Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Why did the NCAA make 12 seeds play an extra game in the tourney?

  1. #1
    Moderator Buffnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    A van down by the river
    Posts
    51,976
    Blog Entries
    40

    Why did the NCAA make 12 seeds play an extra game in the tourney?

    Stands to reason that if you're going to make teams play extra games, you'd make the 8 lowest seeds play each other. So why aren't the 16 seeds all playing extra games instead of screwing with 12 seeds (a line on the bracket that's been about even money to advance)?


    Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. - Alex Levine

  2. #2
    Club Member CVilleBuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Free Union, VA
    Posts
    13,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Buffnik View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Stands to reason that if you're going to make teams play extra games, you'd make the 8 lowest seeds play each other. So why aren't the 16 seeds all playing extra games instead of screwing with 12 seeds (a line on the bracket that's been about even money to advance)?
    I've been wondering the same thing. I think the answer is that this most recent expansion of the tournament to 68 was mostly geared towards adding a few extra spots for at-large teams. Since the last at-large teams in NCAA tournaments don't usually go lower than 12 seeds, you're essentially penalizing these teams for being the last of the at-large bids, and then the bottom four automatic qualifiers will play as 16 seeds for the right to take on the 1 seeds.

  3. #3
    Colorado Buffaloes Fan Mick Ronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Efrains on 63rd
    Posts
    9,506
    kinda screws the 5/6 seeds as well. they have less time to prepare for an opponent than the past (4/5 days). 8/9 is a bad spot to be since you see a #1 if you win (thanks for playing), now 5/6 has a drawback, too. i guess 7 seed is the mid-range seed to fly these days.

  4. #4
    Club Member CarolinaBuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    In front of my TV
    Posts
    16,819
    Quote Originally Posted by CVilleBuff View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I've been wondering the same thing. I think the answer is that this most recent expansion of the tournament to 68 was mostly geared towards adding a few extra spots for at-large teams. Since the last at-large teams in NCAA tournaments don't usually go lower than 12 seeds, you're essentially penalizing these teams for being the last of the at-large bids, and then the bottom four automatic qualifiers will play as 16 seeds for the right to take on the 1 seeds.
    I guess they didn't want to completely screw all the auto-bid teams, plus like you said the expansion of the tournament added 3 more at-large bids, so they must have figured that these last few at-large teams should kind of have to play their way into the "real" rounds.

    64 was an absolutely perfect number of teams because it was a representative number of teams and everybody had to play 6 games. That play-in or "Opening Round" game they've had these past few years was stupid and this new "First round" isn't much better.

  5. #5
    Club Member BehindEnemyLines's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    state of purgatory
    Posts
    11,401
    Quote Originally Posted by CarolinaBuff View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    64 was an absolutely perfect number of teams because it was a representative number of teams and everybody had to play 6 games. That play-in or "Opening Round" game they've had these past few years was stupid and this new "First round" isn't much better.
    Agreed, they had it right to begin with. I don't think these extra games add anything to the tourney, except, extra teams. I realize there are some teams/fans who will be elated to have this opportunity, but to most of us purists, it's just watering down the soup.
    Kanzazz basketball -- screwing up office tournament brackets since 1939.

  6. #6
    Hail to the King buff4bcs1985's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Highlands Ranch
    Posts
    22,400
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by RedDirtBuff View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Agreed, they had it right to begin with. I don't think these extra games add anything to the tourney, except, extra teams. I realize there are some teams/fans who will be elated to have this opportunity, but to most of us purists, it's just watering down the soup.
    i think we would all appreciate a watery soup with cu in it...

    Quote Originally Posted by absinthe View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    BCS is the voice of reason.
    Sacky's reaction to a text alerting him to Embree's dismissal.
    Quote Originally Posted by sackman
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I will rip your lungs out if this isnt true.

  7. #7
    Hoops Moderator Goose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    7,411
    Blog Entries
    23
    I know I'm in the minority, but if we have to have the play-in-games (which I hate), I prefer it be "at large" teams. One of the best parts of the tourney is watching the automatic bid little guys get to play in the big dance. Now, for the last few years, one team has had the reward for their awesome season (or run in the conference tournament) ruined with a trip to Dayton.

    Of course, if CU has to play a play-in-game, I reserve all rights to change my opinion and rail about how the play-in's should only involve 16 seeds.

  8. #8
    Moderator Buffnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    A van down by the river
    Posts
    51,976
    Blog Entries
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuggets4 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I know I'm in the minority, but if we have to have the play-in-games (which I hate), I prefer it be "at large" teams. One of the best parts of the tourney is watching the automatic bid little guys get to play in the big dance. Now, for the last few years, one team has had the reward for their awesome season (or run in the conference tournament) ruined with a trip to Dayton.

