Latest Bracketology (before Kentucky game)

[CadaverDawg]

Has us playing in the play-in game as an 11 seed vs VCU.

Gross

Let's win some more games and get out of the play-in game

http://m.espn.com/ncb/bracketology?src=desktop

[Lord McBuckethead]

Play in game as an 11 seed is stupid as 17.

[Jack Lambert]

Play in game as an 11 seed is stupid as 17.

Better than the NIT or sitting at home.

[PMDawg]

Better than the NIT or sitting at home.

I think he means an 11 seed should be safely in the tournament. play in games should be 14, 15, or 16 seeds.

I get why they don't stick it to the 16 seeds, but an 11 seed play in game is stupid.

[BrunswickDawg]

I think he means an 11 seed should be safely in the tournament. play in games should be 14, 15, or 16 seeds.

I get why they don't stick it to the 16 seeds, but an 11 seed play in game is stupid.

They do it that way because the 14, 15, 16 seeds are normally auto-qualifiers from 3rd tier conferences and aren't bubble teams. You can't have auto-qualifiers be in a play-in game, kind of defeats the concept of "auto-qualifier".

[ShotgunDawg]

I've always been disgusted by how the NCAA is chosen. Something seems inherently inaccurate about it

[smootness]

I think he means an 11 seed should be safely in the tournament. play in games should be 14, 15, or 16 seeds.

I get why they don't stick it to the 16 seeds, but an 11 seed play in game is stupid.

I totally disagree, I think they should get rid of the two 16-seed play-in games and basically make the 4 play-in games be between the last 8 at-large teams to make the Tournament. Make them true play-in games. Here are 8 teams and we can only give them 4 spots; instead of just picking which 4, let them play.

It makes no sense that 2 of the play-in games are at-large teams and the other 2 are auto-qualifiers. But get rid of the auto-qualifier play-in games and make them all at-large, not the other way around. Auto qualifiers should get in the actual Tournament.

[confucius say]

I totally disagree, I think they should get rid of the two 16-seed play-in games and basically make the 4 play-in games be between the last 8 at-large teams to make the Tournament. Make them true play-in games. Here are 8 teams and we can only give them 4 spots; instead of just picking which 4, let them play.

It makes no sense that 2 of the play-in games are at-large teams and the other 2 are auto-qualifiers. But get rid of the auto-qualifier play-in games and make them all at-large, not the other way around. Auto qualifiers should get in the actual Tournament.

I agree. The four play in games should consist of the final 8 at large teams.

[MetEdDawg]

I totally disagree, I think they should get rid of the two 16-seed play-in games and basically make the 4 play-in games be between the last 8 at-large teams to make the Tournament. Make them true play-in games. Here are 8 teams and we can only give them 4 spots; instead of just picking which 4, let them play.

It makes no sense that 2 of the play-in games are at-large teams and the other 2 are auto-qualifiers. But get rid of the auto-qualifier play-in games and make them all at-large, not the other way around. Auto qualifiers should get in the actual Tournament.

Here's my problem. Make it one or the other. Honestly I could see a case for the weakest auto bids or the last at larges. But to do both like they currently do? Exceedingly inconsistent.

[smootness]

Here's my problem. Make it one or the other. Honestly I could see a case for the weakest auto bids or the last at larges. But to do both like they currently do? Exceedingly inconsistent.

Agreed

[EdDawg]

I've never been a fan of the automatic qualifier if you win your conference tournament. I think it should be the team that wins the conference regular season. I understand you want the hottest team, but to me I want to see the best overall team from each conference.

[gtowndawg]

Yeah, let's keep winning and not worry about that nonsense. Ball's in our court.

[PMDawg]

They do it that way because the 14, 15, 16 seeds are normally auto-qualifiers from 3rd tier conferences and aren't bubble teams. You can't have auto-qualifiers be in a play-in game, kind of defeats the concept of "auto-qualifier".

I get all that. Just saying 11 seed is too high imo. Honestly, I've never liked the play in games to begin with. I was totally ok with 64, and would support going back.

[smootness]

I get all that. Just saying 11 seed is too high imo. Honestly, I've never liked the play in games to begin with. I was totally ok with 64, and would support going back.

11 seeds are typically the lowest at-large teams. Sometimes a couple 12's but that's why the 11's are the play-in games. Basically by being in one of those play-in games, they're saying we would currently be one of the last 4 teams in.

The seeding just comes down to how many teams won their conference tournament who would not have made it as an at-large.

[R2Dawg]

11 seeds are typically the lowest at-large teams. Sometimes a couple 12's but that's why the 11's are the play-in games. Basically by being in one of those play-in games, they're saying we would currently be one of the last 4 teams in.

The seeding just comes down to how many teams won their conference tournament who would not have made it as an at-large.

Also why I think you see so many 12 upsets. These are real good teams that are better than their seeding.

[Joebob]

I've never been a fan of the automatic qualifier if you win your conference tournament. I think it should be the team that wins the conference regular season. I understand you want the hottest team, but to me I want to see the best overall team from each conference.

Besides, half the teams in the conference tournament don’t take the tournament seriously anyway because they’re already locks to get into the NCAA tourney, so it reduces the significance of winning the conference tournament.

[bullygrowl]

https://www.ncaa.com/video/basketball-men/2020-02-03/march-madness-bracket-predictions-ncaa-tournament-field-projected

[dawgs]

Here's my problem. Make it one or the other. Honestly I could see a case for the weakest auto bids or the last at larges. But to do both like they currently do? Exceedingly inconsistent.

Agreed. It's weird that they kinda half assed do it both ways. Either the bottom 8 at large or bottom 8 auto qualifiers makes sense. Bottom 4 of each doesn't.

Really just go back to 64 though, the 68 number is just awkward.

[BrunswickDawg]

Agreed. It's weird that they kinda half assed do it both ways. Either the bottom 8 at large or bottom 8 auto qualifiers makes sense. Bottom 4 of each doesn't.

Really just go back to 64 though, the 68 number is just awkward.

I think it allows some recognition of the fact that some teams get in via tournaments that shouldn't. That 17-17 or 15-19 team that won the Patriot League tournament on a miracle shot shouldn't be there. They are going to get trounced against a 1 seed - so having the flexibility or putting them in a play-in game makes sense.

[dawgs]

I think it allows some recognition of the fact that some teams get in via tournaments that shouldn't. That 17-17 or 15-19 team that won the Patriot League tournament on a miracle shot shouldn't be there. They are going to get trounced against a 1 seed - so having the flexibility or putting them in a play-in game makes sense.

Sure, but that's what's always made the NCAA tournament the NCAA tournament. Even a 25-5 team from the patriot league is extremely unlikely to do anything but get trounced but duke or Kentucky in round 1 anyway.

[smootness]

Sure, but that's what's always made the NCAA tournament the NCAA tournament. Even a 25-5 team from the patriot league is extremely unlikely to do anything but get trounced but duke or Kentucky in round 1 anyway.

Agreed. I love that a bad team who goes on a crazy run to get in then gets to play Duke. That is cool and what is all about.

I don't care if Purdue gets in.

[dantheman4248]

Just here to say **** kentucky that is all.