Should we get rid of the First Four?

[DudeAnon]

I am sort of torn on this one. It does seem to of been favorable to mid-majors which I like, but it is just such an oddity.

1) It is slightly unfair to the team that plays against the First 4 winner. I know this is debatable, but I would rather half a week knowing the team I am going to play rather than 1 day.

2) Obviously this is an outlier, but Dayton is a home team against Boise St. Which is nuts.

[stever20]

I am sort of torn on this one. It does seem to of been favorable to mid-majors which I like, but it is just such an oddity.

1) It is slightly unfair to the team that plays against the First 4 winner. I know this is debatable, but I would rather half a week knowing the team I am going to play rather than 1 day.

2) Obviously this is an outlier, but Dayton is a home team against Boise St. Which is nuts.

I had just posted something about this:
NCAA officials said Sunday that the men's basketball selection committee may revisit the principle of locking in the last four at-large teams into the First Four in Dayton after a possible UConn win Sunday would have sent the Huskies into the general at-large field, even though they would have been the last team on the bracket.

not sure if this means making 1st 4 61-68, or where a Dayton would be sent to main bracket while UCLA dropped to 1st 4. Huge difference.

[Bill Marsh]

I am sort of torn on this one. It does seem to of been favorable to mid-majors which I like, but it is just such an oddity.

1) It is slightly unfair to the team that plays against the First 4 winner. I know this is debatable, but I would rather half a week knowing the team I am going to play rather than 1 day.

2) Obviously this is an outlier, but Dayton is a home team against Boise St. Which is nuts.

I know that they're not a first 4 in the sense that you're talking about, but a team like Manhattan really gets screwed by this. They now have to spend a couple of days flying out to Dayton and preparing for the Hampton juggernaut.

If it wasn't for that Steve Masiello, now finally a UK alum, could concentrate all his time on game planning for Kentucky so that he could become the first 16 seed to knock off a one seed.

And Masiello's handicap is nothing compared to the dilemma facing John Calipari. How will he get the attention of his players on Monday and Tuesday? How will he put a game plan in place not knowing if he'll be facing Hampton or Manhattan? It's totally unfair to Kentucky. If Manhattan does avoid getting upset by Hampton, Calipari can definitely point to this as the reason why his team lost.

[shupirate98]

I am sort of torn on this one. It does seem to of been favorable to mid-majors which I like, but it is just such an oddity.

1) It is slightly unfair to the team that plays against the First 4 winner. I know this is debatable, but I would rather half a week knowing the team I am going to play rather than 1 day.

2) Obviously this is an outlier, but Dayton is a home team against Boise St. Which is nuts.

I had just posted something about this:
NCAA officials said Sunday that the men's basketball selection committee may revisit the principle of locking in the last four at-large teams into the First Four in Dayton after a possible UConn win Sunday would have sent the Huskies into the general at-large field, even though they would have been the last team on the bracket.

not sure if this means making 1st 4 61-68, or where a Dayton would be sent to main bracket while UCLA dropped to 1st 4. Huge difference.

That makes absolutely zero sense. A UConn win wouldn't have sent them into the at-large field at all, they'd be an automatic qualifier. They'd be no different than Wyoming or Buffalo or Stephen F. Austin or any of the other automatic qualifiers seeded in that range. Stupid. The NCAA doesn't even understand their own tournament.

[HoosierPal]

Everyone likes the David v Goliath story line. Put four David's in the First Four, and cut the final P5+ schools out. Texas, UCLA, (and probably IU and Ole Miss) etc. don't belong in the tourney. Let's substitute Murray State, Iona, etc. and get some more story lines going. 'People' are aghast of a P5' 65 all in tourney' as there would be no Cinderella stories. Here is a chance to add more Cinderella's.

[Edrick]

Absolutely not.

No one wants 'more' Cinderellas, they just like it when deserving mid majors do well.

Murray State, for example, didn't have a resume even remotely close to a tournament profile.

Want to make the tournament better? Fix a metric the Committee has to adhere to. Adding more substandard teams does nothing but worsen the product.

[RedStormHoops]

I want to rid of it because of your first point bill.

Every team in the tournament right now is watching game film and dissecting matchups and game plans. Meanwhile providence and Xavier sit on theirs hands or try to prepare for two teams at the same time. It's not fair to a team that worked hard to get a good 6 seed to have to be at a strategical disadvantage.

[NJRedman]

I like the first four, just stop calling that the first round and the round of 64 the second round. I know it's changing next year but when 99% of the teams are still in it its not the second round.

[CPJays]

I would rather have all the 16 seeds be play in games instead of picking two random 6 seeds to match up with play in teams. Give all the small conference winners their chance for a game before the 1 seed ritual slaughter. Doing that would also boost the competition further down. 15s become 14 caliber teams ect.

[hoyahooligan]

Get rid of the play in games. We don't need 4 more mediocre teams in the tournament. Go back to 64.