- Greg Sankey heard the condemnation last spring amid his quest to reimagine March Madness. Still, he continues his mission to alter this tournament.
- At-large bids usually favor power conferences. As the SEC grows, is it any wonder, then, that Greg Sankey wants to expand beyond 68 teams?
- Cinderella’s ability to upset bluebloods may give March Madness its charm, but can Cinderella fend off a ruthless commissioner hungry for greater representation?
Greg Sankey heard the condemnation last spring amid his quest to reconfigure college basketball’s NCAA Tournament. He documented sportswriters’ columns criticizing him.
But, he’s not letting that blowback derail his mission to evolve March Madness, one of America’s most popular and celebrated sports events.
Most fans believe this tournament requires no tinkering. I join in that belief. Sankey doesn’t. Altering March Madness lingers on his mind.
Sankey acknowledged that March Madness is a glue binding Division I together, and fierce support for the preservation of a 68-team field illustrates our culture’s passion for this tournament.
Sankey, though, doesn’t speak for the interests of the common fan. He’s a cutthroat leader who answers to SEC membership and persistently puts his conference first – sometimes at the expense of others.
A bigger Big Dance would create more bids (see: money), primarily for power conferences at a time when every dollar matters.
I'd prefer Sankey keep his greedy paws off one of college athletics’ remaining charms. I also understand why that’s unlikely. What Sankey wants, he often gets, and he’s unsatisfied with the tournament’s format and 68-team field.
GREG SANKEY:Why March Madness expansion something to 'dig into'
TOPPMEYER:More SEC expansion coming? Why I'm listening to what Greg Sankey (doesn't) say
“I do think that March can be kept together,” Sankey said at the SEC spring meetings. “That doesn’t mean it stays exactly the same. But, just the articles written after my comment and the reaction show you how unique that experience is for our culture.
“But, we also have to recognize the differences that do exist within the group that pursues that brass ring of tournament access.”
Why Greg Sankey, SEC matter in March Madness conversation
The SEC hasn’t produced a men’s basketball national champion since 2012.
Sankey runs a football conference. (And a softball conference. And a baseball conference.) Sankey’s efforts helped elevate SEC basketball, but the sport remains second fiddle in his conference.
Why should Sankey’s opinion of the NCAA Tournament carry more weight than the commissioner of the Missouri Valley Conference?
And yet, I know the answer to that question. The SEC and Big Ten hold the rest of Division I in their palms. If those Super Two conferences don’t get their way, they can pack up their toys and build their own sandbox to play in.
The rest of Division I might be weary of Sankey putting his thumb on the scales, but any product that doesn’t include SEC and B1G participation would become a watered-down, minor-league version of college sports.
Sankey has teamed with Big Ten Commissioner Tony Pettiti to chart the direction of college sports. That direction might eventually include a March Madness field featuring more than 68 teams.
What number does Sankey envision? He didn’t say a figure, but some might consider a number between 72 to 80 teams a soft landing. Such an uptick would significantly increase the number of play-in games before the Round of 64.
Sankey launched his expansion quest a few years ago, and, in the spring, he bemoaned that the NCAA Tournament is “giving away” automatic bids to small conferences. His comments stunk of smugness, and Sankey got served just desserts when the SEC went 3-5 in the first round of the tournament, including No. 3 Kentucky’s loss to No. 14 Oakland and No. 4 Auburn losing to No. 13 Yale.
Expanding the field could be the difference between auto-bid Oakland earning a No. 14 seed and upsetting UK versus Oakland being seeded worse within a larger bracket and competing among the play-in games.
What a bummer that would be for Oakland and other smaller-conference teams.
Auto bids probably would be retained in an expanded March Madness. If so, the compromise to keep Sankey and other expansionists happy would be to grow the number of at-large bids. That would further tilt the percentage of total bids away from the smaller conferences and toward the big boys.
Why Greg Sankey wants to expand March Madness
Sankey won’t say that money or greater SEC access are driving forces behind his expansion quest.
Instead, he offered two motivations:
∎ Sankey highlights power-conference teams with double-digit seeds that made deep tournament runs in a recent years as evidence supporting expansion. Specifically, he noted No. 11 North Carolina State reaching this year’s Final Four.
Counterargument: Why does NC State’s run prove the need for expansion? To the contrary, it’s proof of the tournament format’s effectiveness.
The Wolfpack got hot in March, won the ACC Tournament, snagged an automatic bid and a No. 11 seed, avoided a play-in game, and stayed hot in March Madness. Comparatively, NC State’s ACC peer Wake Forest stumbled to the finish and got held accountable for its middling strength of schedule. It fell to the NIT, where it was a No. 1 seed and lost in the second round.
I see no issue. The format worked.
∎ Sankey also points to Division I’s growing membership number as a reason for expansion. Now, more than 360 schools compete in Division I men’s basketball conferences.
The tournament has not expanded since going from 65 to 68 in 2011. As of 2010, fewer than 350 teams played Division I men’s hoops.
"We’ve allowed Division I to grow, … but we haven’t modified the bracket size,” Sankey said. “I think common sense says you have to dig into that.”
Common sense tells me Sankey’s expansion goals aren’t really a result of Northern Kentucky’s transition from Division II to DI. It’s not as if the Horizon League’s growth from 10 to 11 teams affects the SEC.
What’s really at play? I’ll translate: Power conferences raided other conferences and grew in number. The SEC will be at 16 teams this season, up from 12 in 2011. The Big Ten and ACC swelled to 18 teams. Lo and behold, as power conferences grew, their commissioners want to expand the Big Dance.
Consider the 2024 NCAA Tournament. Of the 36 total at-large bids, 33 went to teams within seven conferences: the SEC, Big 12, Big Ten, Mountain West, ACC, Pac-12 and Big East.
No wonder Sankey wants to expand the field. At-large bids are a boon for power conferences.
Cinderella’s ability to upset blue bloods gives March Madness its charm, but can Cinderella fend off a ruthless commissioner hungry for greater representation? That game continues.
Blake Toppmeyeris the USA TODAY Network's SEC Columnist. Email him atBToppmeyer@gannett.comand follow him on Twitter@btoppmeyer.
Also, check out his podcast,SEC Football Unfiltered,and newsletter,SEC Football Unfiltered.Subscribeto read all of his columns.
