What'd everyone say about 68?

Everyone's got something to say about the NCAA tournament expansion, which makes sense. We've been chattering about it nonstop for months.

Yet it seems the expansion from 65 teams to 68 – not 96 – didn't prompt a multitude of similar stories. That's a happy change. Instead of everyone railing against going to 96, there's more than one school out thought out there.

On that note, here's your NCAA expansion roundup.

I offer two links on the expansion basics from Eammon Brennan and Matt Norlander. Read up. Then move onto the opinions.

Did the NCAA actually listen to everyone who ripped the idea of 96? Gary Parrish thinks so.

Then again, maybe the NCAA simply made the savvy move by setting everyone up to think we were headed for 96. That way 68 sounds marvelous, writes Pat Forde.

There is skepticism. Brett McMurphy doubts the field of 68 will remain the field of 68 for very long. Perhaps that's true given that some coaches are still pushing for more expansion, but it's hard to envision after the storm NCAA officials endured this spring. Give it until at least 2016.

What did the players think of the expansion? Dana O'Neil did the legwork before the news hit and found mostly mixed results. Some don't mind, some do. (Stunner.)

There was much rejoicing. I mean a lot. Like everywhere.

Hey wait, what about the logistics? After all, which eight teams are going to be slated for those four play-in games?

What about an expansion response in cartoon form? (It's worth it.)

And finally, we hoops pundits deserve some finger wagging for thinking the move to 96 was a done deal. Turns out the sky wasn't falling.

Mike Miller's also on Twitter, usually talkin' hoops. Click here to follow him.