The FUTURE of Mid-Majors & NCAA Tournament Expansion with Vince Wolfram

This is an I Heart podcast. Guaranteed human. Okay, it is our pleasure for the next episode of SoCon Fast Break, and we're calling it the Insider Edition, because we do have a true insider to get his insight on everything going on in the mid-major world, and specifically, of course, the Southern Conference. But we're joined by Vince Wolfram, who does a great job with the college sports company, his podcast. That's a W, and then also as a host on Field of 68 for the mid-major show. Vince, can't thank you enough for joining us here on the show, and I'm telling you, been following you, and you're the hardest working man in media right now. I don't care what anybody says. I've got my odds on you, brother. I appreciate you guys for having me on. I'm excited. This is going to be a fun conversation. Obviously, a lot of craziness happening in college basketball right now, so I can't wait to dive into it. I appreciate you. Yes, of course. Yeah, and speaking of just all the craziness, I know we could jump into the transfer portal, all of that. That's all the news that's happening right now, and even looks like there might be some changes with eligibility rules, an age limit, all of those things that are being discussed right now. But I do know what was being discussed quite a bit at the Final Four, and Darren was there in India, and I know a lot of people, Field of 68, including yourself for there, and just knowing that there seems to be steam picking up with this intention of expanding the NCAA tournament. And right now, Vince, it seems that, hey, man, the tournament expansion is going to be great. I just don't know if I'm buying it if you're viewing it from the lens of a mid-major. And that's what we're doing here. And I'm concerned just in terms of, hey, is it going to actually be detrimental to the mid-majors versus helpful? Yeah, I feel like there's so many different ways that you can take the thought to, because you don't know how many they're going to expand it to. Is it going to be 100? Is it going to be 76? Is the play-in going to be a 12-team play-in versus a 4? And I think even with the trends that we've seen in terms of these play-in games, and we were so used to, I feel like in the 2010s, seeing mid-major teams be those play-in games, where in the last couple of years, it's been the Texases, it's been the SMUs, it's been the North Carolina. So you're sort of already seeing the trend happen, where some mid-majors are getting weaned out of this for the high-majors that didn't have a great year, or the high-majors who didn't have a good conference play, but won two games in the conference tournament and they get their spot. Those sorts of things, those narratives have kind of already started playing themselves out. So to expand, I think, yes, you might run into that same problem, having the Auburns of this year who are almost 500 on the season, or the Indianas, those sorts of teams that in the tournament where you're trying to find out who's the best winner in all of college basketball to give a team that's only one half their games has shot. Is that really fair, or do you include, I don't even know why we were having the Miami Ohio question. Look at the record, they should be in the dance. That is a no-brainer to me in every aspect of the question. So it will be a very, very interesting thing to see how the narrative sort of plays out, since we've already started seeing glimpses of a little bit of how it might work. Yeah, and that's what I'm concerned about, is that history is already showing us right now, and you've got some of the commissioners of these conferences coming out, like a Greg Sankey talking about that it's more about the depth of these power conferences and that these teams should be rewarded. And I know for many years there's been a lot of discussion, especially here in the SoCon, could the SoCon ever get to a two-bid league? And we know now, just even from the net rankings and how that's still a heavy metric that's used for evaluating these teams, I just don't know if the SoCon could ever get to that point right now without some type of expansion. That would be probably the only window that would happen, but that doesn't even guarantee it that they would get selected because they still would have to have almost an amazing season. Even putting high majors aside and trying to think of it that way, okay, say they expand that those play-in games to the first 12, which sounds so silly when I say it versus the first four. But say you expand those. Yes, it gives the mid-major conferences more of the opportunity, right? If you're a super, super high-level mid-major team and you had a great year and say you lose in your conference tournament, I think of Liberty even this year had a great year and then it loses in the first round of the conference tournament and they don't get a shot. That could totally be a team that wins a game in the NCAA tournament. Exactly. They didn't get their shot because they lost in their conference tournament and with how the field is built, they were kind of shafted by that. But with the 12 team, with the high majors aside, it does give a team like that or a team that has momentum that was the