Play-In Games (PTTB - TC Play Along)

[panther2317]

So I got to thinking last night (which my wife assures me is a dangerous thing) and I think I've come up with a band-aid of sorts to fix the NCAA Tournament.

Instead of having one play-in game, why don't they have 4? That way, the 8 lowest seeded teams in the NCAA's would face off against each other tonight and the winners would advance to play each of the #1 seeds in each bracket and that would free up four spots for at-larges into the brackets. What would that make this year's bracket look like?

Am I way off base here? I think this could really help get teams like MSU and Creighton into the field. Or...does this lessen a bid to the NCAA's?

Right now I'm not sure just looking for answers.

[ejacobson]

That is interesting, but then the field of 64(65) which many accuse of being too large and admitting too many teams becomes 68 teams, not too bad in my mind, I like the idea. Every year the committee says its always those last 4-6 bids that are the hardest to decide on so why not get all 8-10 teams in that are fighting for them and let them fight it out on the court for admittance to the tourny. But that would allow more Mids/Lows and that would piss off CBS/ESPN/BCS even more. But I like it alot 2317, I am nominating you to the NCAA selection committee for next year

[Panthers Win!!]

While it's great to discuss alternatives, I think you would see the next four out being upset. It would never end. Whenever there is subjectivity involved and a finite number there will always be tough losers and speculation that a better team should have been in. A clear line demarking worthy teams from unworthy would be difficult to draw.

In my opinion, the real problem is the apparent selective use of the RPI. Either use an objective standard and build into it other factors like play during the last ten games of the season, injury to key players at tournament time, etc. or don't use it. The problem this year is that the NCAA made the rules, teams played pursuant to the rules and then the rules changed.

I would also use the RPI for seeding, not just determining who makes the field. It's either valuable or not. If it's a good way to determine the field why abandon it when seeding?

Good arguments for inclusion of teams that were just outside the field will always be able to be made no matter how many teams are invited to the tournament.

[tcondon]

Good idea, but that is making things even tougher on the teams that normally are one and done. These conferences are not going to like this idea. Instead, I would go this way.

The Final 4 spots would still have a play in game. Instead of the automatic bids, you instead would have the final at large teams in the mix.

Texas A&M vs. Creighton

Air Force vs. Southern Illinois

Utah State vs. Cincinnati

Bradley vs. Western Kentucky

Have this be a Tuesday tournament played in Dayton. Great TV ratings, a true play off to determine who actually should be in the NCAA Tournament. Monmouth, Hampton, Oral Roberts and Albany already played their way in. Make these final teams earn their way into the tournament as well. It would be hell for travel, but what the heck. These teams would all be happy with having to opportunity vs. the alternative, the NIT.

[panther2317]

I think the teams traditionally being paired with #1 and #2 seeds would welcome the opportunity to win a game in the Dance and then advance to play the #1 or #2 seed.

[UNI Guy]

This sounds like a good idea this year because we feel for our Valley brethren who were snubbed. But I think its a slippery slope to go down. If you increase it to 68, then the next 5-6 teams will feel slighted, and before you know it, you're inviting 100+ schools to the tourney. I have no problem with 65 teams, actually I would prefer 64, but I think the committee needs to do a better job of actually selecting the best teams. They tried to send a message to some of the major conf. bubble teams that they had better start scheduling non-conf. better. But the message is mixed when some of the mid-major's get in without scheduling any quality non-conf. schools.

[Newsbreaker]

With all due respect, I don't think this proposal solves any problems, but rather adds several new ones.

We already have two 'tournament' teams who have to play a last-minute game that's not a part of the actual tournament at all. There is no reason to toss more 'midmajors' (the very teams you're probably trying to include, remember?) out of the actual tournament.

The other byproduct of a such a potential system is that instead of the 33-37th team, none of which whom have any shot at actually winning the championship, you have teams 38-41 pissed off. What for? Those teams are marginal anyway. You're recreating the D1A bowl system, where getting in only really means you won as many or more then you lost. Getting in is supposed to be reserved for the very best. Hell, add in the NIT, and far too many average teams are playing basketball in the post-season anyway.

The point of selection isn't to get the 65 best teams, but to get the 20-30 teams with a shot at winning the thing, then reward some pretenders with a date in the spotlight, and a shot at a bigboy.

As for 'beating the system and the system changing' that's as misguided as the CBS morons were on sunday. We didn't 'beat a system' that guarantees entry. We correctly played a game to get one factor to swing in our direction. ONE factor.

[panther2317]

News, I know YOU think the play-in game isn't a part of the 'actual tournament' (what does that mean by the way? Just because the game isn't connected to the bracket of 64 by another couple of lines making a bracketed game?) but try and tell that to Monmouth this morning. Last night, they won a game in the NCAA Tournament and advanced to play the #1 seed in their bracket. Those games give teams like Siena and Monmouth a chance to actually win a game in the tournament. I'm one of the geeks that watches the play-in game...because it's exciting for those kids and I love basketball. We'll agree to disagree on this one.

I just thought taking away the 16 seeds and having them face off vs. the 15 seeds to see who gets the chance to play #1 in each region would open up four more spots. This year...move the #13 #14 seeds down a spot and put the last four teams in (Missouri State, Creighton, Michigan and Maryland) in at #13 seeds. Makes for some interesting first round games.

[tcondon]

This year...move the #13 #14 seeds down a spot and put the last four teams in (Missouri State, Creighton, Michigan and Maryland) in at #13 seeds. Makes for some interesting first round games.

Cincinnati would then be pissed.

[CincyPanther88]

Cincinnati would then be pissed.

Too late.

[panther2317]

No matter what is done...teams will be pissed. I should have said Cincy originally.

[Newsbreaker]

Do you think the loser of last night's game really feels like they were in the NCAA tournament? Hell, their parents haven't even finished filling out their office pool yet and they're on their way home.

If you're going to keep this silly assed game, just take the lowest two RPI leagues and inform them that their champions will be forced to play a game the morning of selection sunday to determine which one actually gets an automatic birth.

[UNICats]

We were disucssing something similar to this at work this morning. What we thought is to take the last 4 in and the first 4 out (probably the 13th seeds) and let them have their 'play-in' game. The winner enters the NCAA tournament with the 13th seed in each region. The losers would then enter the NIT as the top seeds. Top seeds get a first round bye in the NIT anyway, so the extra game shouldn't hurt them.

I'd bet Creighton, Missouri State, Cincy, and whomever else wants to gripe (screw Maryland!!) would love the opportunity to take their tournament destiny to the court.

Would also provide ESPN with more 'glamerous' matchups than conference champions from leagues we barely know about (some of which could have losing records as well).

Just a thougt. Obviously we don't have enough work to do around here!!

[panther2317]

I actually like that way a little more...and the NIT and NCAA are tied together now being owned by the same entity. So it would be good for that tournament as well.