The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #61 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 12:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Not where I was previously
Posts: 1,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjones1 View Post
I got my picks locked in last night!

I will not be available for chat for Round 1 and Round 2 as I will be watching in Vegas. I should be in chat for the rest of the tournament though!
That is awesome. I recommend hitting the ESPN Zone over at New York New York at least an hour before tip off.
My wife and I wastched the Final Four there last year it was great. We sat in the recliners right up front and could not have had more fun!! There is a meager $10/HR "cover" but that is not that big a deal. PLUS the sport betting window is right outside the restaurant!!
Reply With Quote
  #62 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 12:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
So, again, you've got two 11s and two 12s who have to play an extra game while two 16s do not. Still stupid.
Holding my nose, I'd say it's the second-most fair way to organize a 68-team tournament. The committee already recognized (however tacitly) that it was relegating two teams each year to second-class citizenship by sending them to Dayton and pretending it was a regular tournament game. For them to take the bottom eight teams in the field and tell them they all had to play way their into the regular 64-team field would have resulted in PR headaches that weren't worth it. So they took a hybrid approach: the bottom four teams overall play pre-lim games, as well as the last four at-larges.

I wish all of the "opening round" games would involve the last eight at-larges, all of whom would be playing for twelve-seeds in the bracket. Why should teams who won their conference tournaments--in other words teams that actually WON their way into the national tournament--have to win another game just so that they can be granted full participation rights?

This has been another episode of "Logistics and PR are tough work when your organization prostitutes itself."
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 12:41pm
Aleve Titles to Others
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: East Westchester of the Southern Conference
Posts: 5,381
Send a message via AIM to 26 Year Gap
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
So, again, you've got two 11s and two 12s who have to play an extra game while two 16s do not. Still stupid.
I can almost guarantee that no 16s will be playing any extra games.
__________________
Never hit a piņata if you see hornets flying out of it.
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 12:43pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap View Post
I can almost guarantee that no 16s will be playing any extra games.
IIRC, no 16 has ever beat a 1-seed in the tourney.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 12:58pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbduke View Post
Why should teams who won their conference tournaments--in other words teams that actually WON their way into the national tournament--have to win another game just so that they can be granted full participation rights?
The strength of some conferences and their rights to an automatic bid has been a question for many years.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #66 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 01:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
So, again, you've got two 11s and two 12s who have to play an extra game while two 16s do not. Still stupid.
Though I didn't quite realize it earlier, this is an interesting framing problem. Logically, the following two descriptions of the opening round are equally valid:

1) Two 11s and two 12's have to play an extra game while two 16's do not.
and
2) Two 11s and two 12's are allowed to play at least one game in this year's tournament, whereas under the last system those same four teams would have been left out completely.

Each framing involves a value judgment. The first construction assumes that, without exception, lower-seeded teams should have to work harder than higher-seeded teams to win the tournament.

The second assumes that the last four at-large teams should recognize that they have no real chance of actually winning the tournament and look at their opening game as an opportunity rather than an extra burden that most lower-seeded teams don't face.
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 01:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap View Post
I can almost guarantee that no 16s will be playing any extra games.
Wanna bet?

Actually, there are 6 #16-seed teams in the tournament. 4 of them will play in 2 different 1st round games, with the winners playing the #1 seeds in their brackets. The final 2 #16-seeds will skip the opening round and play the other 2 #1 seeds first.

So, 2 #16-seed teams are guaranteed to win and advance to the next round.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 01:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
The strength of some conferences and their rights to an automatic bid has been a question for many years.
Really? I don't think I've ever heard anyone seriously propose that the lower-tier conferences shouldn't be guaranteed at least one representative in the tournament.

Link(s)?
Reply With Quote
  #69 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 01:22pm
Esteemed Participant
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 4,775
So why not just let those last "at-large" teams and the lowest seeded teams all into the tournament, and give the 4 #1 seeds a bye in the first round, and they don't have to play until Saturday or Sunday?
Reply With Quote
  #70 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 01:34pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad View Post
So why not just let those last "at-large" teams and the lowest seeded teams all into the tournament, and give the 4 #1 seeds a bye in the first round, and they don't have to play until Saturday or Sunday?

Because the math/bracket doesn't work out that way. If you give the top four teams a bye, then the other sixty-four teams play each other and you're left with thirty-six teams.
Reply With Quote
  #71 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 01:38pm
M.A.S.H.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judtech View Post
That is awesome. I recommend hitting the ESPN Zone over at New York New York at least an hour before tip off.
My wife and I wastched the Final Four there last year it was great. We sat in the recliners right up front and could not have had more fun!! There is a meager $10/HR "cover" but that is not that big a deal. PLUS the sport betting window is right outside the restaurant!!
I did this last year and had a great time!

We watched at Planet Hollywood, though.

Looking forward to it!
Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 01:47pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,843
ESPN.com has been blocked by my base's firewall. I bet you it's specifically to prevent folks from filling out brackets considering we still have access to sites like YouTube and Facebook.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 01:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
ESPN.com has been blocked by my base's firewall. I bet you it's specifically to prevent folks from filling out brackets considering we still have access to sites like YouTube and Facebook.
Maybe the base commander has stock in CBS, and doesn't have Disney?
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 02:06pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
ESPN.com has been blocked by my base's firewall. I bet you it's specifically to prevent folks from filling out brackets considering we still have access to sites like YouTube and Facebook.
I'll bet you're right. Now I'm curious as to whether access is blocked at the local bases.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old Mon Mar 14, 2011, 02:53pm
Esteemed Participant
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 4,775
Same is true for Hill AFB where my son is stationed...he can get on to ESPN on his personal laptop, but not on any of the base computers.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
espn tournament challenge 26 Year Gap Basketball 214 Mon Apr 05, 2010 01:00pm
ESPN Tournament Challenge BktBallRef Basketball 80 Tue Apr 07, 2009 04:13pm
ESPN Men's Tournament Challenge BktBallRef Basketball 122 Tue Apr 03, 2007 08:29am
ESPN Tournament Challenge BktBallRef Basketball 97 Mon Apr 03, 2006 05:52pm
ESPN Men's Tournament Challenge BktBallRef Basketball 42 Thu Mar 18, 2004 04:15pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1