×
MLB manager grades for every new hire, including 2 A’s and 2 D’s

MLB manager grades for every new hire, including 2 A’s and 2 D’s

Sports news

2025 has been a busy year for the managerial market. With nine openings, nearly a third of the league was looking for a new manager. Eight of those openings have now been filled, with the Colorado Rockies now the only team still searching for a manager.

The theme of this cycle has been a lack of experience among the hires. Five of the eight hires have no MLB managerial experience and six of the eight are under 50 years old. Teams have been swinging for the fences this cycle. That is a high risk, high reward strategy. Here are my grades for all eight managerial hires.

Craig Albernaz, Orioles: A

Craig Albernaz was one of the hottest names on the managerial market this offseason. Despite not having any managerial experience, multiple teams went after Albernaz. He received rave reviews during his time as Stephen Vogt’s right hand man in Cleveland. In the end, he landed with the Baltimore Orioles.

The O’s are in need of a spark after a disappointing 75 win campaign. Baltimore had made the playoffs in the two previous seasons, but a lack of pitching and stagnation among their young hitting core led them to take a step back. On paper, Albernaz seems like a great candidate to get the best out of that core.

At 43 years old, Albernaz is a young fresh face who has the personality to command a locker room. However, the success of the 2026 O’s will come down to the work of GM Mike Elias. He needs to make a run at a top line starter that can compliment the O’s young hitters. If the right tools are around him, Albernaz should succeed.

Skip Schumaker, Rangers: A-

Unlike many of the managers hired in this cycle, Skip Schumaker has managerial experience. He managed the Marlins in 2023 and 2024. In his first season, he led the Marlins to the playoffs and won Manager of the Year. However, things went off the rails in year two, with the Marlins losing 100 games and Schumaker losing his job.

After taking an advisory role in Texas, he was seen around the industry as the manager in waiting. Bruce Bochy was entering his 70’s, so the Rangers needed a succession plan. Texas had a second straight disappointing season following their 2023 World Series, so Bochy stepped away.

Schumaker was the obvious candidate and became the first manager hired this cycle. This is a great and well planned hire by the Rangers. It remains to be seen if Schumaker can be successful though. The team is aging and could enter a retool. If they do that, Schumaker is a good man to lead them into this new era.

After a pair of mediocre seasons under Bob Melvin, Giants President of Baseball Operations and franchise legend Buster Posey had seen enough. Melvin was let go and Posey set out to make a splashy hire. Since their magical 2021 season, the Giants have been the definition of average, winning between 79 and 81 games each of the past four seasons.

Posey was looking to shake things up and he did just that by hiring University of Tennessee coach Tony Vitello. This outside the box hire sent shock waves around the baseball world. Vitello is the first college coach to jump into MLB management without professional coaching experience.

However, Vitello was wildly successful in Knoxville, where he rebuilt the Vols program and won a National Championship. He is also highly charismatic and has the personality to win over a locker room quickly. Given his lack of professional experience, the grade was knocked down but this is a risk worth taking for a Giants team desperate to escape mediocrity.

Blake Butera, Nationals: B

After firing manager Davey Martinez and GM Mike Rizzo, the Washington Nationals have gone in a youthful direction. The team hired 35-year old Paul Toboni to be their President of Baseball Operations and went even younger with the manager, hiring Blake Butera, who is just 33-years old. Butera is the youngest manager in over 50 years, which comes with a lot of risk.

Butera has taken a non-traditional path to management. He was a Minor League manager for four years before spending the last two years as the Senior Director of Player Development for the Rays. That player development experience is valuable for the Nationals who have a lot of work to do in that area.

This hiring does not come without risk. Butera is still very young in his baseball journey. He could be too green for this job, but he is highly thought of in the industry. Having floundered since their 2019 World Series title, the Nationals are in position to take a high risk/high reward swing because they do not have much to lose.

After Mike Shildt surprisingly stepped away, the Padres had to search for their sixth full time manager of the AJ Preller era. Shildt had led the Padres to the playoffs in each of his two seasons, so he will be a tough act to follow. In a surprising twist, former Padres reliever Craig Stammen went from interviewing potential candidates to landing the job himself.

Despite the palace intrigue, the hire does make some sense. Stammen played six seasons in San Diego and has been an advisor to AJ Preller since his retirement. He knows the organization well and has existing relationships with players on the roster.

This is a risk though. The Padres are in their competitive window right now. Having a manager learn on the job while the team is trying to compete could become problematic. Stammen does not have any coaching experience, but AJ Preller feels he is ready to manage a veteran-laden and occasionally volatile clubhouse.

The Atlanta Braves are not a team that hires new managers very often. Since 1990, the team has only had three managers. Of course, the legendary Bobby Cox managed many of those seasons, but Fredi Gonzalez and Brian Snitker both had long runs in Atlanta. Gonzalez lasted six seasons, while Snitker managed for 10 seasons.

This makes the hiring of Walt Weiss feel underwhelming. After a mediocre run as Rockies manager, Weiss had been the Braves bench coach since 2016. Following a disappointing season in 2025, many thought the Braves would shake things up. That did not turn out to be the case. This hire feels very uninspired, but the Brian Snitker hiring was not a glamorous hire and that worked out very well.

Weiss’ grade was helped out by a couple smart staff hirings. Adding pitching coach Jeremy Hefner and first base coach Antoan Richardson is impressive. Both are highly regarded around the league. Richardson helped the slow footed Juan Soto steal 38 bases last season, imagine what he could do with Ronald Acuña.

The Minnesota Twins went against the grain, hiring an older manager with previous experience in Derek Shelton. Shelton was fired by the Pirates midway through his sixth season as manager. He did not have any winning seasons in Pittsburgh, but blaming that on the manager would be foolish.

However, the Twins feel like a team going nowhere fast. With ownership problems of their own, the team is entering a rebuild. While Shelton has experience managing a young team, this is not a very exciting hire. Nothing about Shelton’s time in Pittsburgh suggests he deserved an immediate shot at another job. It would be easy to argue that he is a downgrade on Rocco Baldelli, who the Twins just fired.

For Shelton, it seems like he is being dealt a tough hand once again as a manager. He is an uninspiring hire being set up to fail. His experience with a rebuilding team is an asset, but I do not have a lot of faith in this hire.

At first, the Kurt Suzuki hire seemed exciting. He was a former Angel who was going back to manage the team. However, the devil is in the details with this hire. Due to the contract he signed, Suzuki is immediately on the hot seat.

A first time manager should have the opportunity to grow with the team. Suzuki will not have that chance, as he only signed a one-year deal. That short contract instantly puts pressure on a manager who will be learning on the job. It is not a smart move by an organization who makes a lot of silly moves.

