I can not figure out why, out of four play-in games, two would be for 16th seeds, but the other two would be an 11th seed and a 12th seed. It just makes more sense to me to have all four play-in games be for 16th seeds. Why should 16th and 15th seeded teams automatically get into the round of 64 over the four teams playing for the 11th and 12th seeds in the first four games?

I have no clue but I think if you are an auto bid you should get into the round of 64 and have the bubble at large teams play to get in.

I agree about the auto-bids.

quote:

---

I have no clue but I think if you are an auto bid you should get into the round of 64 and have the bubble at large teams play to get in.

---

+1

All four 12 seeds should be play in games. Last 8 in.

If you look at the Lunardi and CBS bracketologies, they both had two 12 v 12 play in games in their predictions.

Is that not decided in advance? I was surprised to see an 11 v 11 game announced last night.

They're getting too cute with all this last 4 in stuff since it expanded to 68 teams...

Just go back to the 64 team setup and get it on...

Actually, I'd be happy if they went back to the old format of 32 teams...Makes it more of an elite tournament.

It all comes down to money. They didn't feel that putting 4 games on with all the 16 seeds would generate any viewership for those games. They are hoping that putting in teams that have a bigger name to them would draw in viewership for the other two play in games.

The rule they implemented with the expansion to 68 teams was that the lowest 4 automatic qualifiers and the lowest 4 at-large bids would play in the opening round games. The other 12 seeds are automatic qualifiers, so they placed 2 teams at the 12 seed and 2 teams at the 11 seed (along with the play-ins at the 16 seed, reserved for the worst automatic qualifiers), according to where they believed their seed should be.

dcaggie nailed it.

It has something to do with the fact that Memphis, Richmond, and Utah State are all automatic qualifiers.

Since they're all 12 seeds, only one of the play-in games can be between 2 12's.

Gonzaga was an AQ team and are seeded 11th. Therefore 3 of the 11's are at-large spots.

4 spots for 6 teams = 2 bids and 2 play-in games.

quote:

---

dcaggie nailed it.

---

No he didn't. They made a rule and the selections follow that rule.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Resources/Latest+News/2010+news+stories/July+latest+news/Format+decided+for+68-team+tourney+field



from article:

The expansion to eight teams will constitute the first round of the championship, with the second- and third-rounds played to round out of the first week of play. Two of the first-round games will feature the last four at-large teams selected to the championship field, while the other two games will match teams ranked 65 through 68 on the overall seed list. The winners of the four games will advance to the second round.

quote:

---

All four 12 seeds should be play in games. Last 8 in.

---

Agree 100%. Realistically the small conference AQ's (seeds 13-16) or even the large conference at-larges (seeds 8-12) have a 0% chance of winning it all and only about a 1% chance of the Final Four. The "small school" teams are a huge part of the charm of the tourney, plus the AQ's at least earned their way. If you have a mediocre resume and don't win your conference tourney, then earn your way via play-in.

I'd actually prefer to see a set of rules as with the golf majors where 60 teams AQ and the committee just selects 8 teams to play in for those 4 11 or 12 seed slots and then does the seeding.

For example:
First 60 teams from:

• Conference champion as determined by conference
• Conference regular season champion not already qualified
• 2nd place regular season in a top 6 'average computer poll' conference not already qualified
• 3rd place regular season in a top 5 'average computer poll' conference not already qualified
• ...
  

[This message has been edited by CapCityAg89 (edited 3/15/2011 9:19a).]

...and it's about The Moneys...

Nice rule post though. Not really. Some of us can see through the smoke.

Yeah I bet the $11 billion TV deal was only signed after agreeing to have 12 seeds play on Tuesday rather than 16 seeds.

96 teams? All about the money. Not so much with 68.

They compromised with the 68 teams, 4 lowest ranked and 4 lowest at large, it's fair to the at-large and still saves a little respect to the weak automatic qualifiers.

go back to 64 teams

quote:

---

dcaggie nailed it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No he didn't.

---

You nailed it also..on paper. He nailed it in actuality. It's all about money. Why do you think they are showing on 4 different channels this year...because they are kind to us average joes and want to give us the opportunity to see more than one game....nope

yep = money is the issue - that is the SOLE reason for tournament expansion.

more games = more $$

Bunburry...WOW. Didn't think that maybe the contract was done that way for this very reason????

He basically gave the sole reason the contract was done that way.

bunbury is clueless

lol @ bunbury

....and here we go.