Play-in Games

MsProudSooner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
10,957
Reaction score
411
I thought that in the past, the winners of the play-in games always played a #1 seed. According to the bracket I'm looking at, two #1 seeds, a 4 seed and a 6 seed play winners of round 1 games. What gives?
 
I thought that in the past, the winners of the play-in games always played a #1 seed. According to the bracket I'm looking at, two #1 seeds, a 4 seed and a 6 seed play winners of round 1 games. What gives?

This changed a couple years ago when the tourney went from 65 to 68 teams. The last 4 at-large teams play each other now, as well as the worst 4 conference champions playing each other.
 
This changed a couple years ago when the tourney went from 65 to 68 teams. The last 4 at-large teams play each other now, as well as the worst 4 conference champions playing each other.

That shows you how much attention I was paying to the tournaments when I knew we weren't in. :facepalm
 
That's how it is officially, but this year Cal got a 12 seed as an at-large while there is a play-in game between two 11 seeds.

I think the committee had a lot of trouble with logistics; they also normally don't have two top 4 seeds in a regional be from the same conference, but this year they sent Marquette and Syracuse to the East regional as the 3 and 4. Possibly they did it to keep New Mexico in the West.
 
That's how it is officially, but this year Cal got a 12 seed as an at-large while there is a play-in game between two 11 seeds.

I think the committee had a lot of trouble with logistics; they also normally don't have two top 4 seeds in a regional be from the same conference, but this year they sent Marquette and Syracuse to the East regional as the 3 and 4. Possibly they did it to keep New Mexico in the West.

If Oregon is the most under valued team, Syracuse might be the most overvaluled team. Those guys have played .500 ball since mid to late January. They had a fairly soft non-conference schedule. Syracuse beat SDSU and Arkansas. They lost to Temple. They started the Big East with some easy games and then upset Louisville. On January 26 they played Villanova on the road and from that point on they played .500 basketball. Had they lost early in the Big East Tournament they would have been below .500. I just don't see how you give this team a 4 seed. I will probably pick them to lose before the Sweet 16.
 
This changed a couple years ago when the tourney went from 65 to 68 teams. The last 4 at-large teams play each other now, as well as the worst 4 conference champions playing each other.

It's retarded and is a step closer to making march madness a joke
 
Was it retarded to go to 64 teams from 53 in 1985? What about going from 32 teams in the mid 70s to 40 teams in 1979?

honestly, id be in favor of the 32 but 64 needs to be the cap. and get rid of these stupid hybrid sort of games/ play in games.. and if they are goin to keep them, they need to stay and be the 16 seed games..

play-in 11 seed games ect dont make any sense
 
play-in 11 seed games ect dont make any sense

Exactly.

If you're an 11 in the play-in game, you'd almost rather be a 12 or 13 seed than an 11, just to avoid that extra game.

How can you be an 11, ranked higher than the 12-16 seeds, and have to play a play-in game while the rest dont?

Makes no sense.
 
Exactly.

If you're an 11 in the play-in game, you'd almost rather be a 12 or 13 seed than an 11, just to avoid that extra game.

How can you be an 11, ranked higher than the 12-16 seeds, and have to play a play-in game while the rest dont?

Makes no sense.
Like JBaker said, it's supposed to be the last four at large teams; all teams seeded below the play-in games are supposed to be conference champs. Oregon won the Pac-12, so even though they're a 12 seed, they can't be in a play in game.

So far, Cal this year has been the only exception.
 
If Liberty wins tonight they are going to get destroyed by Louisville
 
Back
Top