number one seed or lost three or four games or what have you to have that opportunity to try to win their way into the field of 64 or into that next round of the NCAA tournament. The opportunity is absolutely there. It's just a matter of the politics on your way to take it. Yeah. And I think adding to that too some stuff that I kind of just started to gather talking to some folks is some of these mid-major leagues I think are now starting to take a step back and say if the tournament is going to expand, do we want to get to a point where we figure out a way to have conference expansion where we can increase the ranking of our league where we can maybe get on the 12-13 seed line or are we okay where we're at and we're going to get one of these 12 team play-in games and guess what? Okay. Yeah. We're a lower seed, but we're going to get an extra unit potentially because now we're playing a 50-50 game that we can win or maybe a game that we're even more favored in. And then whoever the however they do the bracket, we end up on the 15 seed line and okay, yeah, you're probably going to have a really tough time beating a two seed, but you get that extra unit and I'm not saying that's the right way, but I certainly think some of these mid-major conferences are probably looking themselves in the mirror right now. I shouldn't say probably they are and they're balancing do we want to try to strengthen our league or are we okay being maybe 15 to 22 in the conference ranking window knowing that we're going to be a lower seed and if they expand, we'll play in one of those early games because we're going to have a really good chance to get an extra tournament unit. And it's look as a fan, as a competitor, I want to see some of these mid-major leagues try to take the next step forward. Yeah. But from a business perspective, I'd be lying to you if I said I don't like I get it, you know, they need more money and maybe that is money that can get dumped into the schools for additional revenue to try to go get more players as we've seen this year just be out of control on what some of these guys are getting. So like you said Vince, we could go down a rabbit hole on this, but I think that's something that a lot of these mid-major conferences are thinking about as we get towards expansion. Yeah, it's definitely interesting to think about it. I even try to take some of these schools that are in the high major conferences that are massive in size, the Big Ten that isn't 10, the Big 12 that isn't 12. I look at Indiana. If you put Indiana in the Big East or the SEC this year, they're probably a tournament team. So, getting in the very middle of this Big Ten, just getting housed by the top of the line teams in that conference. When in all reality, they're a really good program, which is why the argument is that they should be one of those last four or first four out sort of teams. But in another conference, it's a totally different story. So I think the size of the conference might matter more than many people might think it does in all reality. Yep, I agree. Great. I think there's some validity to that. We also know that there is a difference when you say mid-majors. We say it collectively, but as you know, Vince, not all mid-majors are built the same. Not all mid-major conferences are built the same. That's where you get into this great area as far as an A-10 versus a SoCon. It's going to be extremely difficult for the SoCon to try to rise to that type of level, somewhat getting into that high-bend major type of tier. Yeah, and it's tough because there are really good programs in that conference, I think, too. Even like this year, I think the best, you can correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I think the best record in the SoCon wasn't at East Tennessee State, and then it ended up being Furman making it into the big dance. Alex Volkins and they almost did it against Yukon there in that game for a while. But it could have been East Tennessee State. It could have been Sanford. It could have been Mercer. Yes. But it's just the fact that they are limited. That stinks for not only any conference, but the SoCon in particular in the national viewpoint for sure. Yeah, it does. That's what just looking at it, as you mentioned, East Tennessee State, there were 13 and 5 in the conference, and you had Furman 10 and 8 that wins the conference tournament. There were a bunch of teams all stacked together right there. At the last week, I mean, you had basically five or six teams that were positioning for that number two slot. So I mean, it was a lot of quality teams, but they can't climb the net rankings to be viewed as a different type of tier. And that's why I'm just not certain that now all of a sudden the NCAA selection committee, even with expansion, is going to look at the SoCon and say, okay, well, now there's another opportunity, unless you're having some of those teams that like that 2019, 2020 East Tennessee State team that won 30 games in the regular season. Yeah, if they got upset, then maybe there's an opportunity for them to get a chosen as a two bid league at that point. But I just don't see it happening for a lot of the mid majors. Yeah. And I guess it's interesting too, because we are like the net is, I feel