menu
Logo
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: New NCAA Tournament Format Revealed
Page: 1 of 1
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,825
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 10:21 AM
settings_applications edit_note
The last four at-large bids will face the last four automatic qualifiers in what the NCAA selection committee is dubbing "The First Four" to be played on either Tuesday or Wednesday.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5374116

I like the format, but a negative could be that it affects Ohio and the MAC. If the conference has a down year, I could see us as one of the last four automatic qualifiers to make it into this round.
bn9
General User
B9
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Post Count: 422
person
mail
bn9
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 10:38 AM
settings_applications edit_note
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
The last four at-large bids will face the last four automatic qualifiers in what the NCAA selection committee is dubbing "The First Four" to be played on either Tuesday or Wednesday.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5374116

I like the format, but a negative could be that it affects Ohio and the MAC. If the conference has a down year, I could see us as one of the last four automatic qualifiers to make it into this round.


I think that the last four at-large will face each other and the last four automatic qualifiers will face each other.  So, their will be two games played for the #16 seed and two games for most likely a #11 or #12 seed.  At least that is how I think it works.
Ted Thompson
Administrator
Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: MAC Play
Post Count: 7,950
mail
Ted Thompson
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 11:17 AM
settings_applications edit_note
bn9 wrote:expand_more
The last four at-large bids will face the last four automatic qualifiers in what the NCAA selection committee is dubbing "The First Four" to be played on either Tuesday or Wednesday.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5374116

I like the format, but a negative could be that it affects Ohio and the MAC. If the conference has a down year, I could see us as one of the last four automatic qualifiers to make it into this round.


I think that the last four at-large will face each other and the last four automatic qualifiers will face each other.  So, their will be two games played for the #16 seed and two games for most likely a #11 or #12 seed.  At least that is how I think it works.


You are correct. The 4 teams that were peviously 16-seeds will play each other. I don't think the MAC has ever been a 16-seed so there's no impact there.  The other two games will pit the "last four out" (although one of those teams would have been in the previous model) against each other so that two can play their way in. Basically, they've created 3 more at-large spots. So the impact to the MAC here is minimal unless a MAC team could secure one of the newly created at-large spots.
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,825
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 11:53 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Ahh ok, I read that wrong. That makes a lot more sense and doesn't really affect us as much as I thought unless we happen to be one of the last at-large which will most likely never happen anytime soon. Still is going to be interesting where they place the last four at-larges whether they make them 10, 11, or 12s.
shabamon
General User
Member Since: 11/17/2006
Location: Cincinnati
Post Count: 7,318
mail
shabamon
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 12:10 PM
settings_applications edit_note
FACE-->PALM
Andrew Ruck
General User
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 5,647
mail
Andrew Ruck
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 1:26 PM
settings_applications edit_note
The auto qualifier games will definitely not involve the MAC.  Look at this year, we were a sub .500 team and still got a 14 seed. 

It is a very real possibility that we someday are involved in the 2 "at-large" games...I could even see it this year if we have a good season and stumble in the MAC tourney.  They said it is looking like Dayton for all 4 matches, which means we could get a TON of people there for that match which would be a lot of fun.
Big Willy
General User
BW
Member Since: 12/29/2004
Post Count: 197
person
mail
Big Willy
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 3:27 PM
settings_applications edit_note
They're talking about possibly having two venues. If they did that I would assume they would have one 16 seed game and one at-large game at each venue. That would help attendance at both places, and would solve the problem of what to do with UD should they be one of the last four at-large teams, since they couldn't play on their home court. I would like to see games at UD and Indianapolis.
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 7:09 PM
settings_applications edit_note
As Andrew mentions, I think if/when the MAC is a two-bid league again, it would be highly likely for the at-large team to end up in a game.  We have a good distance to fall as a conference to get into the last 4 AQ spots, I believe.

