Discussion in 'Colorado Basketball Message Board' started by Buffnik, Mar 14, 2015.
I'm a "only wins in the 64 bracket count" guy.
It's dumb when Alcorn State beats Binghamton and they rave on TV about it being their first Big Dance win.
Tough question because it all depends on perspective.
You can argue that a play-in game isn't a tourney win but if you want to start making value judgements then we should adjust the records of numerous coaches with multiple #1 and #2 seeds who pad their records with wins over #15 and #16 seeds who are happy to stay within 50.
Maybe we should have a couple of play-in rounds and no wins "count" until it's down to 32.
In the long run nobody even remembers the play in games except the teams that play in them. Let them have their moment in the sun. They aren't "bigtime" basketball even if they are officially D1. For them the reward is being able to hang a banner that said they got there, if they win one so much the better. Otherwise, who cares?
Mtn, you know it is not just nobodies playing in those games... right? (Hence Nik's question)
With 68 you've now got the NC State vs Iowa type play-in games. No way they should be counting wins in those games towards their total.
I do know that. If they call it a tourney game, it's a tourney game at least for the teams playing there. Point is that if you are going to give Kentucky a tourney win for pounding the minor conference auto-qualifier they will get in their first round game then give the winners of the play in games their win as well
Last year NC State beat Xavier, and Iowa beat Tennessee. The other game was Cal Poly beating Texas Southern. I'd put both of those first two wins ahead of Virginia beating Coastal Carolina or Arizona beating Weber in the next "round."
In the end what does it matter. It doesn't change to eventual winner of the tourney. If you are going to say the teams are in the tourney then let them count the games as a tourney game, if not don't let them in.
What happened is that the money available in D1 caused expansion. There are over 30 auto-bids. The expansion of the field was in reaction to that in order to get 4 extra quality bubble teams into the Dance.
1 seeds earn that game.
You're in the play-in game because you're a mediocre team or you're a fluke 16. Not the same thing.
These games do impact the tourney..at least the last four at large games do..I'll give you three examples-First 2011 VCU. They were sent to a play-in game, won that, and then won four more games to get to a Final Four. Two other teams (LaSalle in I think 2013, and Tennessee last year) turned First Four appearances into trips to the Sweet 16.
As far the two games featuring the lowest seeded conference champs......Let 'em have their moment. I love watching these teams, but I'm a basketball junkie.These small conference games are the best part of this time of year.....Look at that finish to the America East title game. Look at Furman last weekend in the Southern Conference tourney-they finished dead last in the regular season, and got hot.....they were a three away from forcing OT with a tourney bid on the line.
Certainly you can go deep in the Dance...if you win your play-in game and join the real thing.
Don't dispute that what so ever. There are a bunch of conferences that are officially D1 that have zero chance of getting a team past the round of 32 and even getting there would be a major upset. Locally schools like UNC and DU are officially division 1 but how many games would either win in a conference schedule against the PAC12 or the Big XII or even the MWC.
The NCAA wants to maintain the idea that every conference gets an auto bit but the increasing number of those has pinched the available at-large bids which normally go to teams that generate much bigger numbers for the NCAA, solution expand the field again to accommodate more teams.
Point is if you are going to call these games tourney games then they should count as tourney wins, if not don't call them tourney games. Instead have a couple of regional play in tourneys that include the conference champs of the minor conferences as well as a few of the best at-large teams from those same conferences with the winners getting into the official tourney.
They won't do that though because just like it is important that CU got into a couple of tourneys recently as a lower seated at large team it is also important to those schools that they can tell their fans and supporters that if they win their conference tourney they go to the big dance.
From a standpoint of winning it all or even final 4 it would be very unusual for a play in team to impact the tourney. That said your examples show why these teams and games are a part of the tourney record.
I also agree with you on the lowest seed game. Those teams tend to play a very entertaining game. For them the game is their chance to shine, to say they won an NCAA tourney game. Who gets hurt if they hang a banner in their gym and enjoy the moment?
I call them round 0. If CU won a play in game I'd count it and probably dismiss it if it wasn't then.
Separate names with a comma.