Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
why are some of the play-in games not between 16 seeds?
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell
I saw one earlier today...NC Central and UC Irvine I think. Seems a little unfair to have 11 seeds play to get in whereas a bunch of lower seeds automatically get in.
as i recall two play in games were for 16 seeds, the other two were for 11 seeds. as for why the NCAA does this, i dont know, but to me it adds to the competition overall.
I forgot to post this last night but the NCAA having 16 seeds play each other in Dayton, OH on an early Tuesday & Wednesday evening in front of 5,000 people is the biggest crock of $#!t ever! Yes, I did post last night that the NCAA should do away with conference tournaments all together, but that is never happening since it generates money. These 16 seeds, which usually come from the bottom of the barrel D-1 conferences (MEAC, SWAC, Northeast, America East, Southern) won 3 games in 3 days to earn their rightful spot into the main bracket, not a trip to Western Ohio to play in an arena that is less than a 1/3 full. What the first 4 should be (and this would make the NCAA even more money so they should be thrilled):
-Leave four 11 seeds open in the bracket, 1 in each region:
-Take the last 4 teams in and pair them against the first 4 teams that were left out, and set it up so that the last team in plays the first team that was left out, last team on the first 4 out list against the first team in on the last 4 in list.
-Make it like a conference tournament setup. Have 2 games on Tuesday afternoon, starting at 12:30, and than have 2 games at night starting at 7.
-The 4 winners of those "play-in" games are your last 4 teams in the NCAA tournament, the 4 11 seeds, and the 4 losers from that game are the 4 one seed's in the NIT.
The last 4 in would have a chance to prove they belong, while the first 4 out get a chance to prove that team should be in the NCAA tournament.
Would Monmouth have beaten one of those last 4 in bubble teams last year?? I'm not sure they would have on a neutral court, but it would have been nice if they had gotten the chance.
I forgot to post this last night but the NCAA having 16 seeds play each other in Dayton, OH on an early Tuesday & Wednesday evening in front of 5,000 people is the biggest crock of $#!t ever! Yes, I did post last night that the NCAA should do away with conference tournaments all together, but that is never happening since it generates money. These 16 seeds, which usually come from the bottom of the barrel D-1 conferences (MEAC, SWAC, Northeast, America East, Southern) won 3 games in 3 days to earn their rightful spot into the main bracket, not a trip to Western Ohio to play in an arena that is less than a 1/3 full. What the first 4 should be (and this would make the NCAA even more money so they should be thrilled):
-Leave four 11 seeds open in the bracket, 1 in each region:
-Take the last 4 teams in and pair them against the first 4 teams that were left out, and set it up so that the last team in plays the first team that was left out, last team on the first 4 out list against the first team in on the last 4 in list.
-Make it like a conference tournament setup. Have 2 games on Tuesday afternoon, starting at 12:30, and than have 2 games at night starting at 7.
-The 4 winners of those "play-in" games are your last 4 teams in the NCAA tournament, the 4 11 seeds, and the 4 losers from that game are the 4 one seed's in the NIT.
The last 4 in would have a chance to prove they belong, while the first 4 out get a chance to prove that team should be in the NCAA tournament.
Would Monmouth have beaten one of those last 4 in bubble teams last year?? I'm not sure they would have on a neutral court, but it would have been nice if they had gotten the chance.
But if you were to do this....what does that say to the 12-16 seeds? They presumably performed "better" than those who had to "play in" and then get seeded up to 5 slots lower? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
How about......NCAA picks 64 teams to make it into the tournament based mostly on regular-season RPI with some consideration given to Conference tournaments (automatic bid to a team that wins conference tournaments; which 99% of the time are teams that would get in based on regular season stats anyways) Those 64 teams all play in the first round on Thursday/Friday...and carry on. Basically...roll it back to 2010
as i recall two play in games were for 16 seeds, the other two were for 11 seeds. as for why the NCAA does this, i dont know, but to me it adds to the competition overall.
There's also some kind of mystique to the 11 seeds that win in Dayton. How many years in a row now has one of the winners gotten hot and overperformed at 11 seed?
When they announced the bracket, I had SMU as a lock originally in that first game. But why not USC here? Unlike SMU, this USC team has some kind of tournament experience. Hooray, SMU just breezed through the American Conference tournament. USC took UCLA to the wire in the PAC 12 tournament. They also took a very good Providence team down to the last possession last year. The same core showed resiliency last night with their convincing comeback. Oh yeah, and their head coach was the guy who led "Dunk City" Florida Gulf Coast during that magical run four years ago.
Big game experience gets very undervalued at this time of the year & I gotta stick with USC here.
"Iowa State "......they have broke my bracket in the past, but year in and year out I like them all season.
I have them making it to the Elite Eight before losing to Louisville.
I usually have a couple teams that I always pick thinking it's their year to make a run and they always disappoint...I figure if I keep picking them they'll have their year (Virginia is one of those and I have them in the elite 8).
Speaking of Virginia...great game with UNCW. W looked unstoppable for 12 minutes and then Virginia put the clamps on them defensively. I thought it was over with W going up 12 (on pace to score ~85) due to Virginia's slow pace and anemic offense.
I usually have a couple teams that I always pick thinking it's their year to make a run and they always disappoint...I figure if I keep picking them they'll have their year (Virginia is one of those and I have them in the elite 8).
Speaking of Virginia...great game with UNCW. W looked unstoppable for 12 minutes and then Virginia put the clamps on them defensively. I thought it was over with W going up 12 (on pace to score ~85) due to Virginia's slow pace and anemic offense.
Virginia's coach Bennet is a chip off the old block.
His dad was a coach at Wisconsin and they really took the word .."deliberate"...to a whole different level when describing Wisconsin's offense.
A newspaper reporter once said..........." watching Wisconsin takes you back to the 50's. The year and the number of points they usually score"
Wow awesome game between Princeton and ND. I thought that 3 was going in.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
