NCAA Tournament Expansion: Why 96 Teams Would Have Been a Good Thing
We have finally, after a long period of discussion about several different ideas for NCAA Tournament expansion, came to a conclusion.
Sixty-eight teams is what we will now see in the NCAA Tournament.
But, I am uncertain of why so many people are content with this solution instead of going with the field if 96.
What does adding three more teams get you?
Why even change it then?
In my opinion, sports enthusiasts should have been ecstatic about the possibility of expanding to 96 teams.
March Madness is one of the best times throughout the sports year.
Thousands of fans are prepared to cheer on their teams, hoping to reach the ultimate goal: win a national championship.
So why is adding 33 more teams such a bad thing for people?
I considered all the negatives and positives within the expansion, and I have come to the conclusion that basically combining the NCAA Tournament and NIT would be a terrific idea.
1. It will bring more money to the tournament; more teams in the tournament will lead to more money, and more people will be watching games on television.
2. It takes away some of the drama that comes along with making the NCAA Tournament.
There will certainly be bubble teams with this format, but seriously, if you are a bubble team for a field of 96, you don't deserve a shot at the tournament anyways.
3. Sports fanatics, specifically college basketball fanatics, will get the chance to watch an unimaginable amount of basketball.
An expansion to 96 would have meant 16 more games to keep track of.
I cannot understand why we would not be in favor of that. The tournament goes by very fast and adding another round would make the enjoyment last even longer.
4. The chances of a "Cinderella" team making it deep in the tournament raises.
I am a huge fan of the "Cinderella" teams. I am a firm believer that they're what keeps the NCAA Tournament so interesting.
If there were no upsets by mid-majors, how interesting would the tournament really be?
In my opinion, there would be a lot of people who would lose interest.
That's why adding 33 more teams is such a brilliant idea.
Within the 33 teams added to the tournament, there will be a surplus of mid-major teams added, thus raising the chances for upsets and "Cinderella" teams.
I understand if you did not support the option of expanding to 96 teams, but if you look at all the positives about expanding, it may not have been that bad of an idea after all.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?