Official reports are out that the NCAA has convened with head men from conferences and university athletic departments to determine whether the NCAA Men’s Division I Basketball Championship, otherwise known as the best event in sports, should be expanded.

Again.

Shame on them.

If someone could convince me that expanding the tournament to 68 or even 96 teams wouldn’t dilute the playing field, I’d gladly go along with the concept. But the notion of increasing the field to 96 is pure poppycock.

I’d argue the field may already be too large, but the present size of the tournament is perfect for the right amount of upsets. Sure, George Mason’s run to the Final Four in 2006 was mesmerizing, but did the Patriots honestly deserve to win the National Championship?

I think not.

Furthermore, despite the successes of teams such as George Mason and Gonzaga in years past, statistics show there are a low number of upsets.

Since the tournament swelled to 64 teams in 1985, a No. 1 has never lost to a No. 16. A No. 4 beats a No. 13 seed 79 percent of the time. Despite the belief that a No. 12 beats a No. 5 each year, it has only happened in 34 percent of the games.

Judging at how big the tournament has become in terms of size of the field and the arenas that host the Final Four, it’s amazing to think about how far the tournament has come.

In the tournament’s first year in 1939, the field had eight teams. Forty years later, when Larry Bird and Magic Johnson were dazzling fans, March Madness had grown to 40. By 1985, the tournament had ballooned to 64 teams.

Currently, team No. 65 is determined by the “play-in” game or what I like to call the “lose-lose” game, since the winner gets to face the No. 1 overall seed and the loser essentially got invited to the Big Dance only to get turned away at the door.

Even adding a few more play-in games is an insult to the teams that win their conference tournament only to find out they’re stuck on the outside looking in on the tournament.

The funny thing about tournament expansion is it’s not really about the money. Sure, the NCAA has an 11-year, $6 billion contract with CBS, but the men’s tournament is the only NCAA championship tournament that doesn’t get to keep the profits. Instead, the revenue is divvied up between the participating schools and conferences.

Adding more schools means spreading the wealth. Proponents of tournament expansion want the majority of the added slots to go to teams that won their conference’s regular season championship in order to put increased value on the regular season. Thus, the “little guys” would not be seeing much of the revenue and in effect the rich get richer, as the major conferences would swoop in for more bids.

Any way you look at it, expanding the tournament causes problems for everyone. Expansion would render the NIT irrelevant and cause students to miss more class time. Schools would have to dish out more money to cover team expenses.

And most of all, the quality of the basketball would suffer.