like the main one that's sort of scrutinized or talked about in a way that's like, okay, we need to switch this up or change this, but there hasn't necessarily been, I guess, a metric proposed that could do a better job, which is kind of the frustrating part, because like you want to say, okay, well, then let's base it on what? What are we going to base it on? I know. If you can't do the net, then what? Like, what's next? You would love to say, I test. Like, I think in my head every March, when it comes around, there's those teams that are just playing so hot that because of their first two months of the season, have no shot. They have no shot in the world, but they're playing their best basketball right now, which is what college basketball is about. You can have rocky moments. You can be in the very bottom of your season and still find a way to take it to the mountaintops. I think of Cincinnati being a high major that I thought about that way this year. I thought they were great. I saw them beat BYU by 20 up in SINSEE, and then they were playing really hot, and they lose early in the Big 12 tournament. There goes their hopes. It's like, okay, well, this is a team that was doing it all right. And there are so many teams out there that are doing it all right, but there's that net factor. And that, okay, well, we have to abide by the statistics, because we can't go by the eye test as unfortunate as that may be, because I think the eye test would give the mid majors a lot of extra credit, too. A word. This is one of the purest forms of college basketball that we still have, and playing the right way, and guys that are competing and trying to grow and working through their schedule the same way that other teams are. And they should be rewarded for that, and for playing hot at the right time. So there's always going to be that, like, I wish there was a metric. And until we find that, I think there's going to be that frustration for me that wonders, okay, when can we get this heating up and march thing right? And see some of these mid majors who are playing their best ball competing in the NCAA tournament, because they're hot right now. Yes, that's right. And, you know, you brought it up earlier with the Miami scenario, right? Like, I don't think I understand the argument, but I don't think we took enough of the eye test there to say, look, this team won its first 31 basketball against, I don't care if you're playing in the SEC, the Big 12, or the Mac. Do you know how hard it is to win 31 games in a row? You know how hard it is to win every single game in your conference? It's hard to win five games in a row. Are you kidding me? And so to me, and Richmond and I talked about this on one of our episodes, when we did our tournament episode, was I actually, I thought it was kind of nuts that they had to play in. And I understand to your point, Vince, you bring up that net and these metrics that we look at, and look, they matter. They absolutely do. But if you took the eye test and you, and is somebody that knows basketball, you would see, like, this is a good basketball team. And this team has earned an opportunity to have a chance to not have to play on a Tuesday or a Wednesday night to then go have a chance to play on a Thursday or Friday afternoon. You win 31 games and you have one hiccup. I just think that we have to put some of these metrics aside and say, look, this is a really good basketball team. And I think the other thing to add to that that you had mentioned earlier about the size of these conferences, and I think this plays a role in some of the metrics, is that these conferences, these powerful conferences have gotten so big that you do have teams that ultimately are going 500 that frankly, look, I'll fully admit it. I wasn't the proponent of a 17 and 16 Auburn team getting into the tournament. I thought they had a ton of chances. And look, and I have a ton of respect. I mean, you're an Auburn grad. And I have a ton of respect for that program. But I think they had a lot of chances. And yes, they did play a tough schedule, but they didn't win a lot of those games. And so I say all this to say, I think sometimes, like these high major conferences have gotten so big that the metrics, they almost get tweaked because those teams have a ton of opportunities to play high level games. But it is almost to a disadvantage of them sometimes because certainly if Auburn was in a different league this year, or maybe they didn't play quite as good of a non-conference schedule, they probably find a way to win enough games that they're squarely in the tournament. So it's almost like, do we have to figure out a way with this conference realignment here as we think about tournament expansion? And like, is without going into too much detail, like, is there another thing that we can look at where we can tear some of these, some of these high major conferences? Because it is really hard to look at a 17 and 16 team that's played a bunch of quad ones in a 27 and four team that has maybe gotten one, two, quad one opportunities, and maybe one or two quad two opportunities in every game in their league as a quad three or quad four. I get those are difficult things to balance, but they're real. And I do think it's hurting some