This is just another example of the Angels being the Angels. Unlike many owners, Arte Moreno actually seems like he wants to win. However, he cannot get out of his own way. This peculiar contract is just another example of that. The pressure of a one-year deal is likely to stunt Suzuki’s growth as a manager. This smells like a one and done for the former catcher.

Source link
#MLB #manager #grades #hire #including

Tag

Related Posts

Deadspin | With manager gone for a game, Padres pursue victory over Cubs Apr 28, 2026; San Diego, California, USA; Chicago Cubs center fielder Pete Crow-Armstrong (4) celebrates after hitting a three-run home run during the seventh inning against the San Diego Padres at Petco Park. Mandatory Credit: David Frerker-Imagn Images Bench coach Randy Knorr will be at the helm of the San Diego Padres when they host the Chicago Cubs in the finale of the teams’ three-game series on Wednesday afternoon. Knorr will fill in for manager Craig Stammen, who will be attending an out-of-town funeral. Stammen departed before the start of the eighth inning of San Diego’s 8-3 loss Tuesday to catch a flight. “We knew when he was going to leave,” Knorr said. “We’re going to miss him a lot (Wednesday).” All-Star third baseman Manny Machado sat out Tuesday’s game due to an ailing left leg, but the Padres could get him back for Wednesday’s contest. Knorr said Machado wants to play, and the acting manager would love to have him. “It’s still April,” Knorr said, implying there was no reason to take a chance — even on an injury later deemed minor — this early in the season. Knorr also noted that Machado — who doubled twice Monday in a 9-7 win over Chicago before being removed from the game, and then got two homers and five RBIs Sunday during a 12-7 loss to Arizona — is starting to get hot. In his past seven games, Machado is hitting .310 with two homers and six RBIs. The same can’t be said of San Diego pitching, which has yielded at least four runs in each of the past six games. The staff ran into control problems Tuesday night as five pitchers combined to walk six, toss three wild pitches and hit two batters. Three walks and a hit batter came around to score. “It’s hard to fall behind those guys and give them good pitches to hit,” Knorr said of Chicago’s batters. San Diego’s Matt Waldron (0-1, 12.46 ERA) hopes to turn his fortunes around in his third start since being called up from Triple-A El Paso. He allowed eight hits and six runs Thursday in the team’s 10-8 win at Colorado, walking three and striking out three. This will be the right-hander’s first career outing against the Cubs. Chicago will counter with right-hander Jameson Taillon (1-1, 4.55 ERA), who last worked on Friday night at the Los Angeles Dodgers. He took a no-decision after giving up four runs on four hits and three walks with four strikeouts in his team’s 6-4 victory. He’s 2-0 with a 2.40 ERA in five career starts against San Diego. Cubs manager Craig Counsell said he hopes that shortstop Dansby Swanson, who left the game on Tuesday in the second inning with a left glute cramp, will be able to play on Wednesday. “He’s feeling good,” Counsell said of Swanson, who was injured while attempting to steal third base. “His hip and glute got jammed up a little bit. I’m optimistic that it’s nothing serious.” Swanson got the scoring started by swatting a two-run double to left-center, giving him 23 RBIs, second on the team to Nico Hoerner’s 26. Offense has been the calling card for the Cubs, who already have 40 homers after Pete Crow-Armstrong’s three-run blast in the seventh broke Tuesday’s game open. Equally as pleasing for Counsell was his team’s ability to get late outs from a depleted bullpen. After allowing four runs on Monday night, Chicago relievers retired all 10 men they faced on Tuesday to protect Edward Cabrera’s third win, keeping the Padres from using their high-leverage relievers. “Just playing with a lead against this team is enormous,” Counsell said. “It’s something you’ve got to do.” –Field Level Media #Deadspin #manager #game #Padres #pursue #victory #CubsApr 28, 2026; San Diego, California, USA; Chicago Cubs center fielder Pete Crow-Armstrong (4) celebrates after hitting a three-run home run during the seventh inning against the San Diego Padres at Petco Park. Mandatory Credit: David Frerker-Imagn Images

Bench coach Randy Knorr will be at the helm of the San Diego Padres when they host the Chicago Cubs in the finale of the teams’ three-game series on Wednesday afternoon.

Knorr will fill in for manager Craig Stammen, who will be attending an out-of-town funeral. Stammen departed before the start of the eighth inning of San Diego’s 8-3 loss Tuesday to catch a flight.

“We knew when he was going to leave,” Knorr said. “We’re going to miss him a lot (Wednesday).”

All-Star third baseman Manny Machado sat out Tuesday’s game due to an ailing left leg, but the Padres could get him back for Wednesday’s contest.

Knorr said Machado wants to play, and the acting manager would love to have him.

“It’s still April,” Knorr said, implying there was no reason to take a chance — even on an injury later deemed minor — this early in the season.

Knorr also noted that Machado — who doubled twice Monday in a 9-7 win over Chicago before being removed from the game, and then got two homers and five RBIs Sunday during a 12-7 loss to Arizona — is starting to get hot. In his past seven games, Machado is hitting .310 with two homers and six RBIs.

The same can’t be said of San Diego pitching, which has yielded at least four runs in each of the past six games. The staff ran into control problems Tuesday night as five pitchers combined to walk six, toss three wild pitches and hit two batters. Three walks and a hit batter came around to score.


“It’s hard to fall behind those guys and give them good pitches to hit,” Knorr said of Chicago’s batters.

San Diego’s Matt Waldron (0-1, 12.46 ERA) hopes to turn his fortunes around in his third start since being called up from Triple-A El Paso. He allowed eight hits and six runs Thursday in the team’s 10-8 win at Colorado, walking three and striking out three. This will be the right-hander’s first career outing against the Cubs.

Chicago will counter with right-hander Jameson Taillon (1-1, 4.55 ERA), who last worked on Friday night at the Los Angeles Dodgers. He took a no-decision after giving up four runs on four hits and three walks with four strikeouts in his team’s 6-4 victory.

He’s 2-0 with a 2.40 ERA in five career starts against San Diego.

Cubs manager Craig Counsell said he hopes that shortstop Dansby Swanson, who left the game on Tuesday in the second inning with a left glute cramp, will be able to play on Wednesday.

“He’s feeling good,” Counsell said of Swanson, who was injured while attempting to steal third base. “His hip and glute got jammed up a little bit. I’m optimistic that it’s nothing serious.”

Swanson got the scoring started by swatting a two-run double to left-center, giving him 23 RBIs, second on the team to Nico Hoerner’s 26. Offense has been the calling card for the Cubs, who already have 40 homers after Pete Crow-Armstrong’s three-run blast in the seventh broke Tuesday’s game open.

Equally as pleasing for Counsell was his team’s ability to get late outs from a depleted bullpen. After allowing four runs on Monday night, Chicago relievers retired all 10 men they faced on Tuesday to protect Edward Cabrera’s third win, keeping the Padres from using their high-leverage relievers.

