Just over two years, the College Football Playoff, facing the pressure of power conference executives, expanded from four to 12 teams. Now, the 68-team NCAA Tournament — on both the men’s and women’s side — is facing a similar predicament.
It hasn’t been made official at the time of this publication, but Yahoo Sports’ Ross Dellinger reported last week that the two tournaments are expected to expand to 76 teams, with the new proposal adding eight games to the “First Four,” which is played on Tuesday
and Wednesday before the second round of the tournament.
According to the proposal, 24 teams — 12 from lower-seeded automatic qualifiers, and 12 at-large teams — would play in the First Four, with 52 teams awaiting to see who they face in the following games. Let’s look at how that impacts the Mountain West, as it enters a completely new landscape of college athletics.
But first, how would that have looked this year?
The Mountain West had just one bid — Utah State, the regular season and conference tournament champ — this year for the first time in nearly a decade. Even though its departing for the richer Pac-12, the Aggies netted the conference two units, which is worth more than $4 million. With San Diego State, Colorado State, Fresno State and Boise State all departing, those units, which are allocated to the current members over a six-year period, will be huge benefits for programs remaining in the MW.
However, say the tournament expanded with eight new at-large selections, that number would’ve been more. First Four games do count in unit calculations, and San Diego State narrowly missed the margin as one of the First Four teams left off. Additionally, NIT runner up New Mexico would have vied for one of those last few spots.
How that impacts the MW in future:
I hate to be the bearer of bad news.
But, truthfully, there’s little-to-no material benefit for the MW in the future — at least relative to this current format.
Moving forward, one could assume the three-best teams in the conference is New Mexico, Grand Canyon and Nevada. Those three teams finished Nos. 46, 71 and 67 in NET, respectively, this season. Last year, those three teams — even though they weren’t in the same conference (GCU was in the WAC) — were 41, 71 and 97 in NET, respectively.
Yes, there will be eight more teams selected; mathmetically, there’s a greater likelihood. Although with now the NET is currently structured, there’s an inherent benefit for high major programs, whose commissioners were pushing for expansion more. In college athletics’ most contentious era monetarily with NIL, the transfer portal and amplified TV. contracts, the big fish want to grow even larger, while leaving others out to dry.
Perhaps this does open the door for one or two more Mountain West teams being in the conversation each year. But three of the five most storied programs (USU, Boise, SDSU), responsible for 21 of the conference’s 32 active units, are now off to greener pastures.
We are more likely to see power conference programs earn the benefit of the doubt for playing more Quad 1 games — not winning them — than an extra MW team (or two) in a much weaker pool than it has been. Look at Miami (OH), for example. They went undefeated while every high major in the country avoided scheduling them in a top-12/13 conference nationally, yet were on the fringe of making the 68-team field because of their lack of Quad 1-2 games. For every San Diego State, you’d see at least three or so Big 12/SEC/Big 10 phonies earn the nod.
In a power-rich college athletic time, the latter benefits much more. Playing more Quad 1-2 and fewer Quad 3-4 contests inherently increases your NET, thus increases the likelihood you’ll go dancing in March. It’s unfortunate — and incredibly flawed — but that directly impacts the MW’s floor and ceiling for future NCAA Tournaments, even in an expanded field.
