One for each 16 seed. This would open up 3 more at large spots, as well as give these crappy 15-16 seed like teams a chance to actually wina game. This would open up the 12 seeds in the East and Midwest, and the 13 seed in the South. I definitely feel those lower level teams don't belong in place of teams like Mississippi State, Illinois or other teams. I would believe this even if it wasn't us getting the screwjob.
Why don't they have 4 play-in games.
- Thread starter mstatefanatic
- Start date
G
Goat Redux
Guest
but the fact of the matter is, those last 4 are very longshots to win it all, so it really only matters to those last 4 teams.
Except in baseball. Signed Fresno State and Oregon State.
Except in baseball. Signed Fresno State and Oregon State.
It would make Tuesday in Dayton interesting plus free up 3 spots .It would have help us this year. Why not go to 8 play in games at two sites . Some of these leagues need to work harder for their bids .
I've heard this suggestion before - in fact someone (maybe the Kansas coach??) was talking about it recently.Expand it to a 68 team tournament instead of 96. My question is - where does it stop? So you expand to 68, then someone wants 72, and so on & so on. Next thing you know, we got a 96 team tournament.
I'm fine with the way it is know. Like I've said before, we don't deserve to be there with losses to Rider & WKU... not to mention getting embarrassed by Tenn just a week ago.
I'm fine with the way it is know. Like I've said before, we don't deserve to be there with losses to Rider & WKU... not to mention getting embarrassed by Tenn just a week ago.
2 games friday, 4 games on a saturday, 2 on a sunday add a whole new weekend let the others rest their legs and get us some buzzer beaters... then have a true-64 selection sunday
i would do it with 16 bubble teams.
expand the field to 72... 16 teams for the final 8 spots rank them 1 to 16.
top 8 get home games..
leave nit at 32 send the 8 losers to nit... fairest way to do it.
i would do it with 16 bubble teams.
expand the field to 72... 16 teams for the final 8 spots rank them 1 to 16.
top 8 get home games..
leave nit at 32 send the 8 losers to nit... fairest way to do it.
seed your top four... then make everyone else be a play -in for those top four.
hell... lets just go ahead and make it a play in to see who'll face duke for the championship.
hell... lets just go ahead and make it a play in to see who'll face duke for the championship.
It's too bad that pine-bluff and winthrop get to go to dayton instead of dancing. They should go back to 64 teams just like they should bring back the art of the jump ball.
Because the entire season is a play in game.mstatefanatic said:
Having a play in game is a friggin insult to the teams forced to play it. THEY WON THEIR CONFERENCE TORUNAMENT...THEY SHOULD BE IN!!
Thats the damn rule- you win your conference tournament and you are in the NCAAT.
But then the NCAA pulled this **** called a play in game. What a crock.
"Congrats on winning your conference tournament, and even though winning it gets you into the tournament...it doesnt. You now must play this other team for a chance to actually be in the tournament. Again, congrats on doing what was required, but it wasnt enough."
Total ********.
If that joke that call a play in game must exist, then 2 teams that arent auto picks should have to play in it. CONFERENCE TOURNAMENT CHAMPS GET AN AUTO BID.
but they still prove your point that in baseball everyone has a chance. Oregon State in their 2nd title barely got in as an at large, and many thought the only reason they got the benefit of the doubt is because they were the previous champion. Then they reeled off a run to the title.
In basketball, you're right. You're just arguing over a banner. Best case scenario for a bubble team is a Sweet Sixteen run with some breaks. You throw all the bubble teams in a hat and pick names out at random, and it wouldn't have any effect on the national championship, which is what the tourney is about in the first place.
ETA: The bubble argument is one that the bowl proponents often use. They argue that some team is always going to be unhappy about being left out. The difference though is that in basketball, that team is at best the 35th team, usually more like the 45th or 50th best team, which means they have little argument for a shot at the title. In football, your snubs are the 3rd, 4th, and 5th best teams by your ranking system, and those teams really might be the best team in the country. You expand the field from 2 to 8 or 16 and your bubble teams left out have less argument for inclusion and your championship gains legitimacy. There is a point of diminishing returns. I think the basketball tournament is right at that point. 31 auto bids and 34 at large bids is more than enough. It's to the point where any more teams are unnecessary. In football, I think anything more than 16 would be unnecessary.
In basketball, you're right. You're just arguing over a banner. Best case scenario for a bubble team is a Sweet Sixteen run with some breaks. You throw all the bubble teams in a hat and pick names out at random, and it wouldn't have any effect on the national championship, which is what the tourney is about in the first place.
ETA: The bubble argument is one that the bowl proponents often use. They argue that some team is always going to be unhappy about being left out. The difference though is that in basketball, that team is at best the 35th team, usually more like the 45th or 50th best team, which means they have little argument for a shot at the title. In football, your snubs are the 3rd, 4th, and 5th best teams by your ranking system, and those teams really might be the best team in the country. You expand the field from 2 to 8 or 16 and your bubble teams left out have less argument for inclusion and your championship gains legitimacy. There is a point of diminishing returns. I think the basketball tournament is right at that point. 31 auto bids and 34 at large bids is more than enough. It's to the point where any more teams are unnecessary. In football, I think anything more than 16 would be unnecessary.
It doesn't automatically go to the No. 1 overall seed. The No. 1 overall seed gets the benefit of being paired with the No. 4 seed in the Final Four and the benefit of guaranteeing they are in the region closest to their home. Which 16 seed they draw really doesn't matter.
lawdawg02 said:
I agree. That's been my feeling all along. I'd much rather see Minnesota vs. UTEP for the 64th spot than Pine Bluff/Winthrop.
G
Goat Redux
Guest
I think it's the nature of baseball that is the difference in why the last team in can make a run in baseball where the last team in for basketball has virtually no chance. Villanova's 1985 run is really the only outlier for a team winning the title as a low seed in basketball.
I like the theory mentioned above about bubble teams in the play in games. Take the 8 teams, last 4 in and last 4 out, and make them play each other for a shot at dancing. Takes all the argument out of who belongs. And lets the UAPBs of the world get their fair shot at dancing, not just an appearance in a meaningless play in game that nobody watches. Also, think how much more interesting tv it would be to have some good bubble matchups...Minn vs State, Illinois vs Florida, VT vs Utah St., etc. Now that would be some good stuff. Play in games actually worth watching.