Should we get rid of the First Four?

[pki1998]

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.

This is my preference. I have no problem if the play in round has the worst seeds. I doesn't make sense to me, how there aren't 4 17 seeds. This would have two positive side effects

1) The low level teams who's players work hard, but just don't have the talent would actually be able to win a game prior to becoming the sacrificial lambs for the 1 seeds

2) Having a the four play in teams as 17 seeds might allow more upsets (The best thing about the tourney, unless of course its your team getting upset). Because you push down the 8 worst AQs to the 16-17 line then the 15 or even 14 seeds are more likely to make their games against the 3 or 4 seeds interesting

[ta111]

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

Did you know that 3 of the last 4 years a first four team got to at least the sweet 16? They certainly aren't mediocre.

[trephin]

Clearly the NCAA doesn't agree and likely will never change but I don't think any AQ should be in what is essentially a PIG (calling it round 1 doesn't change it). Make those questionable at larges play each other.

[hoyahooligan]

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

Did you know that 3 of the last 4 years a first four team got to at least the sweet 16? They certainly aren't mediocre.

That's because the play in game actually gives those teams an advantage. They get their nerves of the tournament out of their system, and are more in rhythm than a team that may have been off for over a week. Getting a game under your belt is an advantage especially since your opponent in the round of 64 can't game plan for you as well ahead of time. So they have an advantage against their opponent in the first round and then with 2 wins under their belts now they have momentum. Getting the play in game winner as a 6 seed is a bad thing. Sucks that two of our teams are in that position.

Go back to 64 teams. Will deserving teams get left out? Maybe, but I think there are more teams in now that aren't deserving see UCLA than teams that would get left our that are deserving.

[murphy]

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

Did you know that 3 of the last 4 years a first four team got to at least the sweet 16? They certainly aren't mediocre.

That's because the play in game actually gives those teams an advantage. They get their nerves of the tournament out of their system, and are more in rhythm than a team that may have been off for over a week. Getting a game under your belt is an advantage especially since your opponent in the round of 64 can't game plan for you as well ahead of time. So they have an advantage against their opponent in the first round and then with 2 wins under their belts now they have momentum. Getting the play in game winner as a 6 seed is a bad thing. Sucks that two of our teams are in that position.

Go back to 64 teams. Will deserving teams get left out? Maybe, but I think there are more teams in now that aren't deserving see UCLA than teams that would get left our that are deserving.

I think UD would argue that they have an adtangage. Played VCU to last possession at 1630 on 3/15, then have play in game at 9pm on 3/18, and then if they win that one have to travel to play Providence at 9pm on 3/20. Top it off they only have
6 scholorship players (plus one walk on convert) and no player over 6'6". Nice treat for a 26 win team.

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

. . . but Dayton is a home team against Boise State.

Most astonishingly, you are incorrect.

In each NCAA Tournament game, the better-seeded team is designated as the 'home' team, and the poorer-seeded team is designated as the 'visiting' team - regardless of the geographic location of the game.

2015 NCAA Tournament: Selection Committee Releases 1-68 Rankings (March 15, 2015)

45. Boise State
46. Dayton

So, the Flyers will be playing an 'away' game at UD Arena (where they are 16-0 this season) and wearing their 'visiting team' uniforms.

Boise State will be designated as the 'home' team at UD Arena and wearing their 'home team' uniforms.


Why in the world did Dayton get sent to Dayton? (Gary Parrish, CBS Sposts - March 15, 2015)


Three things the selection committee got right and three it got wrong (Jeff Eisenberg, Yahoo! - March 15, 2015)

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

The NCAA Tournament will never go back to a 64-team field. If there is another change to the tournament, it will be expanded to 72 teams (in order to get 4 more mediocre P5 conference teams into the field).

For those of you interested, here’s a link to an excellent, lengthy USA Today article:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc ... /24868991/

For NCAA's First Four, Dayton's Gym a Tourney Gem

Rachel Axon, USA TODAY Sports - March 17, 2015

[stever20]

The NCAA Tournament will never go back to a 64-team field. If there is another change to the tournament, it will be expanded to 72 teams (in order to get 4 more mediocre P5 conference teams into the field).

For those of you interested, here’s a link to an excellent, lengthy USA Today article:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc ... /24868991/

For NCAA's First Four, Dayton's Gym a Tourney Gem

Rachel Axon, USA TODAY Sports - March 17, 2015

Except that 69-72 was Temple, Old Dominion, Richmond, and Colorado St.
and look at the 2/3 seeds for the NIT- Tulsa, Murray St, Miami, Illinois, Texas A&M, La Tech, Stanford, Rhode Island. So of the 1st 12 teams out(that would be fighting for the 4 extra spots)- only have 4 P5 teams. The other 8- 2 AAC, 2 CUSA, 2 A10, 1 MWC, 1 OVC.

[DudeAnon]

The NCAA Tournament will never go back to a 64-team field. If there is another change to the tournament, it will be expanded to 72 teams (in order to get 4 more mediocre P5 conference teams into the field).

For those of you interested, here’s a link to an excellent, lengthy USA Today article:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc ... /24868991/

For NCAA's First Four, Dayton's Gym a Tourney Gem

Rachel Axon, USA TODAY Sports - March 17, 2015

The poll wasn't "will the First 4 be removed" but rather "should it be removed". No doubt Dayton has done a great job hosting the First 4 (apart from heckling Xavier during a practice.) Most people agree that "The First Four" is sort of weird and unfair to both the teams competing in it and to those who play the winners. It puts those teams on a different schedule than every other team in the tournament.

Personally, I think BYU and Dayton shouldn't have to be in those games. The First Four almost seemed like an excuse for the Committee to put their mid-majors. Without it, maybe UCLA and Texas would've been left out and Dayton/BYU would've taken their places.

[dmac80]

Get rid of it. Never liked, confusing as hell. Almost as bad as the catastrophic idea of expanding to 96 teams which would destroy the regular season and water down the achievemant of making the tournament significantly.