For those who think Iowa is a "lock" for the NCAAs

ssckelley said:
I am sure there are people from the 70's and 80's that thought expanding the tournament to 64 was a joke as well.

You still listening to those 8 track tapes or have you moved on to cassette?
Click to expand...

Have you seen the bubble this year? Who else would you want in the tournament? Are there 10-20 more worthy teams out there?

The number I have seen thrown around is 96 teams...That is nuts...if the NCAA does that they should just cancel the regular season.
 
SonofaSailor said:
Ok, well then put me on record...if they expand the NCAA tournament further...they might as well just call the whole thing off...it will be a joke.

Teams with losing conference records will be making it...
Click to expand...

Not really. The reason they have expanded the field in recent years is because the amount of AQ's keeps going up each year. This year there is one more AQ than last year, a few years back they added something like 3 AQ's so they expanded the field. If they didn't expand the field, then true bubble teams, high quality teams that deserve to be in, would get screwed over because of the "Big Sky Tournament Automatic Qualifier".

These conference tournament guaranteed bids have increased the need for extra teams. That is all
 
SonofaSailor said:
Have you seen the bubble this year? Who else would you want in the tournament? Are there 10-20 more worthy teams out there?

The number I have seen thrown around is 96 teams...That is nuts...if the NCAA does that they should just cancel the regular season.
Click to expand...

In 2011 the NCAA damn near expanded it to 96 and I think we will eventually see it expanded. I agree, the bubble looks like crap and it will look worse as they keep expanding the tournament. But that still does not change what the NCAA officially considers "in" the tournament. The NCAA is all about money and the more 1st round games they have the more they can get from TV revenues because someone will be willing to pay to televise the games.
 
mopkins said:
Not really. The reason they have expanded the field in recent years is because the amount of AQ's keeps going up each year. This year there is one more AQ than last year, a few years back they added something like 3 AQ's so they expanded the field. If they didn't expand the field, then true bubble teams, high quality teams that deserve to be in, would get screwed over because of the "Big Sky Tournament Automatic Qualifier".

These conference tournament guaranteed bids have increased the need for extra teams. That is all
Click to expand...

That is not true, if the NCAA was all about expanding the field because of the AQ's then they would have created more 16 seed games for those low majors to battle it out in order to advance into the field of 64. Like I just posted in 2011 they almost expanded it to 96 teams and it had nothing to do with the amount of AQ's. They made the last expansion be bubble teams playing each other, because obviously those games are more attractive to television than two 16 seeds battling it out.

The NCAA is all about money, always has and always will.
 
SonofaSailor said:
Ok, well then put me on record...if they expand the NCAA tournament further...they might as well just call the whole thing off...it will be a joke.

Teams with losing conference records will be making it...
Click to expand...

Seriously get a clue...teams with losing conference records get in now...just like last year.

Just stop it is embarrassing.
 
Lock is probably a little strong, but I'd say 80/20 Iowa's in. Most bubble teams didn't exactly grab the bull by the horns this year.
 
SonofaSailor said:
Here is the thing though...is the "play-in" really a tournament bid? IF you win that game you are in the tournament...that's why it is called a "PLAY-IN". As someone else said...if we consider that part of the tournament...couldn't we now say that all of the conference tournaments are "play-in"?

It's an interesting question I guess...
Click to expand...

It's only called a play in game by the media and fans.
 
My head says we're in as most evidence out there says we are. Nearly every bracketologist has us in and our resume is just good enough but ****, every piece of logic said that we wouldn't go 1-6 to end the ******* season.

I'm just going to be nervous as hell tonight though.
 
ssckelley said:
It is not BS, it is expansion and the NCAA is not done. So those of you that keep wanting to tear down the first round games and say they are "play in" are in denial and as the NCAA keeps expanding your claims of the first round being "play in" will look more and more ridicules. Those games are officially known as the "First Four" and the are officially the first round of the NCAA tournament.

Back in 1983 (52 teams) and 1984 (53 teams) they had a "preliminary round" with play in games. It was not until 1985 they had 64 teams in the NCAA tournament. It would be silly for some old guy to keep saying the (now) 2nd round games being called "play in".
Click to expand...

