I still don't understand Dayton

[Duggar Hall Desk]

Why not have seeds 61-68 play each other for the chance to play the #1 seeds. Give those lowest seeds a decent chance to get a NCAAT win. Why eliminate two #11 seeds before the weekend?

 

[DesotoCountyDawg]

Why not have seeds 61-68 play each other for the chance to play the #1 seeds. Give those lowest seeds a decent chance to get a NCAAT win. Why eliminate two #11 seeds before the weekend?

It’s combination of the lowest ranked automatic bids (16 seeds) and lowest ranked at large bids (11 seeds). They did it in a way to be fair but that is as always up for interpretation.

 

[Bulldog from Birth]

Why not have seeds 61-68 play each other for the chance to play the #1 seeds. Give those lowest seeds a decent chance to get a NCAAT win. Why eliminate two #11 seeds before the weekend?

I’d argue that the play in games should be ALL at large teams. If you earned an automatic bid, you should be advanced to the main part of the tournament and get your shot in the real thing.

 

[patdog]

I’d argue that the play in games should be ALL at large teams. If you earned an automatic bid, you should be advanced to the main part of the tournament and get your shot in the real thing.

Especially since the play in games were added to give more teams at large bids. Essentially, they’ve stolen 2 automatic bids.

 

[Duggar Hall Desk]

It’s combination of the lowest ranked automatic bids (16 seeds) and lowest ranked at large bids (11 seeds). They did it in a way to be fair but that is as always up for interpretation.

That makes certain amount of sense, but it doesn't seem like it would produce the best possible games on Friday and Saturday.

 

[8dog]

That makes certain amount of sense, but it doesn't seem like it would produce the best possible games on Friday and Saturday.

In theory this gives you 2 extra watchable games instead of 4 games no one would watch.

 

[Duggar Hall Desk]

In theory this gives you 2 extra watchable games instead of 4 games no one would watch.

I would argue that a Tuesday 11 v 11 game doesn't get much more viewership than a 16 v 17 game would. I mean, looking at ESPN right now, how many casual viewers are going to tune in to see Miss St play Pitt other than the schools' fanbases? More than Howard vs SE Missouri St?

 

[Bulldog from Birth]

Especially since the play in games were added to give more teams at large bids. Essentially, they’ve stolen 2 automatic bids.

I think the play-ins were added because a conference or two got created out of thin air during a bunch of conference realignment. Rather than reduce the number of at large bids to create the new automatic bid(s), they went with this First Four model.

 

[PBDog]

I think the play-ins were added because a conference or two got created out of thin air during a bunch of conference realignment. Rather than reduce the number of at large bids to create the new automatic bid(s), they went with this First Four model.

This is the correct answer

 

[patdog]

I think the play-ins were added because a conference or two got created out of thin air during a bunch of conference realignment. Rather than reduce the number of at large bids to create the new automatic bid(s), they went with this First Four model.

There were 32 auto bids in 2000, the last year of the 64 team tournament. There are 32 auto bids today. The extra 4 teams are all atlarge teams. When a conference is created, they add another team to the tournament. When a conference goes away, they add another at large bid.

 

[Bulldog from Birth]

There were 32 auto bids in 2000, the last year of the 64 team tournament. There are 32 auto bids today. The extra 4 teams are all atlarge teams. When a conference is created, they add another team to the tournament. When a conference goes away, they add another at large bid.

In 2000 they went to a 65 team tournament with a single play in game between two 16 seeds. There were 32 automatic bids at that time. You are correct. But at some point after that, a conference dissolved. Because in 2010, there were only 31 automatic bids. 2011 began the “First Four”, expanding the Dayton round to 8 teams. This was done because of a new conference automatic bid, taking it from 31 to 32 auto bids. They didn’t want to remove an at large slot, and they didn’t want to be seen as solely shafting another pair of 16 seeds into the “not really the tournament” play-in, and thus the “First Four” began.

 

[8dog]

I would argue that a Tuesday 11 v 11 game doesn't get much more viewership than a 16 v 17 game would. I mean, looking at ESPN right now, how many casual viewers are going to tune in to see Miss St play Pitt other than the schools' fanbases? More than Howard vs SE Missouri St?

Thats why I said “in theory”

 

[hatfieldms]

I’d argue that the play in games should be ALL at large teams. If you earned an automatic bid, you should be advanced to the main part of the tournament and get your shot in the real thing.

I completely agree. It would also make the play in games much more interesting with more well known teams

 

[patdog]

In 2000 they went to a 65 team tournament with a single play in game between two 16 seeds. There were 32 automatic bids at that time. You are correct. But at some point after that, a conference dissolved. Because in 2010, there were only 31 automatic bids. 2011 began the “First Four”, expanding the Dayton round to 8 teams. This was done because of a new conference automatic bid, taking it from 31 to 32 auto bids. They didn’t want to remove an at large slot, and they didn’t want to be seen as solely shafting another pair of 16 seeds into the “not really the tournament” play-in, and thus the “First Four” began.

Good info. So, the added 4 bids are really all at large bids.