“Just playing with a lead against this team is enormous,” Counsell said. “It’s something you’ve got to do.”


–Field Level Media

#Deadspin #manager #game #Padres #pursue #victory #Cubs">Deadspin | With manager gone for a game, Padres pursue victory over Cubs Apr 28, 2026; San Diego, California, USA; Chicago Cubs center fielder Pete Crow-Armstrong (4) celebrates after hitting a three-run home run during the seventh inning against the San Diego Padres at Petco Park. Mandatory Credit: David Frerker-Imagn Images Bench coach Randy Knorr will be at the helm of the San Diego Padres when they host the Chicago Cubs in the finale of the teams’ three-game series on Wednesday afternoon. Knorr will fill in for manager Craig Stammen, who will be attending an out-of-town funeral. Stammen departed before the start of the eighth inning of San Diego’s 8-3 loss Tuesday to catch a flight. “We knew when he was going to leave,” Knorr said. “We’re going to miss him a lot (Wednesday).” All-Star third baseman Manny Machado sat out Tuesday’s game due to an ailing left leg, but the Padres could get him back for Wednesday’s contest. Knorr said Machado wants to play, and the acting manager would love to have him. “It’s still April,” Knorr said, implying there was no reason to take a chance — even on an injury later deemed minor — this early in the season. Knorr also noted that Machado — who doubled twice Monday in a 9-7 win over Chicago before being removed from the game, and then got two homers and five RBIs Sunday during a 12-7 loss to Arizona — is starting to get hot. In his past seven games, Machado is hitting .310 with two homers and six RBIs. The same can’t be said of San Diego pitching, which has yielded at least four runs in each of the past six games. The staff ran into control problems Tuesday night as five pitchers combined to walk six, toss three wild pitches and hit two batters. Three walks and a hit batter came around to score. “It’s hard to fall behind those guys and give them good pitches to hit,” Knorr said of Chicago’s batters. San Diego’s Matt Waldron (0-1, 12.46 ERA) hopes to turn his fortunes around in his third start since being called up from Triple-A El Paso. He allowed eight hits and six runs Thursday in the team’s 10-8 win at Colorado, walking three and striking out three. This will be the right-hander’s first career outing against the Cubs. Chicago will counter with right-hander Jameson Taillon (1-1, 4.55 ERA), who last worked on Friday night at the Los Angeles Dodgers. He took a no-decision after giving up four runs on four hits and three walks with four strikeouts in his team’s 6-4 victory. He’s 2-0 with a 2.40 ERA in five career starts against San Diego. Cubs manager Craig Counsell said he hopes that shortstop Dansby Swanson, who left the game on Tuesday in the second inning with a left glute cramp, will be able to play on Wednesday. “He’s feeling good,” Counsell said of Swanson, who was injured while attempting to steal third base. “His hip and glute got jammed up a little bit. I’m optimistic that it’s nothing serious.” Swanson got the scoring started by swatting a two-run double to left-center, giving him 23 RBIs, second on the team to Nico Hoerner’s 26. Offense has been the calling card for the Cubs, who already have 40 homers after Pete Crow-Armstrong’s three-run blast in the seventh broke Tuesday’s game open. Equally as pleasing for Counsell was his team’s ability to get late outs from a depleted bullpen. After allowing four runs on Monday night, Chicago relievers retired all 10 men they faced on Tuesday to protect Edward Cabrera’s third win, keeping the Padres from using their high-leverage relievers. “Just playing with a lead against this team is enormous,” Counsell said. “It’s something you’ve got to do.” –Field Level Media #Deadspin #manager #game #Padres #pursue #victory #Cubs

The seemingly inevitable change that absolutely nobody wants appears to be coming in 2027.

According to ESPN’s Pete Thamel, the NCAA has initiated the final steps to expand the men’s and women’s NCAA basketball tournaments to 76 teams. The expansion is on track to be formalized in the upcoming weeks, and the new 76-team tournament formats will begin next year.

The news was met with the same reaction we’ve seen every time the idea of tournament expansion has been floated: Near universal disapproval.

While not unexpected at this point, messing with the least flawed postseason in all of American sports remains inexplicable and indefensible.

Outside of a handful of head coaches, athletic directors and television executives who stand to personally (but not sizably) benefit from this, nobody associated with college basketball wants this to happen.

Fans of the sport absolutely despise the idea. Media members who cover the sport mostly feel the same. The NCAA Tournament is already the most popular postseason in American sports. There’s no obvious competitive reason for the change. And in an era where massive change is driven by money and virtually nothing else, the financial implications of expansion would seem to be minimal when put up against the pushback from just about everyone who cares about March Madness.

There is simply no logical defense when it comes to messing with one of the few things in sports that just about everyone agrees shouldn’t be messed with it.

Side note: The irony of all ironies here is that if you polled every college basketball fan in the world and asked them what they would do to change the NCAA Tournament before the better, the most common response you would undoubtedly get would be to DECREASE the field back to 64 teams like it was from 1985-2001.

Despite its best efforts over decades littered with ineptitude and head-scratching decisions, the NCAA has consistently done one thing well: Organize a tournament that captivates the American public like few other things can for three weeks ever March/early April. The event brings in about a billion dollars a year for the NCAA, a total which accounts for right around 90 percent of the entity’s annual revenue.

You would think those two sentences would be more than enough reason to leave well enough alone, and yet here we are.

The most logical explanation for why, despite everything, expansion seems inevitable revolves around greed. No amount of money is ever enough, which is why college basketball fans are going to be force fed multiple tournament games featuring power conference teams with losing conference records playing ugly basketball in front of small crowds starting in March of 2027.

The problem with this argument is that the financial benefits of tournament expansion really aren’t that great.

The current television rights agreement between CBS Sports/TNT Sports and the NCAA runs through the 2032 tournament, and the addition of any early round games would have little to no bearing on that deal.

“Right now there’s no guarantee there’s any additional revenue,” one commissioner told CBS Sports’ Matt Norlander last fall. “One of the main sticking points is that without more revenue, how do you pay for more games? How do you pay for more travel? How do you pay for more expenses of an expanded tournament? And on the flip side of it, if you expand, you’re devaluing basketball units at that point. Without more revenue it creates more problems.”

Adding to the point: The current television ratings for the four “First Four” games that are played in Dayton each year on the Tuesday and Wednesday before the “real” tournament starts are … not great. The numbers belabor the point that the 2001 move from 64 to 65 teams — a move made because power conference officials didn’t want to lose an at-large bid after a handful of teams left the WAC to form the Mountain West Conference — was the original minor sin that is now on the verge of blossoming into a deadly sin.

March Madness fanatics are willing to ignore the TruTV contests, and will even fill out brackets on Sunday-Wednesday of tournament week without knowing (or caring) who is going to win the four games in Dayton, but the early round becomes almost impossible to ignore when the number of teams participating jumps from four to 12.

