Expanded NCAA tournament field? Put me down as an enthusiastic 'Yes'
· Yahoo Sports
May 9—Here's a phrase nobody ever said with any level of conviction: Smaller is better.
OK, maybe waistlines, cost of living increases and golf scores.
Visit sport-tr.bet for more information.
Bigger is almost always better.
So, why the uproar over the NCAA plan to increase both the men's and women's basketball tournaments to 76 teams that will go into effect with the 2027 tournaments?
Because the complainers — you know who you are — don't think the change is needed. Why fix what isn't broken, they will mutter to nobody in particular.
The better question: Why not add to the field? And why does it offend everyone so much? Time for a quick history lesson. Most college basketball fans will agree that in the first 40 years of the NCAA tournament, it wasn't big enough.
Great teams stayed home year after year after year. Some of the best of all time had no opportunity to show it.
The tournament had just eight teams the first 12 years before expanding to 16 in 1951 and 20-plus starting in 1953.
The field didn't grow to 32 teams until 1975 and went to 40 teams three years later.
The first 64-team field arrived in 1985. That is 41 years ago with an increase of just four teams since that time. One team per decade.
Looking back, there were 282 Division I programs playing 40 years ago. Today, that number is 361 with more on the way. The increase in the size of the tournament hasn't kept pace with the number of eligible teams. Not even close.
Little downside
I'm willing to listen to reasonable arguments about why the increase is bad. Are you worried about the quality of the games? That has often been an issue. The solution, one helped by blowout tournament losses, is for schools to improve their programs.
I've heard repeatedly that the new eight teams "can't win it all." Why?
Forever, the talk was a No. 1 seed would never lose a first-round game to a No. 16 seed. Until it did. Thank you Maryland-Baltimore County for knocking off Virginia in 2018 by 20 points. I wasn't there. But I was in the stands when No. 16 Fairleigh Dickinson stunned No. 1 Purdue in 2023. In terms of the electric atmosphere, the only game that came close for me was the 2005 Illinois-Arizona regional final.
Second chance
Every year on Selection Sunday, a handful of teams are singled out after just missing the cut.
In 2026 that list included Auburn, Oklahoma, Indiana, San Diego State and Seton Hall.
Four of the five are from Power Four conferences. One of the reasons those teams missed the cut was the severity of their schedules. Playing 20 games against the Big Ten is a chore.
The extra eight spots ought to cover those red-hot teams at the end of the season. Plus, having a wider field should encourage schools to take on a more challenging nonconference schedule. The money-grab side of the tournament expansion doesn't bother me. Perhaps, in a sign of good faith, the NCAA should promise to keep ticket prices at a reasonable level. The expenses for the NCAA have increased, so covering those costs with more media rights revenue makes sense.
Can't wait for the 76-team field ... in 10 months.
Bob Asmussen is a college football reporter and columnist for The News-Gazette. He can be reached at 217-393-8248 or .