Anyone Else Annoyed

[StatGeek]

That the NCAA is acting like the first 4 play-in games are "round 1" of the tournament. This is obviously an attempt to condition fans so they can expand the tournament significantly, IMO.

 

[StoopsBros]

Would anyone be opposed to the 4 16 seeds playing a bubble team and the winner getting the #1 seeds? That seems like a better idea.

 

[thebigabd]

Would anyone be opposed to the 4 16 seeds playing a bubble team and the winner getting the #1 seeds? That seems like a better idea.

Thats a much better idea.

 

[StatGeek]

Would anyone be opposed to the 4 16 seeds playing a bubble team and the winner getting the #1 seeds? That seems like a better idea.

way better idea, but this isn't about interesting ideas, its all about expansion.

 

[Boomer]

I like the idea that the play-in games are for the 16 seed. It's odd when they are playing for an 11 seed or whatever.

 

[Sooner04]

Would anyone be opposed to the 4 16 seeds playing a bubble team and the winner getting the #1 seeds? That seems like a better idea.

It's a MUCH better idea, and I was shocked that wasn't the final plan when the NCAA announced this "first four" garbage.

Four play-in games, two a night on Tuesday and Wednesday between the teams that will become 16-seeds in Dayton, OH. Easy. So easy.

 

[Big Old Booger]

That the NCAA is acting like the first 4 play-in games are "round 1" of the tournament. This is obviously an attempt to condition fans so they can expand the tournament significantly, IMO.

Yes. I am annoyed by this.

When they were showing highlights of the George Mason win over Nova, Gumbel kept saying "in 2nd round action", so I thought they were flashing back to GMU's final 4 run to get some interest in the upcoming 1st round game.

I was really confused...

 

[red recluse]

Would anyone be opposed to the 4 16 seeds playing a bubble team and the winner getting the #1 seeds? That seems like a better idea.

is that fair to the no. 1 seed? cuz i'd rather be a 2 playing a 15 than a 1 playing a bubble team in the first game. maybe setup the bubble teams to play the best automatic bids from the smaller conferences for a 12 seed?

as for the first round, it's garbage. just call it the play-in round. first round will always be thursday/friday, and we should all refer to it as such. don't care what cbs/ncaa want to call it.

 

[HoHum]

is that fair to the no. 1 seed? cuz i'd rather be a 2 playing a 15 than a 1 playing a bubble team in the first game. maybe setup the bubble teams to play the best automatic bids from the smaller conferences for a 12 seed?

as for the first round, it's garbage. just call it the play-in round. first round will always be thursday/friday, and we should all refer to it as such. don't care what cbs/ncaa want to call it.

That's what I think, if the last four at-large bids were to play the #16 seeds for the right to play the #1 seed, I'd rather be a 2 or 3 seed and get to play a low-major.

 

[StoopsBros]

is that fair to the no. 1 seed? cuz i'd rather be a 2 playing a 15 than a 1 playing a bubble team in the first game. maybe setup the bubble teams to play the best automatic bids from the smaller conferences for a 12 seed?

Either way works, I was just trying to alleviate the #1 vs #16 beat-down. Was anyone really excited to see Ohio State or Duke pound their opponents? I was just throwing an idea out there. I didn't realize we had to cater to the #1 seeds. If they're truly the best team(s) in the field, they should be able to beat the VCUs, UABs, Colorados or Va Techs. Something needs to be done though, as great as the tourney is, it still has flaws.

 

[HoHum]

Either way works, I was just trying to alleviate the #1 vs #16 beat-down. Was anyone really excited to see Ohio State or Duke pound their opponents? I was just throwing an idea out there. I didn't realize we had to cater to the #1 seeds. If they're truly the best team(s) in the field, they should be able to beat the VCUs, UABs, Colorados or Va Techs. Something needs to be done though, as great as the tourney is, it still has flaws.

They should be rewarded though with a great regular season by playing the worst teams in the tournament. I do like the idea, I just think it would make the #2 seed the real prize of the tournament selection.

 

[Edmond_Sooner]

YES!

I like the idea of bubble teams playing each other to get in the tourney...

I have never liked the original play in game...i realize it gives one of those teams a chance to get a win in the dance, but IMO that really isnt the dance...

If i was one of those 16 seed type teams just put me in the tourney and give me my #1 medicine...Just feel terrible for those two teams this year that earned their bid by winning their conference tourney but didnt even really get a chance to be in the REAL tourney...

First Round my A$$!

 

[Dr Sleep]

Either way works, I was just trying to alleviate the #1 vs #16 beat-down. Was anyone really excited to see Ohio State or Duke pound their opponents? I was just throwing an idea out there. I didn't realize we had to cater to the #1 seeds. If they're truly the best team(s) in the field, they should be able to beat the VCUs, UABs, Colorados or Va Techs. Something needs to be done though, as great as the tourney is, it still has flaws.

If your are a #16 seed, then it sounds like you deserve a beat down.

If we have to have 68 teams now, then the bottom 8 seeds should play for the 4 #16 seeds.

The play in game for the 12 seeds is unfair to the legitamite 12 seed that would have made it in in a 64 or 65 team field, but now has to play another bubble team just to get to the first round. I would think that a 13 seed would be better than the play-in 12 seed. Beating a bubble team and a 5 seed vs beating a 4 seed just to get to round 2.

 

[OUGenius]

I also noticed that "2nd Round" garbage and had the exact same thought...

But I don't have a problem with bubble teams playing each other in a pre-first-round game. In fact, I think the teams that got it automatically should NOT have to play and maybe you have the last 8 at large teams not the last 4 at large teams (or maybe even the last 16 at large teams) play it off to see who gets into the first round.

I'd rather just have 64 but that's not happening...and I'd rather be in one of those pre-first round games than in the NIT.

 

[oukimber]

I'd say reward the low majors who had a good season and won their conference by not making them play a play in game.

Take the last 4 in and the last 4 out and make them play in for 14 or 15 seeds.

 

[red recluse]

what's unfair is any automatic bid having to play a play-in game. it's not an automatic bid if they have to win another game to be in the field, thus the pc name change from play-in round to "first" round.

pretty simple, like has been mentioned, just make the 8 bubble teams play each other for an 11/12 seed. ratings and games would be a lot better for those four games.

 

[campbest]

#1 Seeds have earned the right to beat down someone in their first game. The system can be tweaked, but this is not the answer and would be shot down quickly.