And those games? They aren’t going to be pretty.

It’s almost too gross to look at.

The biggest argument in favor of tournament expansion surrounds the idea of access.

There are 365 teams in the sport.

Great power conference teams are left out every year.

Look at UCLA in 2021 and VCU in 20111.

This will get more mid-majors into the field.

Why are people so mad about more basketball?

Let’s be clear: This has never been about access.

No major American sport has greater access to its ultimate postseason than college basketball does. The reason? Conference tournaments.

Almost every team in Division-I college basketball automatically qualifies for its conference tournament, which means almost every team in Division-I college basketball has the opportunity at the end of its season to play until it loses.

Had an injured star player in the first half of the season who tanked your tournament resume? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance. Had some chemistry issues early on that got fixed in the second half of the season? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance. Played horrible basketball for absolutely no logical reason for the first three months of the season but are now playing splendidly? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance.

The power conference head coaches and administrators who seem to be the only ones in favor this will tell you that this is a numbers game. More and more teams keep making the jump to D-I, and because of that, bids are being taken away from some of the best power conference teams in the sport. Oh, and those mid-major Cinderellas you guys love so much? They’re also getting less of a chance to shine.

It’s a disingenuous argument on both fronts.

Sure, the Division-I level of college basketball has been adding teams on a consistent basis for decades now, but over that time, the stranglehold that power conference teams have had on bids to the Big Dance has only grown stronger.

Over the last 10 years, a total of 362 NCAA Tournament at-large bids have been handed out. Out of those 362, 304 of them went to schools in a power conference. That’s 83 percent. If you can’t get your power conference program into the field of 68 over the course of 3-5 years, you probably deserve to have your job performance questioned.

Three of the first four teams left out of last year’s NCAA Tournament were power conference squads Indiana, Auburn and Seton Hall. The fourth was the Mountain West’s San Diego State, a team from the best conference outside of the sport’s Power 5.

Make no mistake about it, these new early round games will be loaded with power conference teams that have records right around .500 and have spent the previous four months proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that they are too average to compete for the sport’s biggest prize. We didn’t need to see Indiana versus Auburn last month. We saw more than enough from both teams between November and February to know exactly who they were.

No one is claiming that this is a change that’s going to make college basketball diehards or casual March Madness bracket fillers abandon the event entirely. It’s just going to make every aspect of the event a little bit worse. The build-up to March will be a little bit more dull. The two weeks of conference tournament action will be a little less exciting. Filling out a bracket will be a decent bit more tedious. The added games themselves will be overwhelmingly forgettable. And all this will happen for no justifiable reason.

For years, college basketball fans have fretted over the powers that be within the NCAA eventually screwing up the one and only thing they consistently get right. We appear to be on the precipice of their latest attempt to do just that.

#March #Madness #expansion #absolutely #coming">The March Madness expansion that absolutely no one wants is coming in 2027 The seemingly inevitable change that absolutely nobody wants appears to be coming in 2027.According to ESPN’s Pete Thamel, the NCAA has initiated the final steps to expand the men’s and women’s NCAA basketball tournaments to 76 teams. The expansion is on track to be formalized in the upcoming weeks, and the new 76-team tournament formats will begin next year.The news was met with the same reaction we’ve seen every time the idea of tournament expansion has been floated: Near universal disapproval.While not unexpected at this point, messing with the least flawed postseason in all of American sports remains inexplicable and indefensible.Outside of a handful of head coaches, athletic directors and television executives who stand to personally (but not sizably) benefit from this, nobody associated with college basketball wants this to happen.Fans of the sport absolutely despise the idea. Media members who cover the sport mostly feel the same. The NCAA Tournament is already the most popular postseason in American sports. There’s no obvious competitive reason for the change. And in an era where massive change is driven by money and virtually nothing else, the financial implications of expansion would seem to be minimal when put up against the pushback from just about everyone who cares about March Madness.There is simply no logical defense when it comes to messing with one of the few things in sports that just about everyone agrees shouldn’t be messed with it.Side note: The irony of all ironies here is that if you polled every college basketball fan in the world and asked them what they would do to change the NCAA Tournament before the better, the most common response you would undoubtedly get would be to DECREASE the field back to 64 teams like it was from 1985-2001.Despite its best efforts over decades littered with ineptitude and head-scratching decisions, the NCAA has consistently done one thing well: Organize a tournament that captivates the American public like few other things can for three weeks ever March/early April. The event brings in about a billion dollars a year for the NCAA, a total which accounts for right around 90 percent of the entity’s annual revenue.You would think those two sentences would be more than enough reason to leave well enough alone, and yet here we are.The most logical explanation for why, despite everything, expansion seems inevitable revolves around greed. No amount of money is ever enough, which is why college basketball fans are going to be force fed multiple tournament games featuring power conference teams with losing conference records playing ugly basketball in front of small crowds starting in March of 2027.The problem with this argument is that the financial benefits of tournament expansion really aren’t that great.The current television rights agreement between CBS Sports/TNT Sports and the NCAA runs through the 2032 tournament, and the addition of any early round games would have little to no bearing on that deal.“Right now there’s no guarantee there’s any additional revenue,” one commissioner told CBS Sports’ Matt Norlander last fall. “One of the main sticking points is that without more revenue, how do you pay for more games? How do you pay for more travel? How do you pay for more expenses of an expanded tournament? And on the flip side of it, if you expand, you’re devaluing basketball units at that point. Without more revenue it creates more problems.”Adding to the point: The current television ratings for the four “First Four” games that are played in Dayton each year on the Tuesday and Wednesday before the “real” tournament starts are … not great. The numbers belabor the point that the 2001 move from 64 to 65 teams — a move made because power conference officials didn’t want to lose an at-large bid after a handful of teams left the WAC to form the Mountain West Conference — was the original minor sin that is now on the verge of blossoming into a deadly sin.March Madness fanatics are willing to ignore the TruTV contests, and will even fill out brackets on Sunday-Wednesday of tournament week without knowing (or caring) who is going to win the four games in Dayton, but the early round becomes almost impossible to ignore when the number of teams participating jumps from four to 12.And those games? They aren’t going to be pretty.It’s almost too gross to look at.The biggest argument in favor of tournament expansion surrounds the idea of access.There are 365 teams in the sport.Great power conference teams are left out every year.Look at UCLA in 2021 and VCU in 20111.This will get more mid-majors into the field.Why are people so mad about more basketball?Let’s be clear: This has never been about access.No major American sport has greater access to its ultimate postseason than college basketball does. The reason? Conference tournaments.Almost every team in Division-I college basketball automatically qualifies for its conference tournament, which means almost every team in Division-I college basketball has the opportunity at the end of its season to play until it loses.Had an injured star player in the first half of the season who tanked your tournament resume? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance. Had some chemistry issues early on that got fixed in the second half of the season? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance. Played horrible basketball for absolutely no logical reason for the first three months of the season but are now playing splendidly? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance.The power conference head coaches and administrators who seem to be the only ones in favor this will tell you that this is a numbers game. More and more teams keep making the jump to D-I, and because of that, bids are being taken away from some of the best power conference teams in the sport. Oh, and those mid-major Cinderellas you guys love so much? They’re also getting less of a chance to shine.It’s a disingenuous argument on both fronts.Sure, the Division-I level of college basketball has been adding teams on a consistent basis for decades now, but over that time, the stranglehold that power conference teams have had on bids to the Big Dance has only grown stronger.Over the last 10 years, a total of 362 NCAA Tournament at-large bids have been handed out. Out of those 362, 304 of them went to schools in a power conference. That’s 83 percent. If you can’t get your power conference program into the field of 68 over the course of 3-5 years, you probably deserve to have your job performance questioned.Three of the first four teams left out of last year’s NCAA Tournament were power conference squads Indiana, Auburn and Seton Hall. The fourth was the Mountain West’s San Diego State, a team from the best conference outside of the sport’s Power 5.Make no mistake about it, these new early round games will be loaded with power conference teams that have records right around .500 and have spent the previous four months proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that they are too average to compete for the sport’s biggest prize. We didn’t need to see Indiana versus Auburn last month. We saw more than enough from both teams between November and February to know exactly who they were.No one is claiming that this is a change that’s going to make college basketball diehards or casual March Madness bracket fillers abandon the event entirely. It’s just going to make every aspect of the event a little bit worse. The build-up to March will be a little bit more dull. The two weeks of conference tournament action will be a little less exciting. Filling out a bracket will be a decent bit more tedious. The added games themselves will be overwhelmingly forgettable. And all this will happen for no justifiable reason.For years, college basketball fans have fretted over the powers that be within the NCAA eventually screwing up the one and only thing they consistently get right. We appear to be on the precipice of their latest attempt to do just that. #March #Madness #expansion #absolutely #coming

