96 or 65?

Tournament expansion talks seem to be getting pretty serious now. We may be only a year or two a way from this water-cooler rumor becoming a reality, but is it a good idea? I have to admit, at first, I was completely against this idea. What's the use of adding another 30 or so teams that have no chance to win the tourney or even do any real damage. But after watching this year's tournament and the NIT (which I had to watch because Memphis was in it) I've realized that a lot less separates good college teams from bad ones.

If one of the NIT teams, Memphis or Ole Miss or UCONN were to suddenly click at the right time, I could have easily seen them making a run in NCAA's this year. Additionally with the first 8 seeds getting a bye, a lot of the first round games, though more anonymous, might actually be better match-ups, and thus better games to watch. Additionally when the lower seeds finally move on to play their execution games, they will no longer be tourney virgins afraid of the spotlight.

Imagine the 16th seed in the tourney this year, they were excited just to be there because it was in doubt all season. More than likely they were less worried about the game and more worried about the sudden exposure, ofcourse they are not mentally prepared to beat the juggernauts across from them. But after one game, the novelty of the situation will wear off a little, and they will be more focused and have a better chance. The second one is always easier than the first, no matter what it is. But this will take a little away from the regular season, especially at the end when bubble teams are fighting to make the tournament, since with 96 teams most big schools will easily be in. Basically, I'm saying, where at first I thought this was a terrible idea, I maybe wouldn't hate it so much now that I think about it. And since I've been 'studying' Biochemistry all day, I've had a lot time to think about it.