    Of course, if CU has to play a play-in-game, I reserve all rights to change my opinion and rail about how the play-in's should only involve 16 seeds.
    Then put the last 8 at-large teams on the 16-seed line. And if that's so unfair to the 1 seeds versus having them play conference champions, then the champions of **** conferences shouldn't complain about an opportunity to get a tourney win in Dayton before getting beat by 60 against Duke.

  9. #9
    Club Member NWD Buff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    I'm better than that
    Posts
    4,365
    I think they should go the opposite way on play-in games, and have it be the last eight in for all four 12-seeds. These will be far more entertaining games than the 16-seed play-in game that we have had the last few years.

  10. #10
    Moderator Buffnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    A van down by the river
    Posts
    51,976
    Blog Entries
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by NWD Buff View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think they should go the opposite way on play-in games, and have it be the last eight in for all four 12-seeds. These will be far more entertaining games than the 16-seed play-in game that we have had the last few years.
    Do you find 16v1 games exciting? I'll take a 12-5 any day.

    Reward the good teams. Those bottom 8 of all 68 should just be happy to get the invite. A 12 seed is a legit Sweet 16/Elite 8 threat.

  11. #11
    Club Member NWD Buff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    I'm better than that
    Posts
    4,365
    Quote Originally Posted by Buffnik View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Do you find 16v1 games exciting? I'll take a 12-5 any day.

    Reward the good teams. Those bottom 8 of all 68 should just be happy to get the invite. A 12 seed is a legit Sweet 16/Elite 8 threat.
    I think it just makes the regular season matter more. Small conference teams get the right to play their way in to a tourney spot, and teams like Colorado still get a shot at a 12-seed, from which they have a very real shot at getting past the first weekend.

    I think regular season conference play should matter. You say reward the good teams, but I say reward the teams that are the best in their respective conference. If you win your conference, you get in. If you win a big conference, you get to play a bad team. If you have to rely on a late at-large bid, then you have to do a little extra, but you still have a shot at making some noise.

    Just my opinion.

  12. #12
    Colorado Buffaloes Fan Mick Ronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Efrains on 63rd
    Posts
    9,506
    i liked it better before the pod system, where every top seed would get sent to play a 25 win Mississippi Valley State team in cold gym in Ogden. neutralize the advantages, play basketball. institutional favoritism is all about the money, not sports. Except Duke and Carolina, the proto-pods, they'd play as either a flexible "East" or "South" team in Charlotte or Atlanta.

  13. #13
    Club Member PhillyBuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Next to Sacky's Grill
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by Mick Ronson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    i liked it better before the pod system, where every top seed would get sent to play a 25 win Mississippi Valley State team in cold gym in Ogden. neutralize the advantages, play basketball. institutional favoritism is all about the money, not sports. Except Duke and Carolina, the proto-pods, they'd play as either a flexible "East" or "South" team in Charlotte or Atlanta.
    Since this thread is all about me...

    I was in Ogden in 1994 to see Jason Kidd lose to UW-Milwaukee and Syracuse crush Hawaii.......

    Weber State's Gym wasnt that cold..... That is racist.

    Josh Rosenblum CU' 95
    9/11/2001

  14. #14
    Colorado Buffaloes Fan Mick Ronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Efrains on 63rd
    Posts
    9,506
    Quote Originally Posted by PhillyBuff View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Since this thread is all about me...

    I was in Ogden in 1994 to see Jason Kidd lose to UW-Milwaukee and Syracuse crush Hawaii.......

    Wonder Bread State's Gym wasnt that cold..... That is racist.
    ftfy

Visitors found this page by searching for:

12 seed play in game

why do 12 seeds have to play in

12 seed play in

why is there a play in game for 12 seed

why is there a play in game for a 12 seed

why is there a 12 seed play in game

why do 11 seeds have a play in game

why do 12 seeds have a play in gamewhy 12 seeds play in gameplay in game for 12 seedwhy are 12 seeds playingwhy are 12 seeds play in gameswhy is there a play in game for the 12 seedplay in game 12 seedplay in 12 seedwhy is there a play in for a 12 seedwhy 12 seed play in gamewhy are play in games 12 seedwhy arent all the play in games 16 seeds12 seed play-in gamewhy are 12 seeds in a play in gamewhy are the 12 seeds playingwhy are 12 seeds playing each otherwhy 12 seed play inwhy do 12 seeds
SEO Blog

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •