I’m not strongly in favor of the expansion, but I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing.
First, the reality is that the vast majority of the teams in a 64-team tournament have no chance to win. There are maybe 12-15 teams that have a realistic chance. As it stands, the lowest seed to win was a #8. That being said, being against expansion due to a lack of competitive balance is bad argument. There is little of that now. We could eliminate 32 teams now, and still nearly guarantee a similar result. At best, those bottom 32 teams are only involved in order to trip up higher ranked team that didn’t come to play, or suffered too many injuries.
Second, there is more competition in the middle and lower end of the pack because those schools aren’t as reliant on the one-and-done players, enabling them to build a decent team over time. While there is still little doubt that a #1 team overall will lose to a #16 (64th overall), under the new system, that #16 team might have a shot against someone closer to their skill level.
Third, there needs to be some punishment for big schools avoiding the mid-majors and small schools during the regular season in order to pad their records. A larger tournament is a small step towards rectifying that. How many big schools do you think UNI will play next year? Those teams will avoid teams like that as if they were the plague. It’s only in the NCAA tournament that we can be sure that a coach cannot duck those teams.
Fourth, a 96-team tournament could easily arranged, giving the top 32 teams a bye. This makes the tournament less dependent on external ranking, and more about play on the court. Consider the difference between being ranked #8 instead of #7 in today’s tournament. The #8 seed not only has to (likely) play the #1 team in the second round, but they also have to play a more difficult #9 seed in the 1st round. Historically, #9 seeds beat #8 seeds more often. 8’s win 45% of the time, 7’s win 61% of the time. A similar disparity exists between all the rankings. Historically, a #16 has a 0% win percentage, whereas a #15 seed has ~5%.
How fair it it that the powers that be can factor into your tournament success that much? By expanding, you don’t completely eliminate the problem, but you can mitigate it a lot. For example, you can have a provisional ranking for the 64-team play-in round which is modified by your actual success in the first game. So if the 96th overall team beats the 33rd ranked team in the first round by 10 points, you can alter their ranking so that they can be ranked relative to the performance of their peers during that first round. This way, they won’t have to play the #1 overall team. Like many things in life, lowering the barrier of entry actually increases the quality of the successful teams, while resting more heavily on actual performance, not external (biased) expectations.
Fifth, the tournament gives exposure and name-recognition to schools that would have otherwise never had it. I would bet more people know Gonzaga, Butler, and Xavier because of their tournament success than for any other reason. Regardless of how much importance you feel sports should get, it’s a good thing when people know about schools because it leads to more students, better resources, and more money. Duke, a great school in its own right, might not be Duke without their basketball team. The same goes for the schools in mentioned above. I would bet far more people are looking into applying at Cornell now that they have been in the national spotlight. The money the school gets, as a result of that, may mean they can accept 4 more med school students, secure more favorable loans for a new dorm, attract greater alumni donations, or provide scholarships for a few promising poor kids. The publicity the smaller schools get is invaluable, and leads to actual positive academic changes.
Lastly, if you step back and look at the tournament, the reason we include all these “Cinderellas” is because we want to see more basketball, and we want to include various schools in on the fun and spirit of the game. I had friends in the Hampton University band who witnessed HU’s basketball team beat Iowa State to secure their only NCAA win; one of the few times a #15 has beaten a #2. The actual impact of that game was practically nothing in the grand scheme of things, but it meant a great deal to the school, the students, and everyone involved.
To them, it was a miracle; one of the greatest experiences of their lives. They knew going in that there was no chance they would ever win the whole thing. Their expectations were modest, mostly going for the experience and to see basketball played at such a high level. When comes down to it, that’s what this tournament is about. Yes, the NCAA wants money, but it isn’t just a money grab. They could be like football, and have a limited number of primetime bowl games if that were the case.
As many problems as there are with the idea, I can only get so riled up about a change that allows more people to have the experience my friends had, gives more people a chance to have their schools in the spotlight, and allows schools to make money that can hopefully go to improving the education experience.