collapse

* '23-'24 SOTG Tally

2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1
'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: The long cold summer

Marquette
Marquette

 Open Practice

Date/Time: Oct 11, 2024 ???
TV: NA
Schedule for 2023-24
27-10

« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Pet Peeve: The stupid play-in game  (Read 2409 times)

WashDCWarrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 841
Pet Peeve: The stupid play-in game
« on: March 12, 2007, 03:04:20 PM »
You've gotta feel for the teams that win their conference tournaments and qualify for the NCAA tournament. (sort of)  They play on Tuesday.  Nobody running a pool requires that you have your bracket in prior to this game.  It's a freebie.  Why?  Because they're just going to lose to the #1 seed, so who (outside of fans of the two unfortunate teams) cares.

Here's how to make the play-in exciting.  (Since I guess we can't just have a 64-team field.)  Make it between the last two at large bids.  This year that would include two of the following: Old Dominion, Illinois, and Arkansas.  That way, teams who earned their way in by winning their tournaments are actually in.  Plus the play-in matters for your brackets and would be exciting to watch.
Logged

marquetteff03

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
Re: Pet Peeve: The stupid play-in game
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2007, 04:10:07 PM »
Thats a flippin awesome idea, start a petition.

Makes less preassure for the committee too because the "last two in" have to duke it out,or in for that matter
Logged

AlumKCof93

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 926
Re: Pet Peeve: The stupid play-in game
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2007, 04:11:09 PM »
The problem with that idea is that the play-in game by the two 12 seeds will have to play on a Tuesday and then turn around and play Friday and Sunday.  It would be an unfair advantage to the opponents of the play-in opponent as the opponent would be running on fumes by the time Sunday rolled around.
Logged
"Yes, Dinnertime!  The perfect break between work and drunk" - Homer J. Simpson

Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
  • Formerly known as notkirkcameron
    • Yellow Chair Sports
Re: Pet Peeve: The stupid play-in game
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2007, 04:15:04 PM »
Why not just have a 64 team bracket? It was good enough for the women... ::)
Logged
“These guys in this locker room are all warriors -- every one of them. We ought to change our name back from the Golden Eagles because Warriors are what we really are." ~Wesley Matthews

WashDCWarrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 841
Re: Pet Peeve: The stupid play-in game
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2007, 04:16:08 PM »
Quote from: AlumKCof93 on March 12, 2007, 04:11:09 PM
The problem with that idea is that the play-in game by the two 12 seeds will have to play on a Tuesday and then turn around and play Friday and Sunday.  It would be an unfair advantage to the opponents of the play-in opponent as the opponent would be running on fumes by the time Sunday rolled around.

That's a trade-off I'd be willing to make.  You can argue that they should have played better during the season.  I just think if a team automatically qualifies, let them be in the actual tournament.
Logged

WashDCWarrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 841
Re: Pet Peeve: The stupid play-in game
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2007, 04:17:15 PM »
Quote from: notkirkcameron on March 12, 2007, 04:15:04 PM
Why not just have a 64 team bracket? It was good enough for the women... ::)

I'd be happy with that, but it seems we're stuck with 65.

That is of course until the brain trust expands it to 128.  ::)
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »
 
feedback