Play in games are very important

ibahawkeye said:
No trolling... I was against adding the 4 teams and the play in games from the start.

I stick to the matrix of the field of 64... You can do whatever you please...
Click to expand...

Still playing those 8 track tapes or have you moved on to cassette yet?
 
THERE ARE NO PLAY IN GAMES. Cripes, how often does this have to be pointed out? The Hawks are in. Period. End of discussion.
 
ibahawkeye said:
You realize they're only considered part of the tourney as am attempt to draw viewers and ultimetely drive tv $$??
Click to expand...

Yes, of course it is. When they expand it further it will be for money as well. But that still does not change the fact Iowa is playing in the NCAA tournament, the field of 68.

NCAA is all about money, no question about it.
 
doclee said:
Please explain: If we are not officially into the NCAA tournament at this point, why did we receive a seeding number of 11? As a matter of fact, why are we seeded higher than several teams that you seem to define as actually in the tournament? Yet, we are not "in." I rely on your superior knowledge on the matter of the NCAA basketball tournament to be brought forth so that I can also define Iowa as "not in." Thanks!
Click to expand...


You are in. If I understand correctly, you are in as one of the last 8 at-large bids, as opposed to an automatic bid. Thus, some teams received an automatic bid, but are seeded lower than the play-in games.
 
We are "in" the tournament, it just happens that we play in the first round of it instead of the second. There are no "play-ins" technically.
 
This program is lucky to get this chance! After the lackluster performance in the B10 tournament and late season skid the panel is setting up a storyline for Duke. Either they get a hot sec team of late, a "talented" but messed up Iowa team, or the 6 seed but we all know the drama and storyline lies with this play in game,,
 
First off, I'm very glad the Hawks have another chance to play in a game that is not the NIT, but playing in the "1st round" just doesn't feel the same. I'm going to say that the Hawks made the tournament, but if they lose Wednesday it'll be hard a month from now to say they were the 11th seed. Hopefully they can squash all that Wednesday night.
 
Filling out my brackets and I don't see these "important" play in games listed? Whar important games, whar?
 
The entire concept of the play in games is a stupid money grab by the NCAA. I will always call them play in games so don't bother trying to correct me.
 
Did any of us watch the play in games last year? Yeah me neither. It won't stop me from going to the game and being excited about our chances but if we lose it'll feel like we weren't really there. It'll feel a lot like almost winning the NIT which no one watches or cares about.
 
sioux34 said:
The entire concept of the play in games is a stupid money grab by the NCAA. I will always call them play in games so don't bother trying to correct me.
Click to expand...

I know I used it in the thread title, but as I had time to reflect further, I think the term needs to be stricken from the lexicon, similar to the R-word and "bossy." It really denigrates the accomplishments of the kids who fought so hard to get that far and that is not what college sports is all about. We need to reward, not ostracize, participation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top