First Four

[NavinRJohnson]

Hate it! I just think it is so stupid. Nobody watches. The teams are bad. Its just pointless. I hated the move to 65 for the same reason. I'm sure there is some additional money, but I would advise a move back to 64.

BTW, if the committee truly believes that MU is closer to UAB than they are to Xavier, WVU, Georgetown, etc., as the selections and seeds would have you believe, then I think its time for a new committee. That team stinks on ice. I know they obviously played fast and loose with the seeds this year, but come on. What an absolutely pointless exercise having them in the tournament.

[groove]

It looked like the attendance was worse than an early 1980s cleveland cavs game.

[GGGG]

The reason it went to 65 had to do with the break off of the Mountain West from the WAC and not wanting to sacrifice an at-large slot for the sake of another auto-bid.  (This is the reason that new auto-bid conferences have formed for the last 15 years.)

I didn't watch much, but I'm certainly not going to get upset about it. 

[Mobot]

Sometimes I wonder if the committee intentionally gave a questionable at large bid to VCU in order to create controversy and open up the door to expanding the tournament even further.

[eroc830]

It looked like the attendance was worse than an early 1980s cleveland cavs game.

I went to the play in game two years ago and it was sold out, I don't even remember which teams were playing, you just pick a team and cheer.  From what I understood they always sell it our or get real close every year, that is one of the reasons they have it there.  Box score said there were 10,000 people there yesterday, which isn't a sell out but its not bad if you consider there will probably be another 10,000 there tonight. 

Dayton is a huge basketball town.  I was there on Saturday when the University of Dayton and Ohio St were playing and you could not find a table or bar stool in the city.

[groove]

Wow, I tuned in the beginning of the first game and the seats in the lower area were almost completely empty. Must have filled up later.

[Skatastrophy]

Wow, I tuned in the beginning of the first game and the seats in the lower area were almost completely empty. Must have filled up later.

I commented to my fiancee that I was surprised how many people were there during OT of the first game.

[MerrittsMustache]

Hate it! I just think it is so stupid. Nobody watches. The teams are bad. Its just pointless. I hated the move to 65 for the same reason. I'm sure there is some additional money, but I would advise a move back to 64.

BTW, if the committee truly believes that MU is closer to UAB than they are to Xavier, WVU, Georgetown, etc., as the selections and seeds would have you believe, then I think its time for a new committee. That team stinks on ice. I know they obviously played fast and loose with the seeds this year, but come on. What an absolutely pointless exercise having them in the tournament.

I agree that it's a pretty dumb concept that should be scrapped. However, if they're going to continue to do it (which I have to assume they will), make at-large teams participate in the play-in games. The 16-seeds earned their way in by winning their conference tournaments. Don't take away the chance for a small, no-name school to try to knock off a Duke or a Kansas, etc. Make the bubble teams earn their way in by winning what amounts to be a one-game playoff. This would also increase interest in the games. Do you think more people would watch UNC-Ashville play Alabama State or watch Marquette play Michigan State?

[robmufan]

Wow, I tuned in the beginning of the first game and the seats in the lower area were almost completely empty. Must have filled up later.

those seats could have been for Clemson or UAB students, band, or other affiliations.  I am sure they didn't rush to get to their seats for UNC-Ashville and UALR

[GGGG]

Merritts...your idea is undoubtedly more fair, but since the money conferences make up most of the at-large bids, they don't want to be in those play in games.  From their perspective, Clemson can beat Boston University, so therefore they shouldn't have to play in that game.

The current system is a compromise.  And television gets a better second game.

[CTWarrior]

The current system is a compromise.  And television gets a better second game.

I watched last night, and the first game was a great game.  The UAB-Clemson game was unwatchable.

I think UNC-Asheville has had a great tournament now that they've won an exciting game.  Better than just getting trounced by Pitt in the first place.  Of course, if it were up to me, they would just go with 64 teams and leave it at that.

[brewcity77]

I watched the last 5 minutes of the first game and it was actually pretty entertaining. Watching UNC-Asheville foul out two of the best players on Arkansas-Little Rock in the last two minutes, then hitting a 3 with 10 seconds to play to force overtime was pretty exciting. Sure, Pitt will kill them, but it made for a good game. And I enjoyed watching Clemson run riot over UAB. While I do think UAB deserved to make the tournament, the criticism of the SC was shown to be pretty well justified on the basis of that poor performance. And that Clemson team was just fun to watch. They'll give West Virginia some fits on Thursday.

Is it really the NCAA tournament? I don't know. It's certainly not the Thursday games, but these teams are playing for their Thursday/Friday lives and it can still be entertaining. Sort of like an appetizer, it just got me more excited for the main course.

[lab_warrior]

The first game was great.  The second, well, it's almost as if one of the teams had NO business getting a bid.  I'm sure peeps in Boulder or Blacksburg weren't bitter watching that sloggy beatdown at all.