Coaches face scheduling challenges with 76-team NCAA tournament

The NCAA tournament expanding from 68 to 76 teams will lead to significant changes in the college basketball industry. Television and travel are some of the components of the business which will be adjusted. Perhaps the biggest change of all could come in the realm of nonconference scheduling, the games coaches get on the phone to discuss with each other.

Reality, like it or not

The sad reality of expansion to 76 teams is that it will serve the high majors, the teams from power conferences, more than the 25-win small-conference teams. We don't like this, but we know this is what will generally happen. Let's start there as the basis for this conversation, even though it's an unpleasant thing to contemplate.

Fewer risks

Coaches of high major teams will be inclined to take fewer risks in their nonconference schedules. That much we can all agree on. You are going to see teams with 7-11 or 8-12 conference records getting into the play-in round quite often with the 76-team setup. Coaches will realize there's little point in testing oneself in nonconference games when conference play is enough of a challenge. Racking up wins will be the goal in nonconference competition.

Miami-Ohio

It became one of the biggest stories of the 2026 college basketball season: Miami could not get high majors to play the RedHawks. That's what led to the team's very soft overall schedule. It nearly got the RedHawks excluded, but they lost only one game and were able to make the First Four and win that game over SMU. If Miami had lost two games, the RedHawks might have been left out. Will that kind of story recur with 76 teams, or will coaches be more willing to play Miami-Ohio (or an equivalent team) now? It's a huge question.

Total cupcake city

Some coaches will very probably go the soft and gooey route. In a sport with over 350 teams, some coaches will just load up on teams ranked around 300 and beat them up, going 13-0 heading into conference play and figuring the absence of losses is a good tradeoff for a terrible strength of schedule ranking which will be minimized by conference play in January and February.

Maybe risks are good

Some coaches, knowing they have more margin for error in a 76-team March Madness setup, will challenge their teams in nonconference play, believing that if they win just one or two games against a very tough schedule, the quality of those wins could be enough to get into the expanded field.

The middle ground

The really interesting part of this discussion is that the middle ground might be the best path. Coaches probably need to schedule at least one or two really tough games but then stack winnable games in the nonconference slate. Balance might be the key.

The wisest course of action for a high major coach on the bubble (not at the top of the sport such as Duke or Michigan) could be to schedule a Miami-Ohio-type team on a neutral floor (not on the road) and to look for teams ranked 100-200 as opponents, not in the 300s or very high 200s. Coaches could identify winnable games but avoid the bottom third (225-355) of the pile. They can win without having the worst possible strength of schedule rankings. This might be the adjustment coaches make.

Hate the reality, love the drama

We all hate expansion to 76 teams, but it's still impossible to ignore that this is creating some really intriguing new questions and challenges for college basketball coaches. It will be interesting to see how they respond to this new world, a world they wanted.

Contact/Follow@College_Wireon X and@College_Wireson Threads. Like our page onFacebookto follow ongoing coverage of college sports news, notes, and opinions.

This article originally appeared on College Sports Wire: Scheduling strategy becomes big focus with 76-team March Madness field