Why We're Headed To The Dreaded Play-in Game

[UNTflyer]

Attendance for the conference championships

Mid-Con: 4,877

Horizon League: 10,686

West Coast Conference: 4,621

Colonial Athletic Conference: 11,200

MAAC: 2,746

NORTHEAST CONF: No official numbers yet, but it looked like a crowd of at least 10,000

Sun Belt: 409

[CMJ]

NORTHEAST CONF: No official numbers yet, but it looked like a crowd of at least 10,000

That gym only seats about 3K. So it musta been 3500.

[NT03]

On College Game Night on ESPN , they just said NT was headed to the play in game. Surely , this can't already be confirmed can it ?? Anyone else hear it ??

[Coach]

Ok I am posting without checking facts, which sometimes doesn't turn out so well...

Wasn't the Horizon game the Wright State/Butler game? That was on Wright State's home court, and they won the right to host it. Should the Sun Belt start doing the same thing? This would put a big emphasis on the regular season and reward good records with a chance to host games. It will also mean much better attendance. There are probably good reasons it isn't done this way, but I'm not familiar with the logistics and economic factors of college sports enough to know them.

Also, I'm pretty sure the commitee doesn't look at attendance. They led the media through a mock selection sunday process a couple of weeks ago, and I don't recall reading from any of the media involved that attendance was considered. They were actually suprised at the things that weren't considered (most notably how many teams each conference has in, which the media makes a big deal of annually).

[CMJ]

On College Game Night on ESPN , they just said NT was headed to the play in game. Surely , this can't already be confirmed can it ?? Anyone else hear it ??

It's not confirmed, but it's looking more and more likely as the 1 seeds in the Mid Major Tourney's keep winning. I'm not sure if we'd jump ahead of UNA, but everyone has us behind Weber State.

Which of course means Weber is winning right now.

[UNTflyer]

That gym only seats about 3K. So it musta been 3500.

Ahh, I didn't think it was that small. It was definitely packed.

Yes, we're going to the play-in game because the Sun Belt is the ugly stepsister to all these Cinderella conferences. The Selection Committee is going to take one look at the SBC attendence and go "Ok, there's one of our #17 seeds..."

[Baby Arm!]

Nothing is confirmed until selection Sunday

[UNTflyer]

That was on Wright State's home court, and they won the right to host it. Should the Sun Belt start doing the same thing?

Yes, it's the only way the SBC tournament is going to make money.

[UNTflyer]

Also, I'm pretty sure the commitee doesn't look at attendance. They led the media through a mock selection sunday process a couple of weeks ago, and I don't recall reading from any of the media involved that attendance was considered.

They will certainly not say so publicly, but the goal of the committee is to make the best tournament for the NCAA (and make money doing it).

[SUMG]

They will certainly not say so publicly, but the goal of the committee is to make the best tournament for the NCAA (and make money doing it).

How does 409 fans at our conference tournament final.....affect how much money is made at the NCAA tournament? All the NCAA tourney games are sold out, at every site, as far as I know. Anyway, I agree with Coach. I think, as far as where we are seeded....our conference tourney attendance will not be a part of the equation.

Maybe start asking that whoever schedules our b-ball games, make the schedule (OOC) tougher next year. Our weak OOC schedule this year isn't helping a bit in this current situation (where we'll be seeded).

[Keith7]

don't think attendence is a big factor in determining match ups.. I saw the opening round last year at the AAC in dallas last year, and the first game only had that arena half full (Cal vs. NC State), and the 2nd had it about 3/4s full (Texas vs. Pennsylvania).. I went to the Big 12 championship last year too at the ACC in dallas and that was more full..

The teams will be seeded by how good they are and their strength of schedule.. It wasn't UNT's fault that the game was 700 miles away in the middle of mid-term week

[UNTflyer]

There's more revenue for the NCAA than ticket sales (and you have to buy the package when you get tickets). There's TV revenues, concession sales, souveniers, etc. The play-in game was a bad idea and puts the 4th #16 seed at a huge disadvantage having to play in Dayton and then rush off to whatever city the winner has to travel to.

I guess the one thing going for us is that a Sun Belt team has never been placed into the play-in game.

But this reveals a big disadvantage for us being in the Sun Belt. It's such a young conference and it can't market very well. Lafayette is within driving distance of several major cities. I guess they spend all their money promoting the N'Orleans Bowl.

[SUMG]

It's such a young conference and it can't market very well. Lafayette is within driving distance of several major cities. I guess they spend all their money promoting the N'Orleans Bowl.

Young conference for football, but not for b-ball. The league has been around for 30 years. (The Sun Belt had a Final Four team back in 1977).

[UNTflyer]

Young conference for football, but not for b-ball. The league has been around for 30 years. (The Sun Belt had a Final Four team back in 1977).

I mean young as in the teams that joined since the "Great Migration of 1991".

[greenminer]

NIT will take into consideration attendance, but not the NCAA.

Those conferences get nice bball attendance numbers because most of them have no football program to speak of. It's a little bit easier to take ownership of a team when there aren't any other shows in town, or across campus for that matter.

[Green Mean]

Lets say we do play in the play-in game....Wont that still be big? I mean I am thinking it will be on national tv somewhere which will mean more exposure and more opportunity for people in the nation to see that we have a very athletic and exciting team. And plus if we play in that game we wont play a powerhouse will we? I think we may play someone from MVC or something....so I think I still like my chances. What do you guys think?

[UNTflyer]

Well, don't get me wrong. I don't like the play-in game, but no matter WHERE UNT lands it's good for us.

We're either going to play the play-in game on Tuesday in front of the entire country, or we're going to play a No.1 or No. 2 seed in prime time on Thursday/Friday.

