play-in games

[GVF]

Unless you allow every D1 basketball school into a postseason tournament, there will always be controversy about bubble teams. And even if they allowed every single team in, there'd be controversies about seeding.

The NCAA knows this, and, IMO, it is part of the appeal of the tournament. Controversy creates debate and is great for ratings. Is anybody really going to stop watching the tournament or college basketball at large because a team got robbed? No. It's too entertaining.

I keep up with the standings, and who is doing what, but this is the only part of the season I truly enjoy for Basketball. Very interesting bracket this year to say the least. There are some possible major upsets.

 

[BigZiti09]

Didnt TN elite 8 run from 2012 start with the Vols winning a first four game against Iowa

Why do people keep calling that an elite 8 run!?!? We did not go to the elite 8!

 

[Lankykong]

Why do people keep calling that an elite 8 run!?!? We did not go to the elite 8!

Because we won 3 games and people still aren’t used to first four, pretty simple really.

 

[Boca Vol]

I'd love to see someone more knowledgeable than me clarify, but I think it's got something to do with AQ teams versus at-large bids.

If you look at the bracket, the lowest seed you'll see an at-large team from a big conference be put in is about an 11. Seeds 12 - 16 seem "reserved" so to speak for automatically qualifying teams from weak conferences - they have to be placed in the tournament, but their schedules are so weak that you can't realistically seed them any higher than about a 12 - 13.

A team like UCLA, for example, wasn't very good but plays in a power conference. They were one of the last 4 in, but they don't get placed as a 16 seed because of strength of schedule. So within the play-in games, they've carve-out two "categories" of them so to speak - one for the AQ teams from mid-majors and one for power conference at-large teams who barely scraped into the tourney.

This is pretty spot on. It gives 2 more at large teams a chance as 11 seeds.

 

[BowlBrother85]

The NIT hasn't been "the" tournament since the 1950s, and has been totally irrelevant since the 1970s.

The NCAA runs the NIT now anyway, so a desire to keep the NIT intact wouldn't keep them from expanding the NCAA Tournament. A 128-team field would essentially be a smashing together of both tournaments, plus 28 more teams.

I can see this happening one day, but it would take some serious tweaking of the calendar.

You had to be a pretty good team to make the NIT in the '70s. From 1975-1978 there were only 32 teams in the NCAA tournament. The last team to turn down the NCAA tournament for the NIT was Marquette in 1970 because Al McGuire didn't like the region the NCAA had placed them in.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

Damn, I was hoping Central would win that one. I love their coach. He seems to be a great guy.

 

[BigZiti09]

Because we won 3 games and people still aren’t used to first four, pretty simple really.

That would be an acceptable excuse except we have one elite in program history. Not like we have 10 of them. We have 1.

 

[volfanCLT]

These teams are both really bad

 

[sport3500]

Saint Bonaventure's team will always have the memory of beating blue blood UCLA in the First Four last night.

 

[Boca Vol]

Saint Bonaventure's team will always have the memory of beating blue blood UCLA in the First Four last night.

Well they lost to UCLA in the Final Four in 1970. They were pretty good back in the day.

 

[sanefan]

At least they won. If you can’t win your conference then you are nothing

Yeah well, of the last 25 national champions, only 11 of them won their conference tournament and received the automatic bid. They might disagree that they are nothing.