of these teams that go out and win 27 28 games, but equally hurting those teams that are in massively deep leagues that end up at 500. Yeah, it's it's inch. I think the Miami Ohio thing is the more difficult one to wrap your mind around, right? Because they dominant like, I don't remember what I did on November 3rd, but Miami Ohio remembers what they did on November 3rd. That was the start of their 31 or whatever game wins. Like, I don't think I've done anything in the last since November 3rd, 31 times in a row. Well, they had 31 wins in a row. So they proved that they're a pretty good team. And you could tell by the way that they finished games that they can not only beat anybody, but win when it matters the most. And I think even to the Auburn example, it's like, okay, yes, they beat St. John's, they beat Florida at Florida, not any, not many if any teams had that win in college basketball. So you have good wins, but you also have bad losses. You lose to LSU, you lose to Ole Miss. And then to go win the NIT and compete the way that they did at the end, I think was kind of telling of where they were as a team, right? Like they were up by, I think it was 19 points against Tulsa. And this is a game that ends up going to overtime and they win by six points in the championship game of the NIT. I think that was proof like, okay, this team maybe didn't deserve the NCAA tournament because they just battled through this, this NIT where they played Tulsa, they played Illinois State and ran business. They played Nevada, they played Seattle close. That was a six point game. So like this was a team that was playing with good big majors that also earned their spot in this NIT. And those teams, in my opinion, despite who they played, should be in the same conversation because at the end of the day, the proof is in the pudding. These games were close games with an SEC team, a Power Four team that you thought, okay, might be able to push themselves in the tournament. And when they didn't, there were some fans that were upset and they thought, okay, they were going to roll this NIT thing. And then they don't, they play South Alabama, they play Seattle and these games are close games, proof to, okay, maybe these teams, just because they're in these power conferences, maybe they're not as good as the power conference label almost projects them to be. That's right. Yeah, I think that's a big part of it right there. Yeah, maybe they're not in that same conversation, you know, with the rest of the conference and, you know, just even looking at the totality of expanding the tournament and again, I don't think it needs to be expanded. I think it is great just the way it is 68. And I was probably even a guy who talked about it when they went to 68 is that, what are we doing? Let's just stick with 64. It seems to be working pretty well. And you know what? If it's on my piece of paper, it's just a nice easy bracket right there, you know, in the landscape setting. That's it. That's all I have to worry about. But I do think that if they are going to expand it and Vince, I think it's going to happen. I think it's just a matter of when not if because there's money involved and there's more inventory of games. And also, hey, we're college basketball Hoopers. We love it. So don't get me wrong. I love more basketball. I definitely do. I just don't know if I like how it's being positioned. Again, that it's going to be access to more of these mid majors because I'm just not certain it is. And if it is going to be more access, are they just going to put these mid majors there in the opening rounds? And that's it. And you're going to have to fight your way in very similar, you know, obviously in the first four. But even what we're seeing like in the NBA in, you know, the play-in tournament, you know, and so does that really give them an advantage because, yeah, they might win a game. But can they go on a Cinderella run because, you know, they're having to play so many games? Yeah, it's going to be interesting. I'm with you. I think more than likely they're going to move to a 76 team tournament, which I don't know why I don't get it. Like this is the most perfect tournament in sports. It's the only tournament that I feel like nobody has a problem with. But, you know, money, money talks. And I guess it's going to have a conversation with this tournament bracket and add more play in games to it. I think from our perspective, like, it'll be interesting to see kind of how they regulate it. Will there be spots for conferences? Will there be a high major or a mid-major spot specific? How will that be really, really interesting? I'm curious to see what, whether it's a band of commissioners or the NCAA, whatever they're able to pull off, how they're able to kind of regulate it. Because I think if, say, if it's 12 play-in games, then realistically, you know how it's going to end up. It's going to end up with North Carolina and NC State and all these high major teams that are going to bring money to Dayton, which is probably going to have to expand too, because I don't know that we're going to be able to fit 12 fan bases in UD Arena up there. But it's going to be really, really interesting to see. I'm fine with it, because I know there's probably no