https://x.com/yahoosports/status/2040201723243888683?s=46
This was brought up in the college hoops thread but it warrants its own discussion.
The NCAA tournament is all but set to include 8 additional at-large teams from here on out. Consequently, the First Four will become a "First Twelve" of sorts, as the tourney will feature a new opening round in which 24 teams compete in 12 play-in games over two days. The 12 winners then join the other 52 teams already safely in.
Putting it simply, the main bracket field of 64 teams remains the same, but the bubble widens significantly from both ends.
Other than disgust for financial greed and the downstream effects of conference supersizing, how are we feeling about this?
I'm fine with it. No biggie having more play in games.
Give out participation trophies :P
It was inevitable......more tournament games more revenue.
How long until they increase the number of games in regular season?
Finally. Imagine how much better this tournament would have been with Seton Hall
What will this mean for the Crown tournament?
So we have a chance??!
I don't get the 76 number. If you are going to expand, why not make it 80 - that way you'd have four play-in games for each region. Now, you're going to have three so I'm not sure how that is going to work. You'll have feeders for the four 16 seeds and the 11s and 12s? Or the 16s, 15s and 12s?
It was inevitable, and it really only matters to me as it affects Marquette.
It's a step in the right direction. It will mathematically strengthen the teams seeded 12-16, though going to 80 would've been better.
And MU would still have been out.
Go get em Shaka!
Quote from: rocky_warrior on April 03, 2026, 11:22:25 PMAnd MU would still have been out.
Go get em Shaka!
Unironically, an immediate effect of expansion is that the offense of missing the tournament will now carry slightly more weight than it did previously. Hopefully our fanbase won't be affected by that anytime soon.
Quote from: rocky_warrior on April 03, 2026, 11:22:25 PMAnd MU would still have been out.
Go get em Shaka!
Bubble team
Quote from: Nukem2 on April 03, 2026, 08:52:10 PMGive out participation trophies :P
You could argue that any expansion, even going from 32 to 48 to 64 teams was just that. Or playoff expansion in any sport.
But in reality it just isn't that big of a deal. Some of the national writers going ape-sh*t over this is just silly. Who cares in the end. As long as they preserve the first Thursday and Friday, it will be fine.
Quote from: cheebs09 on April 03, 2026, 09:03:11 PMWhat will this mean for the Crown tournament?
Crickets?
Quote from: Jay Bee on April 03, 2026, 09:19:26 PMSo we have a chance??!
Exactly. Might as well expand it to 300 plus teams. Or maybe it should be downsized to the days when only 16 teams got in. Wow, imagine the opinion rattling that would garner on who should be in.
I've changed my opinion after watching this year's tournament and think expansion is a good thing now. They need to get the best 64 teams playing on Thursday/Friday.
I'd keep it simple and make the 14, 15, and 16 seeds the 12 play in games. Essentially all the low majors getting pushed into these games. A 4 seed playing 13 seed Auburn, Oklahoma, or Seton Hall in the opening round is more compelling than the total mismatches we saw this year.
Sucks for the low majors.
I don't like it at all.
Will the payout be the same or reduced since there will be more teams.
Quote from: wadesworld on April 04, 2026, 08:39:28 AMSucks for the low majors.
I'd argue it improves their odds of earning tourney credits and pulling off R1 upsets. All the single bid league admins that I talked to were in favor.
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 04, 2026, 09:19:03 AMI'd argue it improves their odds of earning tourney credits and pulling off R1 upsets. All the single bid league admins that I talked to were in favor.
Yeah it's cool for the school. But it sucks for the players who make the Tournament and don't even get to truly play in the 64 team tournament.
two thoughts:
a) if MU makes the tourney through this expansion in some future year, I'd be happier then if they don't make the tournament
b) the HOW is now the important issue. it's an opportunity to make the first round of the tournament more competitive and some kind of improvement as proposed by country roads - while certainly beyond the intellectual capacity of the NCAA - would be good for college basketball.
Quote from: WarriorFan on April 04, 2026, 11:24:13 AMtwo thoughts:
a) if MU makes the tourney through this expansion in some future year, I'd be happier then if they don't make the tournament
b) the HOW is now the important issue. it's an opportunity to make the first round of the tournament more competitive and some kind of improvement as proposed by country roads - while certainly beyond the intellectual capacity of the NCAA - would be good for college basketball.
So you're saying if they go on a tear and snag a S16 or E8 after being in the expansion play ins you'd still be upset?
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 04, 2026, 08:51:45 AMWill the payout be the same or reduced since there will be more teams.
More games should be more revenue.......so more teams will share in more revenue .........my guess is the payouts will go up or at minimum stay the same or they wouldn't have done it.
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 04, 2026, 09:19:03 AMI'd argue it improves their odds of earning tourney credits and pulling off R1 upsets. All the single bid league admins that I talked to were in favor.
How about the multi bid leagues? If they're OK with it, it
just might indicate March Madness will continue after 2032.
