On May 7, the NCAA unanimously ruled to expand the Mens and Womens March Madness tournaments from 68 to 76 teams. While college basketball decision-makers justify the ruling by calling it an effort to increase tournament access, to fans, it feels like a sole effort to increase revenue, diluting the quality of the competition in the process.
In recent years, it is clear that college basketball is increasingly dominated by big-budget power conference teams, and “Cinderella” tournament runs are becoming less common, largely due to NIL and the transfer portal. With the addition of eight teams, it seems the NCAA is compounding the issue instead of trying to fix it.
A major issue that will likely arise with the expansion is the granting of tournament berths to power conference teams with below-average records, maybe even under .500. In the most recent tournament, Indiana and Auburn were both prime examples of this problem.
Historically, both schools have had successful basketball programs that have won many games and consistently rank at the top of their respective conference standings. However, Indiana ended its season with an 18-14 record and finished in the bottom half of the Big Ten. Auburn equally underperformed; a regular-season record of 16-16 ultimately made it the second team out of the NCAA tournament, two spots closer to a bid than Indiana.
If the 2025-26 tournament had 76 teams, both Indiana, Auburn, and other mediocre teams like Oklahoma and Cal Berkeley would surely be part of the tournament. Instead of berths remaining exclusive and containing a sense of significant achievement, the NCAA is rewarding teams for having below-average seasons and disappointed fanbases.
Sophomore Jeremy Li spoke on the possibility of teams like Auburn and Indiana reaching the tournament.
“I think that even though, you know, these teams do have much tougher schedules than smaller schools, it’s pretty ridiculous that we will likely have a team with a .500 record or lower in the tournament next year,” Li said.
In the new tournament model, the eight additional teams will compete alongside 16 others in the expanded “Opening Round”, formerly known as the First Four.
This change will significantly impact how the extremely popular, usually straightforward bracket pools work. Now, the bracket will have many more open slots following Selection Sunday, making the processes of filling out brackets and hosting office pools much more intricate.
A major reason March Madness is so popular every year is the accessibility of the tournament. Anyone from a diehard adult fan to a clueless kindergartener can enjoy filling out a bracket and watching games. With the expansion, this simplicity is diminished, and it could harm the tournament’s popularity among various demographics.
“It seems like the bracket is getting a lot more complicated for no reason. A lot of people love March Madness because it is simple and fun, but it’s becoming less traditional, and I don’t like it,” senior River Alves said.
Though the opening round’s expansion brings many implications, it also brings universities one very important thing in today’s college athletics landscape: money.
Some could argue that the money schools earn from making the tournament, along with the viewership money that the NCAA makes, is enough to constitute the addition of more games to the tournament. However, for smaller, worse-funded schools, the logistical costs that come with a March Madness berth could be a burden.
Costs of travel, lodging, and general team operations get extremely expensive, and while schools do receive financial payouts, they are quickly offset.
The NCAA can claim that the purpose of the expansion was to increase tournament access, but the negative effects are clear: the eight-team addition will alter the competitive balance of the tournament and toy with the classic bracket structure that the world has enjoyed for the last 16 years.