stopping it. Would I love to see it stay the same forever and ever? You bet. But I think it's kind of, it's trending in that direction. Yeah. And your thoughts then also, say they, you know, with the expansion, you know, could there be a qualifier in terms of, very similar to what we have with automatic qualifiers. We know each conference champion, you know, 31 of those are going to get the automatic bid. You know, could there be a scenario where they, you know, set aside, okay, out of these additional teams that can get in now, two slots are going to be for mid-major programs. And however that's defined. Now that would make sense to me, but I just don't know if they would go to that granular level of a detail, because I don't think they want to box themselves in into just, you know, being in a rigid type of situation. Yeah. I'm inclined to agree with you, because I think, well, one, you've seen it with college football. I know it's a, it's a different thing, but people were upset that they had the, the James Madison's in the Tulane world in the college football playoff. And then everybody's of course, change it, change it, recycle that one. But with college basketball, I think there's a little bit of a difference, mainly because people love the mid majors. Yeah. They love the Cinderella story. Love the Cinderella stories. And I think that's the one piece that's like kind of the hold back for them, maybe right now, like, yes, the money's there. We're going to make a ton of money adding these, call it 12 play in games, teams, whatever. But they're also like, okay, well, we don't want to take away from this, the spectacle and the, the history of what March Madness is. And I think there's going to have to be some implementation for the mid majors. Now, in what aspect, I don't know. I hope it's to God, it's not the net or whatever, whatever ranking that we're, that we're already hating on before this thing even starts. But there has to be not only some metrical value or some analytical way to decide who's going to get in, because a lot of these power four teams and the strength of schedules and the different numbers don't match up to that of the, the mid majors and the low majors. But those teams are still very good at basketball and deserve a spot in the tournament. So how they'll be able to regulate it, whether it's we're getting mid majors or said conference, these six spots or four spots, or whether it's a, you have to be above this threshold, either be consented, can be considered, no matter what that, I don't know what that threshold could be, but some monetary number that cancels out half the field and says, okay, these are the teams that we can now consider. Or at the end of the day, maybe you just scrap it all and say, hey, Jill Lennardy, who are your last eight in? What a, there you go. Yeah. Right. Now, I think, I think it's a really interesting point to bring up Richmond of them not wanting to box themselves in. And, and I, I really think that that's the case. Now, I think equally Vince, you, you said something that makes a lot of sense is maybe they give special credence to, for instance, Hey, if you're a team that won 28 plus games, and you won your conference tournament, but you lost in the conference tournament, you know, that's worth a little bit more in the evaluation process. But I think, I think it's going to be really tough to get any sort of hard line. We will have X amount of spots for mid majors. And I think one of the reasons for that is I just don't think any mid major conference, you know, whether it's a commissioner or whether it's just on some of these committees that matter. I just don't know if there's a strong enough voice that will be able to get that over the hump to say, look, we're for this, but we have to have some mid major presence here. But I, I think the middle ground there is finding some way where you put together some categories that are at least weighed a little bit more heavily that gives some of these teams a chance. And look, some of these may, some of these may help, you know, you know, maybe it's something where you, where you have something equal that helps some of these middle of the pack high majors. But I think certainly carving something out for the mid majors that says if you do X, Y, and Z, and but you lose in your conference tournament, whether that's not automatic in or not, like we're going to give that more credence than we would to, to something else. Yeah. Now I could see though, where they don't give credence to the mid majors and again, not wanting to box themselves in, but we know the powers that be the Greg Sankies, the guys that are, you know, pushing that narrative that there needs to be more of these powerful conferences in. It wouldn't surprise me though, Vince, if they did say, okay, from these four conferences, as long as you meet this eligibility, we're going to have this number of powerful conference teams that make the tournament. I could see something like that, because at the end of the day, it's, it does come down to dollars and who's got the power. Yeah. And as unfortunate as that is for the mid majors, it is kind of reality. Yeah. Yes. With the, with the power four conferences and just the, the silly amounts of money that, that is