I won't be calling it the first round because that means 60 teams get a bye. But I will call them pig tail games or a preliminary round as I just won't accept that only 8 teams play in the 1st round. Let's just call it the non-elite eight.
 
I don't really get the point in getting so hung up on the semantics of the first round. Everyone knows it's ****** to play in that game, especially if you were in contention for the conference crown in one of the most elite conferences in the country just a month ago.
 
I will never see the 1st games as anything more than play in games.

Bye's would be if the gave the top 8 seeds 1st round bye's not 60 teams.
 
Foval21 said:
I won't be calling it the first round because that means 60 teams get a bye. But I will call them pig tail games or a preliminary round as I just won't accept that only 8 teams play in the 1st round. Let's just call it the non-elite eight.
Click to expand...

You can call it whatever you want but officially the first four games are the 1st round. It will not be long when that 1st round will be 5, 6, 7, 8 (on and on) games so at some point you will have to decide when you want to stop being in denial. The NCAA would not have called the first 4 games as first round if they did not have future expansion in mind. Like I've said in 2011 they damn near made it a field of 96, it would have been pretty silly to call those first 32 games "play in", "preliminary", or "pig tail" don't you think?
 
The play in games are not required to be input in order to fill out a bracket on Yahoo, therefore they are NOT part of the tournament. The tournament begins on Thursday. Period. Full stop. No one calls in sick for work to watch play in games. We don't roll TVs into our conference room to watch play in games. No one cares about them. They are glorified NIT games. If we play in one and lose, Barta better not hang a participation banner in Carver.
 
bcl20 said:
I don't really get the point in getting so hung up on the semantics of the first round. Everyone knows it's ****** to play in that game, especially if you were in contention for the conference crown in one of the most elite conferences in the country just a month ago.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I would not be making that big deal about it if people were not on here suggesting that if Iowa plays in the 1st round they are not "in" the tournament. That first round game is not an extension of the regular season, it is a tournament game. If it was another regular season game then the loser should get to go to the NIT (which would be kinda neat).
 
okeefe4prez said:
The play in games are not required to be input in order to fill out a bracket on Yahoo, therefore they are NOT part of the tournament. The tournament begins on Thursday. Period. Full stop. No one calls in sick for work to watch play in games. We don't roll TVs into our conference room to watch play in games. No one cares about them. They are glorified NIT games. If we play in one and lose, Barta better not hang a participation banner in Carver.
Click to expand...

I don't think the NCAA has anything to do with all these bracket contests that people enter. If the contest chooses to not require you to pick a winner in the 1st round that does not mean the first four games are not considered tournament games.

As far as a banner is concerned perhaps they should take down all the ones where they lost in the 1st round. If being included in a field of 68 is embarrassing then so should a field of 64, not much of a difference there.
 
I'm tired of the 1-6 in the last 7. I'm sick of Nebraska deserves it more. I know it's hard for some to remember but we played this team and we beat this team. The entire season counts. Big 10 standings don't matter. See last year.

We played a solid schedule. We beat some good teams. We have a lot of talent on our roster. There is also this. We were 4-6 on the road and 3-2 on neutral courts.
 
tweeterhawk said:
I would encourage you to lock up the sharp knives and any weapons you might own; stay away from high windows and surround yourselves with friends and loved ones as the NCAA brackets are read this afternoon. I am very dubious about the Hawks making it to the dance this year.

The season that once looked so promising totally collapsed in the final seven games. A record of 1-6 with a quick exit from the BTT -- to Northwestern, of all teams -- will not impress the selection committee. And it would not surprise me if the NCAA wanted to send a message to Gary Barta and Fran McCaffery for McCaffery to clean up his act next year by doing no favors to a bubble Iowa team.

USA Today has us one of the last five teams in, likely putting Iowa in a play-in bracket. It could be a brutal afternoon; for those waiting to get good news, please keep things in perspective and do not harm anyone, pets or yourself if your expectations are not met.

USA TODAY Sports' NCAA tournament Bracketology
Click to expand...
Is that all you have? Iowa is 1-6 in their last 7. Come on, it's about the whole season not the last 7. It hurt their seeding not their tournament life. I'll bet you our account on here. If Iowa is in then you go away. If they're out, I'll go away. I'll make that bet with anyone interested. Any takers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top