Should the Tournament Expand?

A lot of coaches have been saying it should happen (Bruce Pearl, Tubby, Roy Williams to name a few) - and hell - why wouldn't they? Getting to the NCAA Tournament is their meal ticket. More tourney spots means more meal tickets for coaches and what's not to like about that in the high-pressure world of NCAA basketball coaching?

From a fan's perspective, I have mixed feelings. Everyone knows this time of year is my absolute favorite: I love me some March Madness and really can't get enough of it! So the prospects of more play-in games or expansion to 128 teams is a bit appealing to me. I'd love to see a couple of bubble teams battle it out for a chance to play a 2 seed.

I also like the prospect of that meaning more mid-majors getting a shot. The St. Mary's of the world won't be forced to have to beat a top notch Gonzaga team just to make it in the field, and teams like Portland might have an easier shot of atleast getting a whiff of the bubble....

But there in lie the problem: There will always be a bubble. Weather its #65 or 128, there will be a bubble somewhere and someone will inevitable get left out. Let's say they expand to 8 play-in games. 4 games for the lowest seeds, and 4 games for bubble teams to get slotted in somewhere in the 12-15 seeds. While it would have solved our "Arizona or St. Mary's" dilemma, we'd be left debating "Should it be Kentucky or Davidson" - which were two teams far from bubble talk this year for the top 65.

But my biggest argument against any expansion is this: The tournament expanded when they started using automatic bids.

Fact is - the NCAA Tournament really starts in the team's conference tournament. Every team (as long as they play well enough in the regular season and actually make their conference tournament) has a shot of representing their league in the Big Dance: Put up or shut up.

Granted, there are a myriad of problems:
1. Conference Tornaments should be held at either a neutral site or at the home of the regular season champ/higher seed. This rewards teams for better regular season.
2. Like the WCC, the top 1 or 2 seeds should get every advantage possible to make it to the championship game. In the WCC, both the 1 and 2 seeds get first and second round byes - automatically getting into the conference semis. I see that as a just reward - especially with teams that have little chance of getting an at-large bid otherwise. A team that wins their conference out to get something for their accomplishment that puts them at least a couple of steps towards winning the conference tourney.
3. Bigger schools need to start scheduling small schools in home and homes. It's ridiculous that these big schools get to play cupcake schedules (MINNESOTA) and never go on the road to some of these mid-majors. Give them some sort of incentive or change the RPI formula to accommodate that. Not sure how... but it needs to happen.

So - should the field of 65 expand? I don't think so: fact is it already is expanded. We just need to even the playing field.

What do you think?