NCAA tourney expansion
 

the NCAA is examining the possibility of expanding the NCAA tournament. i've heard some people behave as if it was wholly unnecessary, impossible to accommodate the new teams, and minimalize the prestige of the existing tourney. i'm on the other side of that argument. and here's why:

a 96 game tournament would be fine. NCAA owns NIT, so they could just combine the two tourneys. 64 teams play, 32 byes, and it only adds one game. plus, it rewards regular season champions. what if you had a different mid-major season and conference tournament champions? tourney champ gets the automatic bid and season champ has to live or die on the bubble. 96 seems like a lot of teams, but in this format, you would only be adding one game. and what is the point of continuing the NIT as some sort of consolation prize? good NIT teams can create some real drama in the big dance. i know Luke Harangody (Notre Dame) would've created problems for a lot of teams in the NCAA tournament last year. he almost single-handedly took that game from the Cats (UK.)

I've been following this, as I'm one of those people who takes a personal day on the opening round weekend. Hmmm, work? or watch sports and cheering for my bracket? Decisions. Anyway, are they planning on doing away with the NIT if they open the field up? If so, then I can see the merits. I like to root for the underdog as much as the next person unless they are playing my team.
However, if they are also going to keep the NIT, then I need to ask who would the NIT be for? ::Gasp!:: You know, the NIT may then be considered "bottom tier." Heaven forbid. Not the bottom tier!! ;)