Comments on: Coaches Want More Teams In Tournament http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/ slangin' knowledge... since 2003. Sun, 04 Jul 2010 20:59:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: zach http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4846 zach Mon, 03 Apr 2006 00:58:13 +0000 http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4846 Well, it wouldn't be fair to the number one seed that had to play a Cincy or FSU instead of a Monmouth or a Hampton. So what seed would they play for? It would have to vary from year to year, and it would totally screw with bracket pools - the PIG isn't a big deal now because whoever wins, they will probably lose the next game, but in this scenario the rest of your bracket for that region might depend greatly on who wins that game. What makes the most sense would be to have 4 play in games, one for each 16 seed, all played at the same site on Tuesday, thereby adding 3 teams. You couldn't have them go on Wednesday because then, at least some years, a winner would have to play again the next day. As it is they try to put the PIG winner at a Friday/Sunday site. It would also have to be the 8 worst teams, regardless of whether or not they won their tournament. It wouldn't mess with bracket pools - we can just ignore the PIGs like we already do. If you wanted you could make each 15 seed have a play-in as well, meaning <i>another</i> 4 teams, but that seems excessive. Could you think of 7 teams that got left out of this year's tournament that had any claims to getting in? Anyone outside of Cincinnati, Hofstra, Missouri State, Michigan, and Florida St (and really only the first 3) had no argument as to getting in. Well, it wouldn’t be fair to the number one seed that had to play a Cincy or FSU instead of a Monmouth or a Hampton. So what seed would they play for? It would have to vary from year to year, and it would totally screw with bracket pools – the PIG isn’t a big deal now because whoever wins, they will probably lose the next game, but in this scenario the rest of your bracket for that region might depend greatly on who wins that game. What makes the most sense would be to have 4 play in games, one for each 16 seed, all played at the same site on Tuesday, thereby adding 3 teams. You couldn’t have them go on Wednesday because then, at least some years, a winner would have to play again the next day. As it is they try to put the PIG winner at a Friday/Sunday site. It would also have to be the 8 worst teams, regardless of whether or not they won their tournament. It wouldn’t mess with bracket pools – we can just ignore the PIGs like we already do. If you wanted you could make each 15 seed have a play-in as well, meaning another 4 teams, but that seems excessive. Could you think of 7 teams that got left out of this year’s tournament that had any claims to getting in? Anyone outside of Cincinnati, Hofstra, Missouri State, Michigan, and Florida St (and really only the first 3) had no argument as to getting in.

]]> By: BF Hoodrich http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4782 BF Hoodrich Sat, 01 Apr 2006 05:19:27 +0000 http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4782 Great points, mjd, number two in particular. That makes much more sense than having play-in games between teams that qualified for the tournament by winning their conference tournament. Suss, the 8/9 game isn't quite a play-in for "power conference nobodies"; this season, George Washington, North Carolina-Wilmington, Bucknell, and Alabama-Birmingham were all either 8 or 9 seeds. Great points, mjd, number two in particular. That makes much more sense than having play-in games between teams that qualified for the tournament by winning their conference tournament.

Suss, the 8/9 game isn’t quite a play-in for “power conference nobodies”; this season, George Washington, North Carolina-Wilmington, Bucknell, and Alabama-Birmingham were all either 8 or 9 seeds.

]]> By: Suss http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4763 Suss Fri, 31 Mar 2006 21:58:30 +0000 http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4763 They already do have a play-in game for power conference nobodies. It's called the 8-9 game. --Suss They already do have a play-in game for power conference nobodies. It’s called the 8-9 game.
–Suss

]]> By: Bouj http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4758 Bouj Fri, 31 Mar 2006 19:00:16 +0000 http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4758 I totally concur about making the middle-of-the-road BCS conference teams go the play-in route. Monmouth and Hampton get screwed for winning their tournaments? How is that fair? But it will never happen, because the BCS conferences will never go along with the idea of their teams having to "qualify". I totally concur about making the middle-of-the-road BCS conference teams go the play-in route. Monmouth and Hampton get screwed for winning their tournaments? How is that fair? But it will never happen, because the BCS conferences will never go along with the idea of their teams having to “qualify”.

]]> By: Mr Furious http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4757 Mr Furious Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:59:16 +0000 http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4757 Good points. Especially number 2. I look forward to the year when Tommy Amaker can have yet <i>another</i> chance to lock up a NCAA berth and blow it. Good points. Especially number 2.

I look forward to the year when Tommy Amaker can have yet another chance to lock up a NCAA berth and blow it.

]]> By: Mac Thomason http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4755 Mac Thomason Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:58:03 +0000 http://www.themightymjd.com/2006/03/31/coaches-want-more-teams-in-tournament/#comment-4755 I don't think it will happen now. Maybe before, but not with the NCAA owning the NIT. I don’t think it will happen now. Maybe before, but not with the NCAA owning the NIT.

]]>