Don't Add 31 Play-in Games!

No No No No No No No No!

Multiply those 8 "nos" by 16, and you get the amount of teams in the 2007 NCAA Basketball Tournament, if certain coaches have their way. With the NCAA meetings set to occur this week, its reported that coaches will lobby for a bigger NCAA Tournament field. Said NABC executive chairman Jim Haney:

"They'd love to see the tournament double to 128. It's based on several things. First, there are a lot of good teams worthy of making the NCAA field, and second, the size of 64 or 65 has been in place for a number of years."

So let's get this straight. If there hasn't been a change in 20 years, then we must change the system? And are we really saying that the 2005/06 Maryland Terrapins deserved a bid into the NCAA Tournament? If we expand the NCAA Tournament, those are the messages we will be sending.

When George Mason made their Cinderella run to the Final Four, my biggest fear was that power conference programs such as Syracuse and even Maryland would use George Mason's run as a reason to expand the tournament. They would claim that an expansion would benefit the mid-majors, when in reality they only want expansion to enhance their chances of making the Big Dance. And looking at this article, that's exactly what I'm seeing.

Expanding the NCAA Tournament would only make things easier for the mediocre power conference teams. Major conference teams have even less of an incentive to line up games with mid-majors. If all you need to do to get into the NCAA Tournament is finish right around .500, why not line up cupcake after cupcake to get your win total up? Why not play a non-conference schedule like Florida State's and tune yourself up with conference play? If that's all you have to do to get a chance to win the title, there's no reason to risk a loss to a Southern Illinois or a George Mason.

As a larger point, expansion of the NCAA Tournament will effectively trivialize the regular season. The nature of the college game is that, thanks to the short three-point line and the zone-defense rules, a less talented team can play a better game and overcome the better team. George Mason may have been in the Final Four, but it's hard to argue they were one of the four best teams in America last year. The reality is that there are non-tournament teams that can definetly beat the big dogs. Florida, last year's champion, lost to NIT team South Carolina not once, but twice in the regular season. But that doesn't mean we should open the NCAA Tournament up to all those teams. Making the NCAA Tournament should be a legitimate accomplishment. A team should deserve the chance to play for the NCAA title. By expanding the tournament field, we're opening spots to teams that haven't really done much to merit a berth. We'd simply be lowering the bar even further by expanding the NCAA Tournament.

But what's the biggest reason to keep the NCAA Tournament the way it is? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The NCAA Tournament is at a perfect situation with 64 teams. When it first expanded, it did so because teams like the 1974 Maryland Terrapins, arguably the second-best team in the country, didn't even get a chance to play for the title. When it expanded again in 1985, it was to create an even 64 teams. Since that expansion, the NCAA Tournament has become the biggest event in college sports. No other event can compare to the three-week madness that is a 64 team NCAA basketball tournament. It has tons of fan support, endorsments, and excitment. There's no reason to change an event that has been so successful for so long.

So I preach the NCAA to do the right thing and shut these coaches up. Keep the tournament as it is, and tell Jim Boeheim and his gang of power conference coaches to suck it up and play the Bucknells and the George Masons.