NCAA tournament play-in games

  • After Iowa State won the Big 12, a Cyclone made a wonderful offer to We Will that now increases our match. Now all gifts up to $400,000 between now and the Final 4 will be matched. Please consider giving at We Will Collective.
    This notice can be dismissed using the upper right corner X button.

TigerCyJM

Active Member
May 3, 2012
1,150
26
38
Polk County, IA
Can somebody explain to me why there are two play in games for 16 seeds but also for like 11 seeds? It seems like the random 11 seeds just get punished, so it should be the 16 seeds because they're the lowest, right? Why is this?
 

keepngoal

OKA: keepingoal
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 20, 2006
38,119
22,339
113
I think up to 11s are typically at large... Where above that seed typically are win ins from conference tourneys.
 

cyclones500

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2010
35,685
23,161
113
Michigan
basslakebeacon.com
Can somebody explain to me why there are two play in games for 16 seeds but also for like 11 seeds? It seems like the random 11 seeds just get punished, so it should be the 16 seeds because they're the lowest, right? Why is this?

Instead of going one way or the other — either shifting all the seeds down to make the play-ins between 16 seeds, or making all of the intro-round at-large matchups — they decided to split the difference, for some reason.

Plus, it isn't strictly 11-seed play-in for the at-large teams. So far in two seasons, it's been at 12 and 14 (2011) and 11 and 12 (2012). Another random, unbalanced aspect about this 68-team idea.
 

theshadow

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2006
17,273
15,332
113
I think up to 11s are typically at large... Where above that seed typically are win ins from conference tourneys.

Yup. Basically making the lowest at-large teams prove their worth against each other.
 

alarson

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 15, 2006
53,745
61,539
113
Ankeny
It should be the 16 seeds (followed by 15 seeds, etc) in all the play-in games if they are going to have them. Minor conference teams have plenty of chances to prove their worth by scheduling in their nonconference. Its not usually great teams getting those 16 seeds (generally they arent even one of the top 70 teams and to be honest they deserve the spot less than some at larges that end up in the NIT), but teams that have little to no resume that just happened to get in from a lucky conference tourney showing. Those 11 seeds have done more and proven more than those 16 seeds have, and making them 'play-in' is just punishing them for being in a better conference that deserves multiple bids.
 

HoopsTournament

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
7,329
3,917
113
51
St. Joseph, MO
www.hoopstournament.net
Can somebody explain to me why there are two play in games for 16 seeds but also for like 11 seeds? It seems like the random 11 seeds just get punished, so it should be the 16 seeds because they're the lowest, right? Why is this?

Money. They would not get any to come to the game or watch if they had all 16 seeds for the "First Four" games.
 

Wesley

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
70,923
546
113
Omaha
Every game is a play-in game until you are the champion. Hey, it is a good chance to be ion national TV.
 

HoopsTournament

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
7,329
3,917
113
51
St. Joseph, MO
www.hoopstournament.net
Every game is a play-in game until you are the champion. Hey, it is a good chance to be ion national TV.

I never liked the term "Play-In" because those teams are already IN the tournament. They just aren't in the round of 64. So your point is well taken. The round of 64 are play-in games to the round of 32 and so on. I like to call them Opening Round or Preliminary Round. I also don't like calling them First Round and the round of 64 Second Round because 60 teams are playing their first game in the "Second Round".
 

cyclones500

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2010
35,685
23,161
113
Michigan
basslakebeacon.com
I never liked the term "Play-In" because those teams are already IN the tournament. They just aren't in the round of 64. So your point is well taken. The round of 64 are play-in games to the round of 32 and so on. I like to call them Opening Round or Preliminary Round. I also don't like calling them First Round and the round of 64 Second Round because 60 teams are playing their first game in the "Second Round".

I also HATE that the First Four (as they call it, which is cool with me) is considered first round now. It causes unnecessary confusion, since Th-Fri had been "First Round" for 25 seasons.

Until they fix that, I'm calling it "play-in" :sad:
 

Wesley

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2006
70,923
546
113
Omaha
I also HATE that the First Four (as they call it, which is cool with me) is considered first round now. It causes unnecessary confusion, since Th-Fri had been "First Round" for 25 seasons.

Until they fix that, I'm calling it "play-in" :sad:
Call it a prequel....
 

BloodyBuddy

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2012
1,719
51
48
I hate the play-ins also, and wish they would not have them at all. But given the current setup, I think all the play-ins should be for the 11 seeds. Why should a 1 seed get punished and have to play a harder team because of a play-in?
 

HFCS

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2010
67,178
54,239
113
LA LA Land
It should be the 16 seeds (followed by 15 seeds, etc) in all the play-in games if they are going to have them. Minor conference teams have plenty of chances to prove their worth by scheduling in their nonconference. Its not usually great teams getting those 16 seeds (generally they arent even one of the top 70 teams and to be honest they deserve the spot less than some at larges that end up in the NIT), but teams that have little to no resume that just happened to get in from a lucky conference tourney showing. Those 11 seeds have done more and proven more than those 16 seeds have, and making them 'play-in' is just punishing them for being in a better conference that deserves multiple bids.

Great point, the minor conference teams with a good non-conf win or two are never a 16 or even 15 for a reason. No matter how bad your conference, beat one good team non-conf and you're not in danger of a 16 seed. It's not asking the world.
 

alarson

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 15, 2006
53,745
61,539
113
Ankeny
I hate the play-ins also, and wish they would not have them at all. But given the current setup, I think all the play-ins should be for the 11 seeds. Why should a 1 seed get punished and have to play a harder team because of a play-in?

I dont see how a 1 seed is getting punished by the 16 seeds being a play-in game. If anything its a bit more advantage to the 1s as their opponent had to play one more game before reaching them.
 

khaal53

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 13, 2006
2,848
525
113
40
I go the other way. I think if they are going to have play in games it should be the last eight at large teams.

If the NCAA tournament is going to keep the "little guy" story line then let them experience the actual tournament. Not the fake one in Dayton. Let the BCS level teams that can't crack the top 40 even with all of their advantages play the play in games.
 

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
45,603
34,892
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
I go the other way. I think if they are going to have play in games it should be the last eight at large teams.

If the NCAA tournament is going to keep the "little guy" story line then let them experience the actual tournament. Not the fake one in Dayton. Let the BCS level teams that can't crack the top 40 even with all of their advantages play the play in games.


Why not have the teams who can't crack the top 50 (and some of them the top 80) play in? I think you are giving some undeserving 5 or 6 seed an unfair advantage as their opponent is coming off of playing an extra tournament intensity game. If someone is getting that advantage shouldn't it be the teams who have earned the #1 seeds?

If it really is a tournament, conduct it like a tournament not some hodge podge of special rules.