According to ESPN’s Pete Thamel, the NCAA has initiated the final steps to expand the men’s and women’s NCAA basketball tournaments to 76 teams. The expansion is on track to be formalized in the upcoming weeks, and the new 76-team tournament formats will begin next year.

The news was met with the same reaction we’ve seen every time the idea of tournament expansion has been floated: Near universal disapproval.

While not unexpected at this point, messing with the least flawed postseason in all of American sports remains inexplicable and indefensible.

Outside of a handful of head coaches, athletic directors and television executives who stand to personally (but not sizably) benefit from this, nobody associated with college basketball wants this to happen.

Fans of the sport absolutely despise the idea. Media members who cover the sport mostly feel the same. The NCAA Tournament is already the most popular postseason in American sports. There’s no obvious competitive reason for the change. And in an era where massive change is driven by money and virtually nothing else, the financial implications of expansion would seem to be minimal when put up against the pushback from just about everyone who cares about March Madness.

There is simply no logical defense when it comes to messing with one of the few things in sports that just about everyone agrees shouldn’t be messed with it.

Side note: The irony of all ironies here is that if you polled every college basketball fan in the world and asked them what they would do to change the NCAA Tournament before the better, the most common response you would undoubtedly get would be to DECREASE the field back to 64 teams like it was from 1985-2001.

Despite its best efforts over decades littered with ineptitude and head-scratching decisions, the NCAA has consistently done one thing well: Organize a tournament that captivates the American public like few other things can for three weeks ever March/early April. The event brings in about a billion dollars a year for the NCAA, a total which accounts for right around 90 percent of the entity’s annual revenue.

You would think those two sentences would be more than enough reason to leave well enough alone, and yet here we are.

The most logical explanation for why, despite everything, expansion seems inevitable revolves around greed. No amount of money is ever enough, which is why college basketball fans are going to be force fed multiple tournament games featuring power conference teams with losing conference records playing ugly basketball in front of small crowds starting in March of 2027.

The problem with this argument is that the financial benefits of tournament expansion really aren’t that great.

The current television rights agreement between CBS Sports/TNT Sports and the NCAA runs through the 2032 tournament, and the addition of any early round games would have little to no bearing on that deal.

“Right now there’s no guarantee there’s any additional revenue,” one commissioner told CBS Sports’ Matt Norlander last fall. “One of the main sticking points is that without more revenue, how do you pay for more games? How do you pay for more travel? How do you pay for more expenses of an expanded tournament? And on the flip side of it, if you expand, you’re devaluing basketball units at that point. Without more revenue it creates more problems.”

Adding to the point: The current television ratings for the four “First Four” games that are played in Dayton each year on the Tuesday and Wednesday before the “real” tournament starts are … not great. The numbers belabor the point that the 2001 move from 64 to 65 teams — a move made because power conference officials didn’t want to lose an at-large bid after a handful of teams left the WAC to form the Mountain West Conference — was the original minor sin that is now on the verge of blossoming into a deadly sin.

March Madness fanatics are willing to ignore the TruTV contests, and will even fill out brackets on Sunday-Wednesday of tournament week without knowing (or caring) who is going to win the four games in Dayton, but the early round becomes almost impossible to ignore when the number of teams participating jumps from four to 12.

And those games? They aren’t going to be pretty.

It’s almost too gross to look at.

The biggest argument in favor of tournament expansion surrounds the idea of access.

There are 365 teams in the sport.

Great power conference teams are left out every year.

Look at UCLA in 2021 and VCU in 20111.

This will get more mid-majors into the field.

Why are people so mad about more basketball?

Let’s be clear: This has never been about access.

No major American sport has greater access to its ultimate postseason than college basketball does. The reason? Conference tournaments.

Almost every team in Division-I college basketball automatically qualifies for its conference tournament, which means almost every team in Division-I college basketball has the opportunity at the end of its season to play until it loses.

Had an injured star player in the first half of the season who tanked your tournament resume? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance. Had some chemistry issues early on that got fixed in the second half of the season? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance. Played horrible basketball for absolutely no logical reason for the first three months of the season but are now playing splendidly? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance.

The power conference head coaches and administrators who seem to be the only ones in favor this will tell you that this is a numbers game. More and more teams keep making the jump to D-I, and because of that, bids are being taken away from some of the best power conference teams in the sport. Oh, and those mid-major Cinderellas you guys love so much? They’re also getting less of a chance to shine.

It’s a disingenuous argument on both fronts.

Sure, the Division-I level of college basketball has been adding teams on a consistent basis for decades now, but over that time, the stranglehold that power conference teams have had on bids to the Big Dance has only grown stronger.

Over the last 10 years, a total of 362 NCAA Tournament at-large bids have been handed out. Out of those 362, 304 of them went to schools in a power conference. That’s 83 percent. If you can’t get your power conference program into the field of 68 over the course of 3-5 years, you probably deserve to have your job performance questioned.

