On August 4, 2025, the NCAA officially announced that both the men’s and women’s Division I basketball tournaments will retain their 68-team format for the 2026 season. The decision, reached after internal meetings involving members of the Division I Men’s and Women’s Basketball Committees, put an end to months of speculation about whether the organization would expand the tournament to 72 or even 76 teams. NCAA Senior Vice President of Basketball Dan Gavitt confirmed that while expansion had been considered, it would not be pursued for the 2026 cycle. Instead, discussions about a potential future expansion may be resumed at a later date, possibly ahead of the 2027 tournament cycle.
This announcement ensures that the First Four round, introduced in 2011 for the men’s bracket and expanded to the women’s field in 2022, remains intact. The 68-team model, which features eight teams battling in preliminary games before the traditional 64-team bracket begins, has become a staple of March Madness. It provides opportunities for fringe teams to make an early impression while maintaining the integrity and excitement of the traditional tournament structure.
The decision was met with widespread approval across much of the college basketball landscape. Many coaches, analysts, and fans had expressed concerns about a possible expansion, arguing that growing the field could dilute the competition and impose added logistical burdens on both athletes and tournament organizers. Critics also raised questions about travel costs, venue availability, and television scheduling, especially given the NCAA’s complex media rights partnerships with broadcasters like CBS and Warner Bros. Discovery.
In retaining the current format, the NCAA emphasized logistical efficiency, budgetary responsibility, and the importance of preserving what has become a treasured tradition. March Madness, with its perfectly choreographed sequence of drama, upsets, and buzzer-beaters, has maintained a near-mythical status among American sports fans. Expanding the field, some argued, risked disrupting that balance without a guarantee of meaningful improvement.
Nevertheless, proponents of expansion remain vocal. Advocates, including several major conference commissioners and members of the NCAA President’s office, argue that more teams deserve the opportunity to compete on the national stage, especially given the increasing competitiveness and parity across Division I basketball. The current system, they argue, often leaves out high-quality teams that narrowly miss receiving at-large bids, particularly those from power conferences that face rigorous regular-season schedules.
The expansion debate has been particularly charged on the women’s side. While the men’s tournament has long dominated media attention, the women’s March Madness has experienced a surge in popularity in recent years. Coaches, particularly those from the ACC and SEC, have expressed concern that expansion could complicate a tournament that is still refining its identity and growth trajectory. Many believe the current format allows the women’s tournament to build momentum without becoming unwieldy or losing sight of competitive quality.
In economic terms, expansion would also pose questions about revenue distribution. The NCAA’s basketball fund, which distributes earnings based on tournament performance, could face restructuring if additional teams are added. More games could potentially increase television rights value, but they might also dilute payouts among more participating schools. Financial implications for smaller or mid-major programs—many of which rely heavily on NCAA distributions—remain a key part of the ongoing conversation.
Although the status quo will hold through the 2026 tournament, the NCAA made it clear that the subject is far from settled. Internal committees will continue to evaluate proposals for tournament expansion, with a final decision on the 2027 format likely to come sometime next year. With the college athletics landscape rapidly evolving—particularly with the advent of NIL rights, realignment, and broader revenue-sharing models—tournament structure remains a pivotal issue on the NCAA’s agenda.
For now, the traditional 68-team tournament returns for March 2026, with Selection Sunday scheduled for March 15. Thirty-one teams will qualify automatically by winning their respective conference tournaments, while 37 at-large bids will be awarded by the selection committee based on performance, metrics, and rankings. The First Four will once again kick off the action in Dayton, Ohio, maintaining a format that has consistently delivered early drama and breakout stories.
Ultimately, the NCAA’s choice to stay the course for 2026 reflects a desire for stability in an era of considerable change. While the pressure to evolve remains, the organization is choosing—at least for one more season—to preserve the format that helped make March Madness a defining feature of the American sports calendar.