Quote from: wadesworld on April 04, 2026, 10:35:21 AMYeah it's cool for the school. But it sucks for the players who make the Tournament and don't even get to truly play in the 64 team tournament.
Be better at basketball then.
Quote from: Florida Warrior on April 03, 2026, 09:38:22 PMI don't get the 76 number. If you are going to expand, why not make it 80 - that way you'd have four play-in games for each region. Now, you're going to have three so I'm not sure how that is going to work. You'll have feeders for the four 16 seeds and the 11s and 12s? Or the 16s, 15s and 12s?
I was curious about this too so I asked ChatGPT since there doesn't seem to be any explanation online.
The reasoning it gave was that 12 play-in games over two days (at two locations) is logistically feasible, but add any more, and you start needing either more days or more sites to play at. Obviously there's no way to verify this was the true reason unless you're inside the NCAA, but I think it makes sense.
Quote from: wadesworld on April 04, 2026, 10:35:21 AMYeah it's cool for the school. But it sucks for the players who make the Tournament and don't even get to truly play in the 64 team tournament.
Does not matter. You are in the tournament. Marquette always played a play-in round when they expanded to a 24 team field.
Quote from: wadesworld on April 04, 2026, 08:39:28 AMSucks for the low majors.
Definitely. And I see this as a where low- and mid-major conference champs will be sent, while 18-14, 11th-place in the Big Ten, Minnesota will be part of the "main draw," while 27-7 Belmont, MVC champions, will be in the play-in games in Dayton or Salt Lake playing Tuesday or Wednesday night on Tru TV or Paramount+.
Quote from: K1 Lover on April 04, 2026, 03:35:47 PMI was curious about this too so I asked ChatGPT since there doesn't seem to be any explanation online.
The reasoning it gave was that 12 play-in games over two days (at two locations) is logistically feasible, but add any more, and you start needing either more days or more sites to play at. Obviously there's no way to verify this was the true reason unless you're inside the NCAA, but I think it makes sense.
Even if it was 80 they could easily play all those game in Dayton. The Big East Quarter Finals are played at one venue, MSG with afternoon and evening sessions. Two afternoon games and two evening games on Tuesday and Wednesday could be done.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 04, 2026, 03:56:33 PMEven if it was 80 they could easily play all those game in Dayton. The Big East Quarter Finals are played at one venue, MSG with afternoon and evening sessions. Two afternoon games and two evening games on Tuesday and Wednesday could be done.
Regardless, I'm sure it's just a matter of dollars and cents. 4 games per day might still be feasible as you say, but clearly something about the math doesn't make it worth it to the NCAA.
Marquette still won't come close to making it in.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 04, 2026, 03:56:33 PMEven if it was 80 they could easily play all those game in Dayton. The Big East Quarter Finals are played at one venue, MSG with afternoon and evening sessions. Two afternoon games and two evening games on Tuesday and Wednesday could be done.
Okay, what about the other 8 games? Expansion to 80 requires 16 games in the First Four.
Quote from: Farley36 on April 04, 2026, 10:57:32 PMMarquette still won't come close to making it in.
(https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:536/0*Qd6vWOdM0laTVhOq)
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 05, 2026, 07:51:11 AMOkay, what about the other 8 games? Expansion to 80 requires 16 games in the First Four.
Ok 2 venues or better yet just have each pod host 2 preliminary games, First Four for each pod, that way the winner just stays at that location.
Quote from: Spaniel with a Short Tail on April 05, 2026, 08:00:16 AM(https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:536/0*Qd6vWOdM0laTVhOq)
I hope we are not asking that question at the end of next season.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 05, 2026, 09:47:32 AMI hope we are not asking that question at the end of next season.
Bitching about the end of next season in April.
Nice! And before you reply with saying you started with "I hope we are not...". Bullsh!t!
Quote from: Scoop Snoop on April 05, 2026, 09:54:32 AMBitching about the end of next season in April. Nice!
And before you reply with saying you started with "I hope we are not...". Bullsh!t!
Why so upset? It is a legit comment. No one here knows what next season will bring, even farley36. If we have a stellar season we'll all be happy, if not, not so much.
Quote from: MuggsyB on April 04, 2026, 08:43:53 AMI don't like it at all.
Me neither, I'd prefer going back to 64 and adding a rule that if your in-conference record is under .500 and you don't win your conference tournament, you are ineligible for the NCAA tournament. College sports is doing everything it can to eliminate the little guy and it sucks.
Quote from: CTWarrior on April 06, 2026, 07:58:08 AMMe neither, I'd prefer going back to 64 and adding a rule that if your in-conference record is under .500 and you don't win your conference tournament, you are ineligible for the NCAA tournament. College sports is doing everything it can to eliminate the little guy and it sucks.
Conference record should be irrelevant. It just punishes the top conferences.
Quote from: The Sultan on April 06, 2026, 08:07:18 AMConference record should be irrelevant. It just punishes the top conferences.
Meh. Fine with me. That's what they get for killing off other conferences for a money grab.
