But let's make a comparison anyway. We have 64+ teams participating in March madness. But is that really about giving all of those teams a chance to compete for a national championship, or is it about rewarding all of those teams for a good season. Every conference champion in basketball gets an automatic bid to the tournament. Why not let football conference champions have that same reward? In either case, it's not about granting them an opportunity to compete for a national championship, but it's about rewarding them for a successful season. As I said previously, in any given season for college football, there is not 16 teams capable of competing for a championship. In the same way there are not 64+ teams capable for competing for a championship in college basketball. I believe Villanova is the lowest seeded team ever to win a championship, they were an eight seed. So why do we have 64 teams in a bracket, when historically 32 teams would be sufficient. Every other team is simply being rewarded for winning a conference championship, or having a good season without winning a conference championship. Historically, they are not competing for a national championship. In addition, as stated, football and basketball are apples and oranges. The difference between the number one ranked team in the country in football and the 10th ranked team is far greater than the difference between the number one ranked team and the number 10 ranked team in basketball. Lower ranked teams can make a run at a championship in basketball, So it's easier to justify 4th and 5th placed conference teams making the tournament. But in reality, the bottom half of the field of teams do not have a chance at winning a national championship, they're just there to add excitement in the first couple of rounds, and to reward those schools for a job well done that season. And to bring in more money. ** Edited by wwhokie1 at 6/6/2025, 6:11:53 PM ** Edited by wwhokie1 at 6/6/2025, 6:15:06 PM