Not a huge fan of this format (not that it is bad, it just seems like it exists for no logical reason), but I have to think it will only last a handful of years, at most.
Big Willy
General User
BW
Member Since: 12/29/2004
Post Count: 197
person
mail
Big Willy
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 7:15 PM
settings_applications edit_note
anorris wrote:expand_more
Not a huge fan of this format (not that it is bad, it just seems like it exists for no logical reason), but I have to think it will only last a handful of years, at most.


Any format that adds at-large teams is good for the MAC. As a conference we just need to get it together, win some big non-conference games, and get in position for at-large berths. We did it in the 90's and we need to do it again.
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 7:28 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Big Willy wrote:expand_more
Not a huge fan of this format (not that it is bad, it just seems like it exists for no logical reason), but I have to think it will only last a handful of years, at most.


Any format that adds at-large teams is good for the MAC. As a conference we just need to get it together, win some big non-conference games, and get in position for at-large berths. We did it in the 90's and we need to do it again.

While I agree it does create more potential for a MAC at-large, I have to think those extra spots will help the bigger (richer) conferences more.  However, the added 16/17 game does guarantee one more win share for smaller conferences.
Big Willy
General User
BW
Member Since: 12/29/2004
Post Count: 197
person
mail
Big Willy
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 7:42 PM
settings_applications edit_note
anorris wrote:expand_more
Not a huge fan of this format (not that it is bad, it just seems like it exists for no logical reason), but I have to think it will only last a handful of years, at most.


Any format that adds at-large teams is good for the MAC. As a conference we just need to get it together, win some big non-conference games, and get in position for at-large berths. We did it in the 90's and we need to do it again.


While I agree it does create more potential for a MAC at-large, I have to think those extra spots will help the bigger (richer) conferences more.


Probably true. It will be interesting how many BCS conference teams are in those games vs mid-majors. There have been only about 4 to 6 at-large bids for mid-majors the past few years. I would hope that would increase by a couple. Of course, only three teams are being added, so the impact will be small. And they could fix it so there are more mid-major teams in those play-in games by simply putting the last few BCS conference teams into the regular bracket and making the mid-majors play their way in. It would be nice to see a good mid-major vs a middle of the road BCS team in those games.
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 7/13/2010 9:06 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Big Willy wrote:expand_more
It would be nice to see a good mid-major vs a middle of the road BCS team in those games.
It sure would, and if the seed line process really works as advertised (resumes and raw numbers detached from team names), I think it should happen relatively often.  Lets just hope it doesn't become the proverbial TCU/Boise State bowl game situation (ie: a mid-major knockout game) every year.
UpSan Bobcat
General User
Member Since: 8/30/2005
Location: Upper Sandusky, OH
Post Count: 3,817
mail
UpSan Bobcat
mail
Posted: 7/14/2010 8:21 AM
settings_applications edit_note
anorris wrote:expand_more
It would be nice to see a good mid-major vs a middle of the road BCS team in those games.
It sure would, and if the seed line process really works as advertised (resumes and raw numbers detached from team names), I think it should happen relatively often.  Lets just hope it doesn't become the proverbial TCU/Boise State bowl game situation (ie: a mid-major knockout game) every year.


And hopefully non-BCS teams consistently get at least one of the extra three tournament spots created. And by that, I don't mean droppoing a should-be qualifier down into this play-in game.
BobcatGman
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Albany, OH
Post Count: 252
mail
BobcatGman
mail
Posted: 7/18/2010 10:25 PM
settings_applications edit_note
           Illinois, Virginia Tech, Arizona State, and Mississippi State we're all number 1 seeds in the 2010 NIT Tournament,  Does that mean these 4 teams would be the last four in, in the NCAA Tournament, There are still gonna be a lot of Mid-Major heartbreaks, I think it's still gonna be hard to get an at-large bid if your a Mid-Major for one of the final spots.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dennis   "Gman"   DON'T   FLINCH   !!! 
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 7/19/2010 12:59 PM
settings_applications edit_note
What is the over/under on the number of years that the new format holds until they switch it to the bottom 8 seeds comprising the play-in pool? 
Showing Messages: 1 - 15 of 15
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)