Either way, we're going to get a recruiting boost and next year will be a better year for our attendance.

[SUMG]

Lets say we do play in the play-in game....Wont that still be big? I mean I am thinking it will be on national tv somewhere which will mean more exposure and more opportunity for people in the nation to see that we have a very athletic and exciting team. And plus if we play in that game we wont play a powerhouse will we? I think we may play someone from MVC or something....so I think I still like my chances. What do you guys think?

We wouldn't be playing anyone from the MVC. We'd playing a school that most folks would have never heard of (or know much about). Yes, the game is on national TV and you would get exposure.

But, what if you lose? And your 2007 tournament experience consists of a loss to a school like Central Conneticut State, a MEAC school or a Mississippi Valley State? How would that be? And don't tell me that losing to a school like that isn't possible....it is.

So, if we have to play the damn play-in game.......we'll deal with it. But, I sure the heck am hoping we avoid it.

And by the way UNT Flyer......the winner of the play-in game HAS TO PLAY A NUMBER ONE SEED. There's no chance that it would be a 2. As a matter of fact, the play-in winner would be playing the top seed of the four #1 seeds.

[NT91]

Play in game blows!

[UNTflyer]

And by the way UNT Flyer......the winner of the play-in game HAS TO PLAY A NUMBER ONE SEED. There's no chance that it would be a 2. As a matter of fact, the play-in winner would be playing the top seed of the four #1 seeds.

Yes, I know... I said we're either going to be in the play-in game, or we're going to play a No.1 or No. 2 seed (if we are placed into a #16 or #15 slot)

[SUMG]

Yes, I know... I said we're either going to be in the play-in game, or we're going to play a No.1 or No. 2 seed (if we are placed into a #16 or #15 slot)

I'm sorry, I read that wrong. My bad, as you kids say.

[Greenblood94]

I just spent some time browsing the NCAA webpage for Principles and Procedures for Establishing the Men's Bracket.

To say the least, it is a complicated process, but there were some interesting things I got out of it. Among them were:

• At no point in the process may an athletic director or commissioner on the selection committee vote for a team he/she represents.
• When 24 or fewer teams remain in the pool of teams, a member may not participate in "list X teams" votes if a team he/she represents as a commissioner or athletics director is included. An athletics director or commissioner may not participate in cross-country votes (i.e., ballots where the members rank a selected number of teams) that involve a team the individual represents.
• All votes will be by secret ballot.
• At any time during the process, the chair may request a "nitty-gritty" report, which compares teams that are under consideration.
• Among the resources available to the committee are computer rankings, head-to-head results, chronological results, Division I results, non-conference results, home and away results, results in the last 10 games, polls and the coaches' regional advisory committees' rankings.

The last item answers whether attendance in conference tournaments is considered. It obviously is not.

The procedures for seeding the 65 teams is a bit nebulous, but basically they are voted on eight teams at a time, with the lowest four being seeded 61-65, then another four teams are added to the top four and voted on, with the lowest four being added to the bottom of the seed list, and so on until all 65 teams are seeded. I'm still a bit foggy as to how this one is really achieved.

Seeds 64 and 65 are put in the "Opening Round" game, as the NCAA calls it, and the winner faces a #1 seed playing at a Friday-Sunday first round site. There is no NCAA mandate that says the Opening Round winner plays the "top #1 seed", since that team may be placed in a Thursday-Saturday first-round site, but it will still be a #1 seeded opponent.

To try and achieve an overall balanced bracket in each region, there are principles involved for placing teams within each region. For instance, with regard to the first and second rounds:

--A team cannot play in an arena where it has played more than three regular-season games, excluding conference post-season tournaments.

--A host institution cannot play at the site where the institution is hosting (for instance, Washington State would not play in Spokane, even though they are not from there, because they are the host at that location.)

--With regard to conferences, each of the first three teams selected from a conference must be placed in different regions; there cannot be more than two conference teams in the same region (unless nine teams from a conference are selected), and those two teams cannot meet prior to the regional final.

There are also considerations like avoiding rematches of regular-season games and the previous year's tournament games in the first two rounds if possible.

It's very possible to get tired head reading these guidelines, but it does give some insight as to how the teams are seeded and end up where they do.

I wouldn't want North Texas in the play-in, oops, opening round game, but its out of our control. If it happens, they'll deal with it the best they can.

[SUMG]

Good info, Green Blood.

I wonder who all are on the committee this year? It would sure help if there was someone from the Sun Belt on there, but I have no clue if there is.

[Greenblood94]

I wonder who all are on the committee this year? It would sure help if there was someone from the Sun Belt on there, but I have no clue if there is.

Ask and you shall receive:

NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Committee

Christopher Hill, Athletic Director, University of Utah (Mountain West Conference), Term Expires 9/2009

Craig K. Little Page, Athletic Director, University of Virginia (Atlantic Coast Conference), Term Expires 9/2007

Daniel G. Guerrero, Athletic Director, University of California-Los Angeles (Pacific Ten Conference), Term Expires 9/2010

Eugene Smith, Athletic Director, The Ohio State University (Big Ten Conference), Term Expires 9/2011

Laing E. Kennedy, Athletic Director, Kent State University (Mid-American Conference), Term Expires 9/2010

Michael L. Slive, Commissioner, Southeastern Conference, Term Expires 9/2009

Gary D. Walters, Athletic Director, Princeton University (Ivy Group), Term Expires 9/2007

Stanley M. Morrison, Athletic Director, University of California-Riverside (Big West Conference), Term Expires 9/2011

Thomas J. O'Connor, Athletic Director, George Mason University (Colonial Athletic Association), Term Expires 9/2009

Jonathan B. LeCrone, Commissioner, Horizon League, Term Expires 9/2008

Each member serves a five-year term.