Moving the Chains: Three Words for the NCAA – More is Less

[email protected]

When I worked in logistics, I found the paradox ‘less is more’ to be true.  In other words, removing any excess  – clutter, in other words – produces better results.  Here’s an example: 

I reduced my staff of 40 by 10% by eliminating the 4 least productive employees.  Soon, it was obvious that the workforce reduction actually increased the overall performance of the operation.  Therefore, ‘trimming the fat’ proved to be a wise decision.    

According to reports, the NCAA is now in the final steps of expanding the men’s and women’s NCAA basketball tournaments – from 68 to 76 teams.  To me, this indicates that the governing body in collegiate athletics is looking at it backwards.  Soon they’ll realize that adding more teams will actually lessen the overall performance of their ‘operation,’ the NCAA tournament.  In other words, more will actually be less.

Adding 8 more teams to the field won’t enhance anything; it will only clutter the field.  It will prove to be the worst decision since the tournament discarded the *perfect 64 format and added 4 teams – which resulted in 4 play in games – in 2011.  (At the time, that was the worst decision since 2001 – when the tournament added one team to the field of 64 thereby necessitating a stand-alone, underwhelming play-in game.) 

*In a single-elimination tournament, 64 teams in 32 first-round games cut the field in half. 

 In the second round, 16 games (with the remaining 32 teams) cut the field in half once again.  And so on, leaving ‘one man standing’ after the sixth round/championship game.

Don’t get me wrong: I under$tand why the NCAA want$ to add more team$.  It’$ not like I wa$ born ye$terday.  

But here’s my take: if the number of teams in the tournament is going to change, the NCAA is moving in the wrong direction.  I recommend fewer teams for the Big Dance.  That’s because less is actually more: a smaller field will result in more competitive games and therefore a better overall tournament.  

As recently as 1984, there were only 48 teams in college basketball’s premier event.  It wasn’t until the following year that the field expanded to 64.  In fact, before 1979, there were only 32 teams.  And before *1975, the biggest field was only 25 teams. 

*1975 was the only year in UCLA’s dominant run of 10 National Championships in 12 seasons under John Wooden that the Bruins had to win  even as many as 5 games in the tournament.

  For Wooden’s first title, they only needed to win 4. 

 (Now a championship requires 6 wins; 7 for play-in teams.)

Did you know the lowest-seeded team to ever win the NCAA tournament was #8 Villanova in 1985?  Or that the lowest-seeded teams to ever make it as far as the Final Four were #11 seeds?  (LSU in 1986, George Mason in 2006, VCU in 2011, Loyola Chicago in 2018)  

Here’s where I’m going with this.  There are four NCAA tournament teams seeded 11^th – one in each of the four regions.  That means between the four of them, they’re all presumably ranked amongst the top 44 teams in the country.  So if the field was reduced to 48 teams, as it was back in 1985, they would all be in the tournament.  

And realistically (if not historically) speaking, if you’re not one of the top 44 teams of the country, there’s not a snowball’s chance of making it to the Final Four anyway.  

Ergo, why bother including the teams ranked 49^th or worse in the tournament?  Remember, less is more.  So get rid of the clutter. 

As for those of you who like to see those first-round upsets – and who doesn’t? – I’ll counter with this: they tend to result in underwhelming games in the second round.  

Certainly, it was exciting when a 16-seed beat a #1 seed for the first time when UMBC – that’s University of Maryland, Baltimore County – upset Virginia in 2018.  And it was just as exciting five years later when Fairleigh Dickinson beat Purdue.  But how soon we forget what happened next.  They both lost in the second round to teams seeded 9^th.  In other words, their respective ‘Cinderella stories’ turned out to be just their 15 minutes of fame.  

Prior to those two historic upsets, #15’s beating #2’s was the big story.  Since 1991, it’s happened 11 times.   However, the furthest a 15-seed ever advanced in the tournament was in 2022, when St. Peter’s reached the Elite Eight after beating #2 Kentucky, #7 Murray State, and #3 Purdue – before losing to #8 North Carolina by 20 points.  

Granted, the occasional upset is exciting.  (My personal favorite was #14 Mercer taking out #3 Duke in 2014.)  But for every time David knocks off Goliath, there are too many lions slaughtering lambs.  To wit: Florida’s 114 – 55 blowout of Prairie View A&M in the first round this year.  

So my advice to the NCAA is this: reduce the clutter.  Less truly is more.  

Let me simplify the mathematical formula.  At the moment, the tournament has a field of 68 teams.  The top 48 teams are the meat.  The other 20 teams – and if the NCAA gets its way, it will be 28 – are the fat.  Now trim accordingly.   

And while we’re on the subject, it’s a bad idea to add 4 more teams to the 12-team College Football Playoffs.  Why not reduce it by 4 teams instead?

It’s not my place to explain my rationale to the NCAA.  They can do the math for themselves.