As the NCAA continues to inch closer to expanding its crown jewel men’s basketball tournament, Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti once again threw the conference’s support behind a widened field and weighed in on the league’s preferred model.
Meeting with reporters at the league’s basketball media day event Thursday in the shadow of Chicago O’Hare Airport, Petitti says the conference has “been supportive” of the move after hearing from the league’s coaches and athletic directors, in large part to preserve “access” to the field as power conferences balloon in size.
“I think part of the motivation for the NCAA is a recognition with these larger conferences, you’re going to force teams to closer to .500 records in their conferences,” Petitti said. “What access do they have? I think overall, with the system we have now with large conferences, more access is better.”
The Big Ten sent eight of its teams dancing last season, its first year with an expanded 18-team league that added the league’s Western arm with USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington. Meanwhile, the SEC (whose commissioner Greg Sankey has been outspoken in his support for expansion) sent a record 14 of its 16 teams dancing. In total, just four of the 37 at-large bids a season ago were issued to teams outside of the traditional “power” conferences, represented by the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and the non-football-playing Big East.
“I think we tilt to the side that access is important and I just believe that as many teams competing for as long as possible for the right reward is the best place to be,” Petitti says.
Discussion of 72- and 76-team field formats have circulated through committees in recent months. Initially, potential expansion was expected to take effect for the 2025–26 season, but no decision was made during NCAA men’s and women’s basketball committee meetings in July, punting a final call until at least the ’26–27 season. Earlier this month, Ross Dellenger reported for On3 that expansion was “becoming closer to reality,” with sights set on a 76-team field that would begin in ’26–27.
A key question circulating among conference commissioners like Petitti is the format of an expanded field with regards to seeding. Plans for a larger field involve adding a second site for play-in games similar to the ones currently played as part of the First Four in Dayton, Ohio. What share of those play-in games would involve automatic qualifiers (largely from smaller conferences) vs. at-large qualifiers is an open discussion. Currently, the bottom four automatic qualifiers and bottom four at-large teams are sent to Dayton, and Dellenger reported a similar split is currently expected to stay in place in the 76-team format (12 automatic qualifiers, 12 at-large teams in the “opening round”).
Petitti suggested Thursday that the Big Ten didn’t quite align with the NCAA on such a model, but he expected the current system will “probably continue” as he understood current discussions. The Big Ten’s preference would be for what Petitti referred to as “straight seeding,” with the early games being the lower-seeded teams. According to last season’s official seed list from the selection committee, 23 of the bottom 24 teams in the field were automatic qualifiers, with the last team in North Carolina the lone exception. In Petitti’s “straight seeding” approach, the vast majority of one-bid league winners would have to beat one another for a spot in the main 64-team draw. Meanwhile, every Big Ten team selected would’ve passed straight through into the Round of 64.
“We’re biased, [but] we think our teams will be seeded higher as the field goes in,” Petitti said.
Petitti said he understood that such a model, with what would largely be automatic qualifiers in the opening round, “might impact the value to what’s happening for a broadcast partner.” To translate for him: His plan is less lucrative for TV and thus unlikely to happen.
As for the coaching sentiment on expansion? The mood in the room seemed generally positive toward the concept, though many said clarity related to revenue sharing and NIL as well as discussions around eligibility were more pressing to them.
“Way down on my list of things I have to worry about,” UCLA’s ever-quotable Mick Cronin said. “More concerned with my dandruff.
“Danny Gavitt [NCAA’s senior vice president of basketball] is a good friend of mine. He can worry about tournament expansion. I’m not adding that to my list.”
More College Basketball on Sports Illustrated
Listen to SI’s new college sports podcast, Others Receiving Votes, below or on Apple and Spotify. Watch the show on SI’s YouTube channel.
Source link
