This is one outlet's own report from CBS Sports — the article as it was filed.
AIPROPX ReportCBS Sports · 55m ago
Candid Coaches: How many games should there be in college basketball's regular season?
We're now in the final week of our 2026 Candid Coaches series. Links to all previous questions are at the bottom of this story. In July and August, college basketball insiders Gary Parrish and Matt Norlander polled nearly 100 men's Division I coaches on a variety of questions about the sport. Honesty was exchanged for anonymity. This is the seventh question of the bunch.
For the previous 20 consecutive seasons — from 2006-07 until this past March — college basketball's regular season allowed for a maximum of 31 games. In the years surrounding the turn of the century, teams played anywhere from 26 to 30 games, as each coach had a different set of scheduling intentions that determined how deep their regular seasons would be.
This season will see an increase to a maximum of 32 games. Unlike previous years, which only allowed teams to hit 31 if they were in a multi-game event/tournament, teams can now get to 32 however they please. College basketball's regular-season inventory in the non-con portion has always and likely will always be a medley of must-watch ranked matchups tossed in with far too many buy-game opportunities that are effectively schedule filler.
The increase to 32 has opened a window for some teams to up their ambitions prior to league play.
Among the throng of teams taking advantage of this extra regular season game by scheduling up and adding another notable matchup on the non-con slate: Connecticut , Duke , Arizona , North Carolina and Florida . (Then there are other high-major programs that coyly decided to add another Quad 4 game to the docket. We'll see if those decisions backfire come Selection Sunday.)
Was upping the regular season by one game warranted? Conversely: Is 32 games enough? With that in mind, we asked approximately 100 coaches:
It took 20 years for college basketball's regular season to increase by one game.
Prediction: It will take less than half that time to increase it by at least another two.
Although 49% of our voting contingent was satisfied topping out at 32 games, more coaches than not told us they are comfortable with expanding the season even more. (Note: 32 was the most common answer we received, though, with almost 20 votes.)
Some think the season is going to grow for the same reason I do: these programs need more money in the era of player payments and empowerment. More games equals more opportunities for more money. A lot more money. If you go from 32 to 34, say, five years from now, that would allow many high-major teams to earn an additional $1 million off those two games on average, just based on home gates or neutral-site opportunities that will likely be paying out a minimum of $600,000 by that point. (I'm using that 600K figure based on the average going rate for a neutral-site game in 2026 and factoring in inevitable inflation. There are already teams are getting more than $600,000 this year for one-off neutral-site games.)
I'd expect the 32-game regular season to be in place and unchanged for the next two, probably three years. But if you told me another expansion to the season was in place by 2030, I wouldn't blink. Because it's going to happen eventually. The economics will dictate it. Teams' roster costs have jumped exorbitantly every year since NIL first came into play less than five years ago.
So, when the next increase on regular-season inventory happens, it will require another week added to the season. And that won't be happening on the back end. The NCAA Tournament's conclusion in the first week of April will not be moved. That means the start of the season will get nudged up.
One coach suggested starting on Halloween every year, and while that has some cachet, it's not practical once you get to 34 games and need to spread them out. Starting somewhere in the Oct. 23-25 range would be the pragmatic approach in order to avoid a game squeeze in November and December. You'd also then see all the high-major leagues go to 20 games in this scenario, which is something the Big Ten and Big East already do and the Big 12 will be moving back to for 2027-28.
I'd have no problem getting to 34, maybe even 35 games. I think the scheduling flexibility would increase and you would naturally build up the amount of really good matchups in November, December — and February. We could find more room for good non-con battles in the thick of conference season, which is a throwback to how it used to be and has come back into style in recent years .
As one coach put it: "Where we are now is good for me, 30-33. But if there needs to be a few more games, to continue bring in the necessary revenue to keep the doors of these athletics programs open, I'm not opposed to 40."
As you can see above with the final quote included, one coach (from a high-major program and who is under the age of 45) voted for a 50-game regular season. I'll write here what I told him when he gave me that number: That's psychotic.
I think 40 is way too much as well, but as the voting indicates, there's no shortage of coaches that want to give their teams as many opportunities as possible to play games. Going back and checking my tallies, all but two coaches who voted for 40 or more games are currently at the high-major level. I understand the desire to get there, but it's still a really big number. While I'd never say never, I think we're at least two decades away from being in a place where 40 games prior to conference tournaments is a possible reality. That's a LOT of college basketball, and while it's easy to be cynical about the academic component, it's still a major factor. These are not full-on pros without other day-to-day responsibilities.
Going from 31 to 32 will be a net positive with more ranked-on-ranked matchups populating the docket, but don't expect it to last too long. The season will grow again, eventually. Because when money is driving so much of what happens in college sports, nothing is off the table — other than getting everyone to agree on ...
AIPROPX is an independent multi-source news index — we track, compare, and connect coverage from across the web into one place you won't find anywhere else.
