More on "play-in" games (Eamonn Brennan)

[SelectionSunday]

I tend to agree with Brennan. I'd like to see the most mediocre of the at-larges (which to be honest quite often is our Gophers) have to play their way in to the Round of 64. If you get into the NCAA Tournament as one of the final 8 at-larges you shouldn't be complaining, anyways.

I would support the Selection Committee if it makes this nod to the automatic qualifiers from the smaller conferences. Reward them for winning their tournament, while at the same time making Tuesday's "play-in games" a heck of a lot more interesting.

All that said, I'd be willing to bet some serious coin that the big boys will win out & it's the bottom 8 automatic qualifiers that we'll see in the play-in games.

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/12866/the-play-in-moment-of-truth-arrives

 

[RodentRampage]

I think there's about 0 chance that the last 8 in would have to play-in. Tournament expansion where the added teams are all from the major conferences doesn't do the smaller conferences one bit of good, it just shoves them back a notch.

I don't really care for the name play-in, it implies that they aren't really in the tournament unless they win.

 

[Tater]

I don't really care for the name play-in, it implies that they aren't really in the tournament unless they win.

Funny. That's exactly why I like the term "play-in."

 

[Holy Man]

I tend to agree with Brennan. I'd like to see the most mediocre of the at-larges (which to be honest quite often is our Gophers) have to play their way in to the Round of 64. If you get into the NCAA Tournament as one of the final 8 at-larges you shouldn't be complaining, anyways.

I would support the Selection Committee if it makes this nod to the automatic qualifiers from the smaller conferences. Reward them for winning their tournament, while at the same time making Tuesday's "play-in games" a heck of a lot more interesting.

All that said, I'd be willing to bet some serious coin that the big boys will win out & it's the bottom 8 automatic qualifiers that we'll see in the play-in games.

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/12866/the-play-in-moment-of-truth-arrives

Hodger, the only way I can see this going our (Brennan's, yours and mine) way is if they need to create games that people will actually watch on TV. The best argument against the bottom eight seeds is that hardly anyone cares about them. Put some big name but mediocre teams in those games and you have a chance of getting some real ratings for Court TV or wherever these games are going to be broadcast.

 

[matt]

Originally Posted by RodentRampage
I think there's about 0 chance that the last 8 in would have to play-in. Tournament expansion where the added teams are all from the major conferences doesn't do the smaller conferences one bit of good, it just shoves them back a notch.

You kind of defeat your own argument here. You say that if the last 8 in have to play-in that it does not do the smaller conference one bit of good; however this way the last 8 in (presumably major conference teams) kill each other off and then 4 of the majors are knocked out before the "real" tournament starts. If the play-in games become 16 vs. 17 though, then 4 small conference schools will be kicked out of the tournament before it truly starts. This way will only hurt the smaller conferences.

 

[Rosemountian]

The funny thing about making the last 8 in play in the "play-in" games is this. If those last 8 in played the teams seeded 61-68, they would win 80-90% of the time. Making the 16/17 seeds play in the play in games makes sense, because they are the bottom 8 teams in the tourney.

 

[Schlic Daddy]

I think it's gotta be the lowest 8 seeded because otherwise it's not going to be 1 vs. 16 in the "first round." It will be 1 vs. 8 or something like that. That's not really fair to the No. 1 seed.