Three of the first four teams left out of last year’s NCAA Tournament were power conference squads Indiana, Auburn and Seton Hall. The fourth was the Mountain West’s San Diego State, a team from the best conference outside of the sport’s Power 5.

Make no mistake about it, these new early round games will be loaded with power conference teams that have records right around .500 and have spent the previous four months proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that they are too average to compete for the sport’s biggest prize. We didn’t need to see Indiana versus Auburn last month. We saw more than enough from both teams between November and February to know exactly who they were.

No one is claiming that this is a change that’s going to make college basketball diehards or casual March Madness bracket fillers abandon the event entirely. It’s just going to make every aspect of the event a little bit worse. The build-up to March will be a little bit more dull. The two weeks of conference tournament action will be a little less exciting. Filling out a bracket will be a decent bit more tedious. The added games themselves will be overwhelmingly forgettable. And all this will happen for no justifiable reason.

For years, college basketball fans have fretted over the powers that be within the NCAA eventually screwing up the one and only thing they consistently get right. We appear to be on the precipice of their latest attempt to do just that.

#March #Madness #expansion #absolutely #coming">The March Madness expansion that absolutely no one wants is coming in 2027

The seemingly inevitable change that absolutely nobody wants appears to be coming in 2027.

According to ESPN’s Pete Thamel, the NCAA has initiated the final steps to expand the men’s and women’s NCAA basketball tournaments to 76 teams. The expansion is on track to be formalized in the upcoming weeks, and the new 76-team tournament formats will begin next year.

The news was met with the same reaction we’ve seen every time the idea of tournament expansion has been floated: Near universal disapproval.

While not unexpected at this point, messing with the least flawed postseason in all of American sports remains inexplicable and indefensible.

Outside of a handful of head coaches, athletic directors and television executives who stand to personally (but not sizably) benefit from this, nobody associated with college basketball wants this to happen.

Fans of the sport absolutely despise the idea. Media members who cover the sport mostly feel the same. The NCAA Tournament is already the most popular postseason in American sports. There’s no obvious competitive reason for the change. And in an era where massive change is driven by money and virtually nothing else, the financial implications of expansion would seem to be minimal when put up against the pushback from just about everyone who cares about March Madness.

There is simply no logical defense when it comes to messing with one of the few things in sports that just about everyone agrees shouldn’t be messed with it.

Side note: The irony of all ironies here is that if you polled every college basketball fan in the world and asked them what they would do to change the NCAA Tournament before the better, the most common response you would undoubtedly get would be to DECREASE the field back to 64 teams like it was from 1985-2001.

Despite its best efforts over decades littered with ineptitude and head-scratching decisions, the NCAA has consistently done one thing well: Organize a tournament that captivates the American public like few other things can for three weeks ever March/early April. The event brings in about a billion dollars a year for the NCAA, a total which accounts for right around 90 percent of the entity’s annual revenue.

You would think those two sentences would be more than enough reason to leave well enough alone, and yet here we are.

The most logical explanation for why, despite everything, expansion seems inevitable revolves around greed. No amount of money is ever enough, which is why college basketball fans are going to be force fed multiple tournament games featuring power conference teams with losing conference records playing ugly basketball in front of small crowds starting in March of 2027.

The problem with this argument is that the financial benefits of tournament expansion really aren’t that great.

The current television rights agreement between CBS Sports/TNT Sports and the NCAA runs through the 2032 tournament, and the addition of any early round games would have little to no bearing on that deal.

“Right now there’s no guarantee there’s any additional revenue,” one commissioner told CBS Sports’ Matt Norlander last fall. “One of the main sticking points is that without more revenue, how do you pay for more games? How do you pay for more travel? How do you pay for more expenses of an expanded tournament? And on the flip side of it, if you expand, you’re devaluing basketball units at that point. Without more revenue it creates more problems.”

Adding to the point: The current television ratings for the four “First Four” games that are played in Dayton each year on the Tuesday and Wednesday before the “real” tournament starts are … not great. The numbers belabor the point that the 2001 move from 64 to 65 teams — a move made because power conference officials didn’t want to lose an at-large bid after a handful of teams left the WAC to form the Mountain West Conference — was the original minor sin that is now on the verge of blossoming into a deadly sin.

March Madness fanatics are willing to ignore the TruTV contests, and will even fill out brackets on Sunday-Wednesday of tournament week without knowing (or caring) who is going to win the four games in Dayton, but the early round becomes almost impossible to ignore when the number of teams participating jumps from four to 12.

And those games? They aren’t going to be pretty.

It’s almost too gross to look at.

The biggest argument in favor of tournament expansion surrounds the idea of access.

There are 365 teams in the sport.

Great power conference teams are left out every year.

Look at UCLA in 2021 and VCU in 20111.

This will get more mid-majors into the field.

Why are people so mad about more basketball?

Let’s be clear: This has never been about access.

No major American sport has greater access to its ultimate postseason than college basketball does. The reason? Conference tournaments.

Almost every team in Division-I college basketball automatically qualifies for its conference tournament, which means almost every team in Division-I college basketball has the opportunity at the end of its season to play until it loses.

Had an injured star player in the first half of the season who tanked your tournament resume? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance. Had some chemistry issues early on that got fixed in the second half of the season? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance. Played horrible basketball for absolutely no logical reason for the first three months of the season but are now playing splendidly? You can win your conference tournament and make the Big Dance.

The power conference head coaches and administrators who seem to be the only ones in favor this will tell you that this is a numbers game. More and more teams keep making the jump to D-I, and because of that, bids are being taken away from some of the best power conference teams in the sport. Oh, and those mid-major Cinderellas you guys love so much? They’re also getting less of a chance to shine.

It’s a disingenuous argument on both fronts.

Sure, the Division-I level of college basketball has been adding teams on a consistent basis for decades now, but over that time, the stranglehold that power conference teams have had on bids to the Big Dance has only grown stronger.

Over the last 10 years, a total of 362 NCAA Tournament at-large bids have been handed out. Out of those 362, 304 of them went to schools in a power conference. That’s 83 percent. If you can’t get your power conference program into the field of 68 over the course of 3-5 years, you probably deserve to have your job performance questioned.

Three of the first four teams left out of last year’s NCAA Tournament were power conference squads Indiana, Auburn and Seton Hall. The fourth was the Mountain West’s San Diego State, a team from the best conference outside of the sport’s Power 5.

Make no mistake about it, these new early round games will be loaded with power conference teams that have records right around .500 and have spent the previous four months proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that they are too average to compete for the sport’s biggest prize. We didn’t need to see Indiana versus Auburn last month. We saw more than enough from both teams between November and February to know exactly who they were.