poured into athletics, specifically March Madness, that's going to out pour into some decisions like this. And it's interesting, I'm sitting here listening and thinking about what could that, that maybe that threshold be and is it, is it a top two team in the conference gets considered that didn't win the conference tournament or we're, we're in like any Tennessee state could be in that conversation or Liberty or those sorts of teams that had great years could totally win an NCAA tournament game, but they lost one game. Like they got to put, I think a little stress on the regular season in the conference schedule, maybe even more in most spots than in the conference. I mean, and going back to, yeah, and going back to Miami, Ohio, just think about how close that was. Yeah. Because they lost in the conference tournament there in the first round and they were also close to actually not making the tournament events. I mean, that's absolutely unheard of. Yeah. And, you know, it really is. And I saw Miami of Ohio in person. I called the game that they played in Asheville against UNC Asheville and then Evan Ipsaro ends up getting heard after that a few games after that. And so misses the rest of the season, but there's, they were still a dominant team, obviously there in their conference and they, they definitely deserved to be an NCAA tournament. And so there's where I just feel that as we're looking at these conferences and again, knowing that there's differences between the mid majors, I am curious though about what Darren was talking about in terms of the units and they start looking at it, these conferences, I should say, start looking at it from a dollar perspective and saying, Hey, as you know, we have a better shot as far as just focusing on getting in the tournament with the expansion. If we win two games, that's, we'll have a better probability of doing that versus being a two-bid league. So we're just going to focus on making sure we have, you know, a representative there. And I think we even see in some of these conferences now changing their tournament, their conference tournament bracket to make it where the top teams having a huge advantage to be able to earn that automatic spot. Yeah, you're talking about teams that had to win six games in the conference tournament, six days to go, to go try to win their league. It is crazy how it's working though, because it's true. And I think that is, that's the base of it is that they want, they want the best representative of their conference to be on the national stage, trying to knock off one of these big national faces. And I think that's the right standpoint to have. But I also think that there's more than one team in a league that can do it. And that's the stuff part because you feel like a team that's just like seat belted while the rest of the family is getting out of the car and going into the store. It's like, well, I can't help myself here. I'm stuck in the car. I can't get out. I can't go with you because there's the one team that that's almost given that like kind of priority or that, that spot where other teams might have to work tougher to try and get it. Yeah, you know, and, and like, I kind of, I kind of come back to this thought process as well of these conferences they know, like they know going into the tournament, whether they admit it or not, especially as a mid major conference, they know who they want to come out because they know that there's probably one team in particular, maybe two teams that give them the best chance to potentially go win a game in the tournament. And so there's no doubt that some of these conference tournaments are geared even when they're not set up the way like the Sunbelt has set up. I mean, I've seen, I'm sure we've all seen enough mid major conference tournament games where there's a call that maybe goes one way that could be a 50-50, but it goes to the team that frankly, if you're looking at it, like, that team, team's probably going to give that conference a better team to win a tournament game. And I'm not insinuating anything here, but I say, oh, yes, you are. Yes, you are. They're cheating. No, but, but like these conferences, like they understand that and I'm bringing it back full circle to what you initially brought up Richmond is the dollars and cents of this and evaluating, hey, do we want to try to go to lengths to potentially strengthen our league, but we may not be able to, we're probably not going to be able to strengthen it enough to a point where it does become a two-bit league, or do we position ourselves where we can make sure that we give the best team or two in our league the best opportunities to get to the tournament so that knowing that expansion is probably coming, we can get that extra unit, or we can put ourselves in the best situation to go get that extra unit because look, it's a lot of money coming into a conference when you go out and you get to an NCAA tournament and then win an NCAA tournament game. That's a significant amount more money that comes into your conference. And for some of these smaller conferences that are not necessarily swimming in resources, an extra unit or two every year, that goes a long way to keeping status quo in the league or providing better opportunities