Since it is bye-week and we just had our basketball media day, let's talk some basketball.
I just finished Joe Lunardi's book "Bracketology," and it is basically a self promotion, except for the last chapter when he actually shared some of his opinions on college basketball. He points out that balance is tipping more and more towards the power league teams (and that's even before NIL and free transfers). Keep in mind that home teams win about 70% of the games in CBB, so some teams can buy themselves to 10-0 (have you looked at the Indinia Loosier's schedule?), while others will have no choice but to sell themselves to 0-10 (the wealth gap is actually kinda like our society as a whole). Have you noticed that these days, P5 teams basically won't play true road games at mid-majors anymore? They'll only play them either at home or on a neutral court.
Another thing is scheduling. To build a resume you need to show whom you've beaten, but with power conferences like B1G moving towards 20 conference games, there are even fewer chances for mid-majors. A power conference like B1G with 14 teams are trying to get 10-12 NCAA bids. When you have 20 shots at a high quality team, you will win some of them, esp. at home, to boost your resume (that's basically how MSU got in last season). The mid-majors just don't have that opportunity.
So there is a reason to help the little guys a little bit. When Loyola Chicago or George Mason make it to the F4, it is a more captivating story than say, Nebraska making a F4 run. Steph Curry helping Davison becoming the Giant Killer is a lot more interesting than say Steph Curry helping Clemson. But that is increasingly difficult. Good players at the small conferences will move to P5 schools. For example, MSU gets the DPOY of CAA, even PSU gets the POY from the MAAC. There is just no room for the little guys to compete.
Lunardi has two proposals: 1) Establish the rule that only teams with a >= .500 conference record eligible to be at-large. The idea is that if you are a mediocre P5 teams, you have enough chances already. If you can't get a non-losing record, you don't deserve a chance at the Tournament.
2) Expand the field to 72 teams, with strictly the bubble teams (the "last four in" and "first four out") to do the play-in games on Tue and Wed to fight for the right to participate in the main 64-team field.
So what do you think?