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on April 06, 2026, 08:36:31 AMMeh. Fine with me. That's what they get for killing off other conferences for a money grab.
That's ok for you to have that opinion, but do you really believe that the power conferences, after making moves to hoard money and "kill off other conferences" will choose to go along with a tournament eligibility plan that punishes some of their teams?
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on April 06, 2026, 08:36:31 AMMeh. Fine with me. That's what they get for killing off other conferences for a money grab.
Much better than a bunch of athletic programs that shouldn't be D1.
Quote from: mug644 on April 06, 2026, 10:24:58 AMThat's ok for you to have that opinion, but do you really believe that the power conferences, after making moves to hoard money and "kill off other conferences" will choose to go along with a tournament eligibility plan that punishes some of their teams?
Of course, they won't. They want to get rid of auto bids altogether.
I enjoy seeing Mercer and Lehigh knocking off Duke, MTSU beat Michigan State, Georgia State and Yale taking down Baylor, Yale beating Auburn, Kentucky losing to NMSU, St. Peter's, and Oakland, and Bucky losing to James Madison and High Point far more than the cinderellas of the tournament being Texas and Iowa, and Butler, GMU, VCU, and Loyola making the Final Four. Others disagree, that's all good.
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on April 06, 2026, 12:08:56 PMOf course, they won't. They want to get rid of auto bids altogether.
I enjoy seeing Mercer and Lehigh knocking off Duke, MTSU beat Michigan State, Georgia State and Yale taking down Baylor, Yale beating Auburn, Kentucky losing to NMSU, St. Peter's, and Oakland, and Bucky losing to James Madison and High Point far more than the cinderellas of the tournament being Texas and Iowa, and Butler, GMU, VCU, and Loyola making the Final Four. Others disagree, that's all good.
I enjoy it when mid-majors upset P5 teams, too. High Point over the Weasels was one of my favorite parts of this year's tournament.
And I enjoy the great games between power programs, such as the one Duke and UConn just gave us.
Is it OK to enjoy both, or does everybody have to pick a side here?
Quote from: Billy Hoyle on April 06, 2026, 08:36:31 AMMeh. Fine with me. That's what they get for killing off other conferences for a money grab.
This is how I feel, too. If you can't win half the games in your own conference, you haven't earned the right to compete for the national championship.
At the same time, I think NIL and paying players is the end of the mid-major (and quite possibly the end of MU as a power because the Big East will continue to decline) anyway. Only two NCAA tournaments since expansion began haven't had a mid-major in the sweet 16. This year and last year. You're not going to have those mid-majors with three seniors and two juniors taking out a power conference team anymore, because those players will be sucked up by the power conference schools.
If you guys want to watch the SEC and Big 10 dominate college football and basketball, you will soon get your wish.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on April 05, 2026, 10:21:39 AMWhy so upset? It is a legit comment. No one here knows what next season will bring, even farley36. If we have a stellar season we'll all be happy, if not, not so much.
Let's be honest......" all of us will be happy" is just never happening on this board.
We could win the national championship by 6 points and some would be upset that it wasn't by 15 with 3 turnovers and 50% from 3.
Quote from: MuMark on April 06, 2026, 03:57:48 PMLet's be honest......" all of us will be happy" is just never happening on this board.
We could win the national championship by 6 points and some would be upset that it wasn't by 15 with 3 turnovers and 50% from 3.
Mr. "All of us will be happy" is not now, has not been, and will never be happy. Even after the upset over UCONN we were lectured that it was an off game for a road team and he stated that he would "concede" that the team improved only if...
wait for it...we held Karaban to only two points again in a rematch. :o ::) ;D ;D
He's a groan man and his schtick has gotten scold. He celebrated the UCONN upset with a glass of whine.
Quote from: Scoop Snoop on April 06, 2026, 04:07:38 PMMr. "All of us will be happy" is not now, has not been, and will never be happy. Even after the upset over UCONN we were lectured that it was an off game for a road team and he stated that he would "concede" that the team improved only if...wait for it...we held Karaban to only two points again in a rematch. :o ::) ;D ;D
He's a groan man and his schtick has gotten scold. He celebrated the UCONN upset with a glass of whine.
That doesn't really narrow it down. Of whom are you speaking?
Quote from: MuMark on April 06, 2026, 03:57:48 PMLet's be honest......" all of us will be happy" is just never happening on this board.
We could win the national championship by 6 points and some would be upset that it wasn't by 15 with 3 turnovers and 50% from 3.
Ok, I may have overstated Scoop's enthusiasm for a stellar season.
Quote from: The Sultan on April 06, 2026, 08:07:18 AMConference record should be irrelevant. It just punishes the top conferences.
Also, conference record depending on league plays 18 of 32'ish games total games. Why should a team get punished for playing a strong non-conference schedule like, Auburn.
Quote from: tower912 on April 06, 2026, 04:58:35 PMThat doesn't really narrow it down. Of whom are you speaking?
eeyore69