No one is claiming that this is a change that’s going to make college basketball diehards or casual March Madness bracket fillers abandon the event entirely. It’s just going to make every aspect of the event a little bit worse. The build-up to March will be a little bit more dull. The two weeks of conference tournament action will be a little less exciting. Filling out a bracket will be a decent bit more tedious. The added games themselves will be overwhelmingly forgettable. And all this will happen for no justifiable reason.

For years, college basketball fans have fretted over the powers that be within the NCAA eventually screwing up the one and only thing they consistently get right. We appear to be on the precipice of their latest attempt to do just that.

#March #Madness #expansion #absolutely #coming

Gujarat Titans will have a second crack at Royal Challengers Bengaluru in less than a week, at the Narendra Modi Stadium here on Thursday.

And this time, the Titans will hope for a reversal in fortunes after having lost the previous encounter by five wickets as RCB chased 206 with ease.

Shubman Gill & Co. come into the contest after a thumping eight-wicket win over Chennai Super Kings that averted a third straight loss. It was fashioned by a fine bowling effort, led by Kagiso Rabada (three for 25), and some solid batting.

It is however a fact that GT is heavily dependent on its top-three of B. Sai Sudharsan, Shubman Gill and Jos Buttler, who bat a lion’s share of the overs.

There is no mistaking their quality, but they have so far proved to be more accumulators than ransackers. The line-up is like a simmering volcano that threatens to erupt but doesn’t follow through on the promise. GT’s highest total this season is 210; every other side, apart from Lucknow Super Giants, has scored more.

Against RCB, a team that pursues totals in the vicinity of 200 like it’s child’s play, GT can ill-afford to bide its time. Even without Phil Salt, who missed the last two games, the defending champion strikes the same fear, for it has the equally marauding Jacob Bethell.

And versus Delhi Capitals most recently, the RCB bowlers showed what devastation they can cause, dismissing Axar Patel’s men for a paltry 75.

READ | Pitch perfect Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar show how to restore IPL’s bat-ball balance

Bhuvneshwar Kumar and Josh Hazlewood, 36 and 35 respectively, scalped seven wickets between them and gave away just 17 runs. Ageing – in sporting terms – is generally associated with physical decline and a slight dulling of the senses, but not for these two.

GT vs RCB, IPL 2026: Gujarat Titans looks for reversal in fortunes vs Royal Challengers Bengaluru Gujarat Titans will have a second crack at Royal Challengers Bengaluru in less than a week, at the Narendra Modi Stadium here on Thursday.And this time, the Titans will hope for a reversal in fortunes after having lost the previous encounter by five wickets as RCB chased 206 with ease.Shubman Gill & Co. come into the contest after a thumping eight-wicket win over Chennai Super Kings that averted a third straight loss. It was fashioned by a fine bowling effort, led by Kagiso Rabada (three for 25), and some solid batting.It is however a fact that GT is heavily dependent on its top-three of B. Sai Sudharsan, Shubman Gill and Jos Buttler, who bat a lion’s share of the overs.There is no mistaking their quality, but they have so far proved to be more accumulators than ransackers. The line-up is like a simmering volcano that threatens to erupt but doesn’t follow through on the promise. GT’s highest total this season is 210; every other side, apart from Lucknow Super Giants, has scored more.Against RCB, a team that pursues totals in the vicinity of 200 like it’s child’s play, GT can ill-afford to bide its time. Even without Phil Salt, who missed the last two games, the defending champion strikes the same fear, for it has the equally marauding Jacob Bethell.And versus Delhi Capitals most recently, the RCB bowlers showed what devastation they can cause, dismissing Axar Patel’s men for a paltry 75.READ | Pitch perfect Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar show how to restore IPL’s bat-ball balanceBhuvneshwar Kumar and Josh Hazlewood, 36 and 35 respectively, scalped seven wickets between them and gave away just 17 runs. Ageing – in sporting terms – is generally associated with physical decline and a slight dulling of the senses, but not for these two. On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR However, as the table-topping Punjab Kings found out in its six-wicket reverse to Rajasthan Royals on Tuesday, momentum has limited currency in T20 cricket. Can RCB prove otherwise?Published on Apr 29, 2026 #RCB #IPL #Gujarat #Titans #reversal #fortunes #Royal #Challengers #Bengaluru

On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR

lightbox-info

On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR

However, as the table-topping Punjab Kings found out in its six-wicket reverse to Rajasthan Royals on Tuesday, momentum has limited currency in T20 cricket. Can RCB prove otherwise?

Published on Apr 29, 2026

#RCB #IPL #Gujarat #Titans #reversal #fortunes #Royal #Challengers #Bengaluru">GT vs RCB, IPL 2026: Gujarat Titans looks for reversal in fortunes vs Royal Challengers Bengaluru Gujarat Titans will have a second crack at Royal Challengers Bengaluru in less than a week, at the Narendra Modi Stadium here on Thursday.And this time, the Titans will hope for a reversal in fortunes after having lost the previous encounter by five wickets as RCB chased 206 with ease.Shubman Gill & Co. come into the contest after a thumping eight-wicket win over Chennai Super Kings that averted a third straight loss. It was fashioned by a fine bowling effort, led by Kagiso Rabada (three for 25), and some solid batting.It is however a fact that GT is heavily dependent on its top-three of B. Sai Sudharsan, Shubman Gill and Jos Buttler, who bat a lion’s share of the overs.There is no mistaking their quality, but they have so far proved to be more accumulators than ransackers. The line-up is like a simmering volcano that threatens to erupt but doesn’t follow through on the promise. GT’s highest total this season is 210; every other side, apart from Lucknow Super Giants, has scored more.Against RCB, a team that pursues totals in the vicinity of 200 like it’s child’s play, GT can ill-afford to bide its time. Even without Phil Salt, who missed the last two games, the defending champion strikes the same fear, for it has the equally marauding Jacob Bethell.And versus Delhi Capitals most recently, the RCB bowlers showed what devastation they can cause, dismissing Axar Patel’s men for a paltry 75.READ | Pitch perfect Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar show how to restore IPL’s bat-ball balanceBhuvneshwar Kumar and Josh Hazlewood, 36 and 35 respectively, scalped seven wickets between them and gave away just 17 runs. Ageing – in sporting terms – is generally associated with physical decline and a slight dulling of the senses, but not for these two. On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR However, as the table-topping Punjab Kings found out in its six-wicket reverse to Rajasthan Royals on Tuesday, momentum has limited currency in T20 cricket. Can RCB prove otherwise?Published on Apr 29, 2026 #RCB #IPL #Gujarat #Titans #reversal #fortunes #Royal #Challengers #Bengaluru

Pitch perfect Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar show how to restore IPL’s bat-ball balance

Bhuvneshwar Kumar and Josh Hazlewood, 36 and 35 respectively, scalped seven wickets between them and gave away just 17 runs. Ageing – in sporting terms – is generally associated with physical decline and a slight dulling of the senses, but not for these two.

