76 team format for NCAAT in 26-27 season

Runt#1969

All-American
Dec 13, 2010
21,183
8,676
113
ncatt bracket.jpg

Teams like Indiana - eternally on the wrong side of the bubble - will finally get a shot. This expansion is custom made for the power 4 conferences to gobble up more bids.

The SEC would have had 2 more teams, presumably, in the tournament had it happened this year : Oklahoma and Auburn.

You would have had San Diego State and Indiana also getting in. Then Seton Hall, New Mexico, Virginia Tech (fringe case?) and Stanford, to round out the field? Cinci probably would have been the first one OUT at this point, but we are no longer talking about the quality of teams getting in it, nor those just with a pulse .... Cincinnati, of course, had fired coach Wes Miller leading into Selection Sunday. So ... The butterfly effect of a 76-team field is drastic, so I'm going assume all things equal here, and say Cinci would've been the first one OUT.

The additional bids mean 21 percent of all Div. 1 teams will be included in the postseason.

Personal thoughts :

64 teams was sublimely perfect, and they continue to screw with the dynamics and tweak it into squeezing the most money they can from it. They would do better making it truly mean something special and have kept it at 64 teams. Having 350+ Division one schools wanting a shot to be the next Cinderella ..... made it inevitable they had to expand, and I doubt they will be done at 76. But that's the way of things in the world.

Finishing .500 or better is no longer a yardstick to making the tournament. You can now get in with a losing record in conference and ostensibly, it makes the regular season less imperative to do well from beginning to end.

Kansas has been in every NCAAT since what, 1989 (sanctions/stripped) ? That's the longest streak? Welp, there's another meaningless stat/record now.

As far as the tweaking of having the 16 seeds decided by play in games to play a 1 seed, and 2 of the 15 seeds determined this way seems logical, there still won't be much of any difference as a #1 or #2 seed to play who comes out of the play in games.

The fact that they're doing that with the 12 seeds, and 2 of the 11 seeds, I think it's does inject better quality in those matchups, but it all seems to come at the expense of cinderellas .... there's the irony, the biggest and most exciting aspect of the tournament, who is the Cinderellla for this year? Well ... it looks to me like they're going to be fewer moving forward, just like this past season.

TL:DNR version :

44 at large bids
32 automatic bids

76 teams means more at large bids for power 4 conferences, those that would have been on the bubble like Indiana, now get in. The bubble/bar sis set even lower now.

We have a new "opening round" now ( No more "First Four" games ... )
2 sites to play games on tuesday / wed. - 3 games in Dayton each day, another site TBD ( somewhere out west is the idea) 3 games on each day, and that is where they will play the other 3 games for a total of 6 games.

4 games to determine the 16 seeds
2 games to determine 2 of the 15 seeds
4 games to determine the 12 seeds
2 games to determine 2 of the 11 seeded teams

Please add your thoughts.

Try to stay on topic, friends, because I don't post threads often, but when I do, I prefer to post them on the Rafters .... and they don't get hijacked.

Go Big Blue !
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HipTer

UKWildcats1987

Heisman
Sep 9, 2021
19,914
35,035
113
I think its absurd as well.

I wont watch a second of these Tuesday and Wednesday games probably. Unless we are sadly in one of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Runt#1969

Smeegs

All-Conference
Nov 19, 2025
826
2,372
93
I hate everything about this idea. It’s just a money grab by the power conferences who want even more of their members …even the ones who had crappy seasons and finished at the bottom of the standings …to get in on the tourney loot. And with absolutely zero concern for what the fans want.
 

BlueBomb

Heisman
Apr 3, 2009
10,738
19,702
103
Two thoughts:

The only way I'd be in favor of this would be for top seeds to get a bye, like the SECT does. That won't happen because it will cut down on the number of game played, hence lessen revenue.

I'm concerned that we will need the 76-team field to have a prayer of making it.
 

LineSkiCat14

Heisman
Aug 5, 2015
39,109
61,422
113
Two thoughts:

The only way I'd be in favor of this would be for top seeds to get a bye, like the SECT does. That won't happen because it will cut down on the number of game played, hence lessen revenue.

I'm concerned that we will need the 76-team field to have a prayer of making it.

That was my thought. If we're gonna expand it, then you need to start giving the top seeds a bye. Let the 3-seeds play the 17-seeds or whatever they want to do.

Another thought, seeing as how the play-in games almost always produce a next-round winner.. I wouldn't be too happy being a 2-seed and getting the 15-seed that just beat another 15. In some ways, I think for that one round, I'd rather just be a 3-seed playing a 14-seed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 20MRoster

JonathanW2

Senior
Aug 6, 2025
579
873
93
I do not support expanding the tournament field.
But if they are going to do it, I would say incorporate something like this:
- every Conf tournament champ and every regular season champ get in
- to keep a (mid-major) team from not giving it all in Conf tourney so another team from Conf can get in, you reward a team that can win both with either a 1st round bye or a choice in 1st round game location
This would result in a variable number of At-Large bids each year, but it wouldn't vary by a lot, maybe 5 or so.
 

Smeegs

All-Conference
Nov 19, 2025
826
2,372
93
If we're gonna expand it, then you need to start giving the top seeds a bye.
But, as we’ve seen in the football playoffs, earning a bye often seems to backfire and act as a punishment more than a reward. Top seeds are often better off getting that warmup game against a low seed than getting rusty from sitting out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LineSkiCat14

LineSkiCat14

Heisman
Aug 5, 2015
39,109
61,422
113
But, as we’ve seen in the football playoffs, earning a bye often seems to backfire and act as a punishment more than a reward. Top seeds are often better off getting that warmup game against a low seed than getting rusty from sitting out.

Yep, good point. What a mess.
 

Goingfor9

All-Conference
Jan 27, 2003
16,280
3,141
113
If you win the conference tournament and are an auto bid it’s poor they have to play a play in game.
 

Noledynasty2490

All-American
Jul 31, 2022
4,360
7,960
113
This format change could end up saving Pope's job this season.

I doubt he's retained if we go say 18-15 and are the 75th team in.
 

Noledynasty2490

The Battles's End Collective Member

The Battle's End enables FSU athletes to maximize the value of their NIL. Click Here to Sign Up

UKSanders

Senior
Aug 27, 2007
354
669
93
If they were going to expand it again, adding 6 play in games/12 play in teams is stupid... so, 2 brackets have 3 play in teams, and 2 have 2 play in teams...

At least make it even.... either 2 or 3 play in teams per bracket.

Regardless, expanding it was stupid anyway from a fan perspective, but as others have said, it was obviously a money grab
 

travisbickle

All-Conference
Jan 4, 2022
457
1,386
93
I guess the only benefit is they are going to be stuck with 76 for a long time because they literally don’t have any more days to squeeze in games from selection Sunday to the first round without cutting into the regular season or expanding past first weekend in April. And sure there is more games so more TV revenue but this is also a huge expense increase as well to NCAA for lodging, per diems, etc.

The next move to squeeze more money out will be the patches on uniforms. Eventually every dribble in the tournament will have a sponsor. That last missed free throw is brought to you by State Farm. Maybe superimpose a Geico commercial over the court during the game.