Arkansas, Arizona set to face off in high-profile Sweet 16 matchup (1:27)Check out some of the best highlights from Arkansas and Arizona ahead of their Sweet 16 matchup in the NCAA tournament. (1:27)
Joe LunardiMar 26, 2026, 09:00 AM ETClose Resident college basketball bracketologist for ESPN Contributor to SportsCenter, ESPN Insider Published first public bracket in 1995Follow on XMultiple Authors
The tournament, mind you, represents less than 1% of Division I men’s basketball games this season. Yet we debate: What happened to Cinderella?
Her demise isn’t exaggerated, but the blame is misplaced. You can’t have Cinderella at the Big Dance if there are fewer invitations to it. You can’t make her ride there unduly harsh. And you can’t make her dance with only big-uglies.
In 2006, the power conferences were comprised of 72 schools. Now, that number is 79 (and counting) — and none of those programs moved up with the intention of losing out on NCAA bids to the likes of mid-majors. Conference realignment has done more to “shrink” the tournament field than any other factor, limiting the number of at-large bids for non-power programs.
The primary reason I’ve been a proponent of NCAA tournament expansion is to counter the power conferences’ dominance of selection and seeding. The big boys aren’t giving up market share anytime soon, so the most agreeable path to a more balanced bracket is to give a little something to everyone. The first eight teams out of the tournament typically include three to four non-power members. Expansion is likely the only way to get them in.
Just as the prince was drawn to Cinderella, fans understand winning first. That’s why the viewing public is overwhelmingly opposed to power conference teams with mediocre records making the field. And since we can’t answer questions like whether Miami (Ohio) was really better than Auburn, we can reward teams that do more with less.
And the results support this approach. In the NET era, 20 power conference teams with sub-.500 league records have received at-large bids. Only eight managed to advance, posting a .355 winning percentage. Last year alone, six SEC teams with losing conference records made the tournament. Only one advanced.
On the other side of the coin, there have been 39 mid-major at-large teams in the NET era. More than half advanced (20), with an overall winning percentage of .400. So, as has been pointed out in this space for years, non-power at-large teams win more NCAA tournament games and advance decidedly more often than “middling majors” with losing conference records.
The non-power conferences have to do a better job of positioning their best teams for the NCAA field, via both regular-season and conference tournament formatting. Tulsa, Dayton, Stephen F. Austin, Liberty and Belmont won a combined 124 games this season and weren’t even close to at-large consideration. And don’t forget that 31-1 Miami (Ohio) was at risk of not making the cut. This would not have been the case before the NCAA introduced the NET rankings in 2018, whose quadrant system values opponent strength in a way that works to the advantage of power conference teams.
Arkansas, Arizona set to face off in high-profile Sweet 16 matchup (1:27)Check out some of the best highlights from Arkansas and Arizona ahead of their Sweet 16 matchup in the NCAA tournament. (1:27)
Check out some of the best highlights from Arkansas and Arizona ahead of their Sweet 16 matchup in the NCAA tournament. (1:27)
It’s almost like winning begets winning and losing begets losing. Imagine that.
After all, it’s why we keep score in the first place.
Joe LunardiMar 26, 2026, 09:00 AM ETClose Resident college basketball bracketologist for ESPN Contributor to SportsCenter, ESPN Insider Published first public bracket in 1995Follow on XMultiple Authors
Close Resident college basketball bracketologist for ESPN Contributor to SportsCenter, ESPN Insider Published first public bracket in 1995Follow on X