without expansion so that maybe you can, maybe you don't become a two-bit league, but you can strengthen the opportunities for the best couple teams, the most, the best well-resourced teams in your league to give them a better fighting chance. Yeah, there's definitely something that when you look at how that's going to play out and of course, leave it to the NCAA though to have the payouts, you know, roughly $2 million for a unit, but just pay it out over six years in installments. So of course, they're going to hold on to as much as they can to try to draw interest off of that before they have to pay it out. But yes, it is significant money for some of these conferences and especially, you know, how they're dividing it. And I would imagine most conferences, you know, at least on the mid-major level are spreading it out evenly across all of the teams. So, I mean, that is a big part of where this is going to move forward in terms of, will there also be an increase in these dollar units that are being paid out because of when they renegotiate their media deals, you know, is there opportunity for more payouts to happen from that standpoint? And, you know, I think we could see some of that too. Well, one thing I think that I wanted to add and you touched on it is how the money is paid out. I'm a personally, I'm a big proponent of not paying it out equally. I think you need to reward teams that consistently put out winning teams. And I think I know it may hurt the bottom of the league, but if we're being honest, the bottom of the league in most mid-major conferences, it's really hard for them resource-wise to ever not be at the bottom of that league. So, why don't we potentially incentivize helping some of these teams that are committed to putting winning programs out their year in and year out and frankly, have the resources to at least be able to do it, maybe those additional resources to put that can push them over the finish line and maybe make them that much more competitive. And I don't know if that all goes to NIL or I don't know if that goes to just allowing more money to be pushed into an operating budget that maybe allows you to travel better or eat better, but just put your best foot forward for your best three or four teams in your league. Yeah, I think that's a good point too because as unfortunate as it may be for the bottom teams in the conferences, you do consistently see some of these lower conference teams stay at the lower level of the conference and for them to be to be paid equally as much as the the first team gets as much as the 12th team, Gonzaga is getting as much as Pepperdine, those sorts of things. It's like you should get like the winners should get winnings and that should be the case to help propel those winners forward to be better on the national stage or to show face more in the NCAA tournament, those things. So, I'm totally with you there. I think that's a way that they could absolutely lean to strengthen especially the top of those leagues. Yeah, and Vince, how much do you feel fans and the Cinderella story and viewing the expansion as far as how, oh, we'll have more opportunities for the Cinderella story? Because I mean, it seems great to have the Cinderella story, you know, they're in the first day, that Thursday, and that's the magical day, you know, they're the tip off right afternoon and then that Friday, you usually have two straight days of basketball basically all day. But it seems that once you get through that, then it seems like the fans, they shift gears and they want the blue bloods, they want the best of the best. So, again, you know, the Cinderella story, I don't know how much that plays into this expansion situation that we could see in the near future. It's funny because it's kind of a double edged sword, right? Because from the business side, you know, the March Madness business people probably don't want to see the FAUs and those sorts of teams in the Final Four. They would love to see the Kentucky and the Duke because they know that's going to ring them in brand. But that's right. I would be lying if I told you I didn't have Off-Dra in my leading. Like, I have mid-major teams making their deep runs in the tournament. And I think in terms of the expansion and what that will do to the Cinderella teams, I think from a fan perspective, they're probably just used that they're probably going to have more games on Monday and Tuesday after the conference ends. Because I don't think you can have all, whatever, all six or eight or however many games it's going to be in Dayton in a span of two days. You're going to have to spread it out a little bit. So, it'll be for us media members, it'll be a time where we get very minimal sleep from the conference. Of course. We have less time to prep. Exactly. Usually that Monday, Tuesday is you're filling out your brackets, analyzing some teams and doing the fun shows. But now it's going to be analyzing these first, call it 12 teams that are playing on Monday or Tuesday night. No rest for the weary for us. But I think the fans will probably, while they might not like the idea of it and think it might ruin some of the madness, they get more basketball, which is a little bit. They do. Yeah. That's right. I think that's a