I don't want to cut off the good discussion we're having about Cornell's Top 25 spot.  However, I've seen in a few places, including Soft Pretzel Logic, Yahoo and this ESPN video, that it appears discussions are moving forward to expand the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament to 68 or even 96 teams.

The expansion won't occur until the NCAA manages to opt out of its current TV deal with CBS -- who has had the broadcasting rights since 1982 -- and renegotiate a new one. But one source claims expansion is "a done deal" and could happen as soon as 2010-11. If the tournament were to expand to 96 teams, then a cable network would broadcast the first round(s) in addition to a network broadcaster covering the latter rounds.

Expanding to 68 teams would create a play-in game for all four regions, instead of just the one play-in game that currently exists. Personally, I wouldn't have any strong objections to this format. I've always thought that the one seed that played the play-in winner had an inherent advantage since the 16 seed has just three days to prepare. Then again, No. 1 seeds have never lost in the first round, so it's not exactly a huge advantage. In the end, the net effect would probably just be three more at large bids to power conference teams.

On the other hand, expanding to 96 teams seems a bit excessive. Frankly, it would cheapen the value of making the NCAA Tournament. Sure, 96 out of 347 Division I teams is still a small percentage. But let's be honest: those 32 extra at large bids are more than likely going to go to power conference teams that had middling overall records but a strong SOS, than decent mid-majors who have better overall records but subpar strength of schedules and RPI.

However, I could see some positives with 96 teams. They could create a rule that any small conference team that clinches the regular season title would be guaranteed a berth to the big dance. Right now these teams are already guaranteed an NIT bid, but I suspect the NIT will be basically worthless if the NCAAs are expanded to 96.  In addition, theoretically another round of single-elimination basketball sounds exciting. I just fear it would make subsequent upsets rarer.

So in the end, what exactly would the effect of expansion be on the Ivy League and Penn? If expansion just ups the field by three, the only impact would be that Ivy teams would get worse seeds, especially in years when there isn't a dominant team like this year's Cornell squad. However, if 32 teams are added, I could see a potential year like this one-- or at least before Cornell throttled Harvard -- in which two Ivy teams are in legitimate contention to make the tournament. And if somehow the NIT does survive, then I definitely could see an Ivy team make that with more frequency than they do now.

What do you guys think about NCAA expansion and its effect on the Ancient Eight.

----

Here's the stat of the week for you: According to one Basketball-U poster, since 1990-91 Princeton has won the Ivy League every time it swept the Brown/Yale roadtrip, while every other year it's lost at least one of those games. Extending it back to 1980-81, the pattern holds for 11 out of 12 titles.

This past weekend Princeton swept those two.

Of course, that doesn't indicate they'll somehow beat Cornell once, let alone twice, and win the League. But as a history major, I'm certainly intrigued by interesting trends.

(HT Noah Becker)

Tags: basketball, ncaa tournament, princeton

This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010 at 9:00 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.