GT vs RCB, IPL 2026: Gujarat Titans looks for reversal in fortunes vs Royal Challengers Bengaluru Gujarat Titans will have a second crack at Royal Challengers Bengaluru in less than a week, at the Narendra Modi Stadium here on Thursday.And this time, the Titans will hope for a reversal in fortunes after having lost the previous encounter by five wickets as RCB chased 206 with ease.Shubman Gill & Co. come into the contest after a thumping eight-wicket win over Chennai Super Kings that averted a third straight loss. It was fashioned by a fine bowling effort, led by Kagiso Rabada (three for 25), and some solid batting.It is however a fact that GT is heavily dependent on its top-three of B. Sai Sudharsan, Shubman Gill and Jos Buttler, who bat a lion’s share of the overs.There is no mistaking their quality, but they have so far proved to be more accumulators than ransackers. The line-up is like a simmering volcano that threatens to erupt but doesn’t follow through on the promise. GT’s highest total this season is 210; every other side, apart from Lucknow Super Giants, has scored more.Against RCB, a team that pursues totals in the vicinity of 200 like it’s child’s play, GT can ill-afford to bide its time. Even without Phil Salt, who missed the last two games, the defending champion strikes the same fear, for it has the equally marauding Jacob Bethell.And versus Delhi Capitals most recently, the RCB bowlers showed what devastation they can cause, dismissing Axar Patel’s men for a paltry 75.READ | Pitch perfect Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar show how to restore IPL’s bat-ball balanceBhuvneshwar Kumar and Josh Hazlewood, 36 and 35 respectively, scalped seven wickets between them and gave away just 17 runs. Ageing – in sporting terms – is generally associated with physical decline and a slight dulling of the senses, but not for these two. On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR However, as the table-topping Punjab Kings found out in its six-wicket reverse to Rajasthan Royals on Tuesday, momentum has limited currency in T20 cricket. Can RCB prove otherwise?Published on Apr 29, 2026 #RCB #IPL #Gujarat #Titans #reversal #fortunes #Royal #Challengers #Bengaluru

On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR

lightbox-info

On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR

However, as the table-topping Punjab Kings found out in its six-wicket reverse to Rajasthan Royals on Tuesday, momentum has limited currency in T20 cricket. Can RCB prove otherwise?

Published on Apr 29, 2026

#RCB #IPL #Gujarat #Titans #reversal #fortunes #Royal #Challengers #Bengaluru">GT vs RCB, IPL 2026: Gujarat Titans looks for reversal in fortunes vs Royal Challengers Bengaluru

Gujarat Titans will have a second crack at Royal Challengers Bengaluru in less than a week, at the Narendra Modi Stadium here on Thursday.

And this time, the Titans will hope for a reversal in fortunes after having lost the previous encounter by five wickets as RCB chased 206 with ease.

Shubman Gill & Co. come into the contest after a thumping eight-wicket win over Chennai Super Kings that averted a third straight loss. It was fashioned by a fine bowling effort, led by Kagiso Rabada (three for 25), and some solid batting.

It is however a fact that GT is heavily dependent on its top-three of B. Sai Sudharsan, Shubman Gill and Jos Buttler, who bat a lion’s share of the overs.

There is no mistaking their quality, but they have so far proved to be more accumulators than ransackers. The line-up is like a simmering volcano that threatens to erupt but doesn’t follow through on the promise. GT’s highest total this season is 210; every other side, apart from Lucknow Super Giants, has scored more.

Against RCB, a team that pursues totals in the vicinity of 200 like it’s child’s play, GT can ill-afford to bide its time. Even without Phil Salt, who missed the last two games, the defending champion strikes the same fear, for it has the equally marauding Jacob Bethell.

And versus Delhi Capitals most recently, the RCB bowlers showed what devastation they can cause, dismissing Axar Patel’s men for a paltry 75.

READ | Pitch perfect Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar show how to restore IPL’s bat-ball balance

Bhuvneshwar Kumar and Josh Hazlewood, 36 and 35 respectively, scalped seven wickets between them and gave away just 17 runs. Ageing – in sporting terms – is generally associated with physical decline and a slight dulling of the senses, but not for these two.

GT vs RCB, IPL 2026: Gujarat Titans looks for reversal in fortunes vs Royal Challengers Bengaluru Gujarat Titans will have a second crack at Royal Challengers Bengaluru in less than a week, at the Narendra Modi Stadium here on Thursday.And this time, the Titans will hope for a reversal in fortunes after having lost the previous encounter by five wickets as RCB chased 206 with ease.Shubman Gill & Co. come into the contest after a thumping eight-wicket win over Chennai Super Kings that averted a third straight loss. It was fashioned by a fine bowling effort, led by Kagiso Rabada (three for 25), and some solid batting.It is however a fact that GT is heavily dependent on its top-three of B. Sai Sudharsan, Shubman Gill and Jos Buttler, who bat a lion’s share of the overs.There is no mistaking their quality, but they have so far proved to be more accumulators than ransackers. The line-up is like a simmering volcano that threatens to erupt but doesn’t follow through on the promise. GT’s highest total this season is 210; every other side, apart from Lucknow Super Giants, has scored more.Against RCB, a team that pursues totals in the vicinity of 200 like it’s child’s play, GT can ill-afford to bide its time. Even without Phil Salt, who missed the last two games, the defending champion strikes the same fear, for it has the equally marauding Jacob Bethell.And versus Delhi Capitals most recently, the RCB bowlers showed what devastation they can cause, dismissing Axar Patel’s men for a paltry 75.READ | Pitch perfect Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar show how to restore IPL’s bat-ball balanceBhuvneshwar Kumar and Josh Hazlewood, 36 and 35 respectively, scalped seven wickets between them and gave away just 17 runs. Ageing – in sporting terms – is generally associated with physical decline and a slight dulling of the senses, but not for these two. On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR However, as the table-topping Punjab Kings found out in its six-wicket reverse to Rajasthan Royals on Tuesday, momentum has limited currency in T20 cricket. Can RCB prove otherwise?Published on Apr 29, 2026 #RCB #IPL #Gujarat #Titans #reversal #fortunes #Royal #Challengers #Bengaluru

On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR

lightbox-info

On a lively surface at the Arun ‌Jaitley Stadium, Hazlewood and Bhuvneshwar claimed seven wickets ​between them and bundled out Delhi Capitals for 75. | Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR

However, as the table-topping Punjab Kings found out in its six-wicket reverse to Rajasthan Royals on Tuesday, momentum has limited currency in T20 cricket. Can RCB prove otherwise?

Published on Apr 29, 2026

#RCB #IPL #Gujarat #Titans #reversal #fortunes #Royal #Challengers #Bengaluru

Post Comment