Why Expand the Greatest Tournament in Sports?

March Madness: The greatest time of the year.

People hustle every which way to make those perfect picks on the bracket, only to root for underdogs the whole tournament. Sports writers have endless marathons telling the public their sleeper picks, their biggest upsets, and eventually, their Final Four.

However, there has been much talk lately of expanding the 65-team field we have right now, to a 96-team. This has led many to wonder if this will change anything, other than the fact that CBS will make more money by showing more games.

Many people refer to March Madness as the greatest event in the nation, and I too have trouble finding one that matches it.

With the opening weekend of the tournament starting on a Thursday, people skip work to take in the first 16 games, or just watch games while working.  On Friday, it is more of the same, and it continues into a basketball fan's dream. The average basketball fan is as excited as an eighth grade boy in Victoria’s Secret.

But supporters of expansion say that teams such as Illinois, Virginia Tech, Connecticut, and Rhode Island deserved to be in the tournament of 65. Many agree that they deserved to be in the tournament, but what is changing the field to 96 going to do, besides making matchups such as Penn State (11-20) vs. LSU (11-20) (admit it, you want to see this matchup).

We will no longer be disheartened by the lack of these teams in the tournament, but instead be arguing if North Carolina should have gotten in the tournament this year. Changing the number of teams in the tournament will not take the politics out of the selection process, but instead just move that down in rank, so we will essentially be talking about lesser teams.

Another issue I have with the process is wondering who will be put in these extra positions. Will more mid-major conference champions fill the vacancies, or will more teams from major conferences be let into the field of 96?

Either way, I do not see any benefit of adding teams to the tournament, except for the obvious financial benefits to the NCAA. I feel it will dilute the field and cause the end of the NIT tournament, which has produced many exciting games this year. 

If the 96-team field is necessary, I hope the NCAA will do it this way: Keep the tournament intact as it is today, but expand the play-in game to 32 games.

Start off the same way it is done now, by seeding all the teams except this time from 1 to 96. The 1-8 seeds would receive a first-round bye, while the 8-24 seeds would play for a chance to get into the bracket.

Once the play-in games are complete, re-seed the teams to fit the 8-16 spots. This will, in essence, be what this writer thinks should be called the Preliminary Round. The Tournament then could be played as usual. 

In essence, though, the expansion to 96 teams is a pointless proposal that is based on nothing more than greed.

The revenue of this tournament has become more important to the NCAA and CBS than the basketball. Going to a 96-team tournament will not do anything to help the controversy of leaving out some team.

Instead, it will lead to more coaches losing their jobs each year for not making a 96-team field.

The only way to expand the tournament successfully and assure that teams that deserve to get in do, is to let every team in.

Yes, I said it!

Let everyone in!  What is the difference?

It will add three rounds to the current format, and would assure that every school receives an equal shot. It would allow the bureaucracy of the selection committee to be taken out a little bit, except in the seeding process.

No basketball fan wants to see the tournament atmosphere change.

March is every college basketball fan’s favorite month of the year. The tournament is a free-for-all, and anything and everything can happen. From the likes of George Mason, to Butler, anyone has the opportunity to make the Final Four.

Money has ruined many things in the world, including the NBA, the music industry, and the film industry. Don’t allow basketball to be ruined by money as well.