big key. It is more basketball. But even from the perspective of the how teams now are saying, we had an NCAA tournament win, I might be still more on that, hey, the NCAA tournament, it doesn't start till you're part of the 64. So, I don't know, man, because again, for me, the bracket is due at 11.59 on Thursday. It's not due before the play in game. So, aren't they already telling us right there that that's really not part of the tournament, even like the NBA right now, fans, you have the NBA playoffs, but then you have the play in tournament. And so, to get into the playoffs, you have to work your way through that tournament. And so, it's almost like a mini tournament just to get into the tournament. But of course, you know, the units are being paid out. So, that's why these schools are easily saying, oh, we had an NCAA tournament win. Right, totally. And that makes sense from their perspective. And it does kind of stink that the narrative around the play in games is that it's like the half-priced games. It's like, no, well, we're still just as good. We just have to work a little harder to get in there and that group of 64, which is an unfortunate spot because you're still playing for something great in my eyes. If you've got the NCAA tournament patch on the jersey and it feels like March, hey, that's the ticket. That's what you signed up for when you go to college basketball and try to play at the highest level. So, I'm all about that. The narrative around it being kind of that dollar tree game to get in the NCAA tournament that is almost unfortunate on so many different accounts. Oh, yeah, it is. And that's why, again, I know I'm probably pushing the envelope a little bit, but you can't get off my lawn from that side. That's just the old school in me in terms of, because I remember when it was expanded to 64 in 1985, I'd date back all the way to there and having my bracket and all of that and how excited I was to be able to create your own bracket at the time. And this was well before we had any opportunity of doing the bracketology and the bracket pools and all of that. But at the end of the day, Vince, regardless of how it plays out and the unintended consequences, because that's the one thing we know there will be some unintended consequences. There'll be somebody that's upset, but you've already nailed it before. At the end of the day, I do think it's happening and it's more college basketball. It's more content for us to talk about. It's more content for us to dive into. And it's more players and coaches we get to know their stories as well. 100%. That's one thing that I think that I always appreciate about how CBS and TNT and TBS and however other many channels, the NCAA tournament gets broadcast on now. They always do a great job of bringing all the stories that can kind of be washed over sometimes, especially in mid-major basketball to life. And they bring those to the forefront. And that's why the average college basketball watcher that has no idea about some of these mid majors can fall in love with a guy who goes for 25 and 10 in an NCAA tournament game when realizing their story is really interesting. And how they got to this point is totally worth being highlighted on the national stage. And more mid-major teams should deserve that level of coverage and of shouts from the national media. So I know we try to do that on the field of 68, something that I've always got my eyes peeled looking for stories like that. But it is the magic that that comes with the NCAA tournament. No question about it. Well, Vince, we can't thank you enough for joining us here on the SoCon Fast Break Show. We greatly appreciate it. And I don't know you've got to get to all of your other activities. We'll have you back because we've got a lot more stuff to talk about. And now it's going to impact mid-major basketball. That's for certain. But Vince, thank you so much. Absolutely. I appreciate you guys having me. It's always fun to talk the potentials with the NCAA tournament. And I'd love to come on again and talk more college hoops. It's the best. All right, Darren, what a great time catching up with Vince there. He's just a great guy, does a great job with everything that he's doing with the field of 68 and college sports company. And we'll see what happens with the NCAA tournament expansion, man. Here we go. We don't know. Yeah. No, that was that was a lot of fun. Vince does a great job. He does a great job. I love his energy. I love his knowledge. And that was a really fun conversation to add another dynamic to no question to us here. And to you, like you said, I think I think it's probably coming next year. Oh, I think it's definitely coming. It is going to be full steam ahead for expansion within the NCAA tournament. We'll see how that plays out the mid major level. And of course, right here in the Southern Conference. All right, make sure you hit that subscribe button. We're trying to get our subscribers up. Yes, we would appreciate it as we'll continue giving you more so con hoops coverage. Hit that subscribe button on YouTube or the follow button wherever you get your podcast, Apple podcasts, Spotify, including the I heart radio app. Until next time, may all your jumpers and nothing but the bottom of the net.