shotgun blog endorses the proposal:

Take the last four at-large teams selected by the committee and pit them vs the next four at-large candidates that did not make the cut in the selection room Sunday night.
Example: Based on the seeding, the last four at-large bids were awarded to #12 UTEP, #12 Utah State, #11 Minnesota, and #10 Florida.
Let's assume, for argument sake, the next four at-large candidates that didn't make it were Virginia Tech, Mississippi St, Illinois and Rhode Island.
Simply pair them off for four play-in games tonight.
UTEP vs Virginia Tech
Utah St vs Mississippi St
Minnesota vs Rhode Island
Florida vs Rhode Island
============================================

Problem is you forget that teams are placed in regionals not always by ranking. Yes the top 4 teams are #1 but after that sometimes teams get moved around based on Conference, Region their from, and even to accommodate for others.

Next problem is that teams like UTEP, Minn, and Florida are in the same regional this year and for instance UTEP is only there cause they are from out west when they could possibly be a #9 seed in the committees minds in the other regionals and have another team be the last 4 in.

Lets say you make all the teams #12 well what happens to Cornell then? They were placed into the East Regional for a reason cause they are from there. They now get shipped out to the west? How is this fair just to get a play-in game for 4 teams that don't make the tournament normally?

The only thing that makes sense is play-in games to include the bottom seeds that can't be shifted around anyways. You aren't moving a 15 seed to a 16 seed to just get them close to home, but 10 seeds can become 12 or 9 seeds can become 11 just to get them into a better situation with location and in jive with their other conference mates.

Ole Miss and UAB fans won't be happy with this.

This eliminates nothing to me.

All this worrying about the 50th-70th best teams crap has to stop.

You want to get in the tournament?!? Beat some people in the top 10 or 20, schedule some difficult non-conference games, or, here's an idea, why don't you just be one of the top 30 teams in the country... or else you roll the dice against the other wannabes that will get skunked in the first two rounds.

Or just STFU.

Quote: Originally posted by toddcommish on 3/16/2010All this worrying about the 50th-70th best teams crap has to stop. You want to get in the tournament?!?  Beat some people in the top 10 or 20, schedule some difficult non-conference games, or, here's an idea, why don't you just be one of the top 30 teams in the country... or else you roll the dice against the other wannabes that will get skunked in the first two rounds.Or just STFU.

if you don't want to discuss this then you don't have to. People care about if and if you don't then whatever but don't try to tell people what to do. If the want to talk about the bubble teams they can.

I just say eliminate the play in game and go back to 64.

Quote: Originally Posted By gators55 on 3/16/2010Ole Miss and UAB fans won't be happy with this.

This eliminates nothing to me

I understand what you're saying, but don't really agree.

If, after they've already picked the top 60, you're not designated as one of the next eight ... well, to quote a brilliant, modern-day philosopher ... "just STFU".

I have to agree with the sentiment. I love talking NCAA tournament, but figuring out ways to get 66, 68, 72, 96 or 128 teams in the tourney is silly... If a team isn't an obvious choice using today's criteria, no proposal will change things so that they have any shot in hell of winning. adding teams just gives coaches more security and like the Papa John's Bowl lets some fans think they have a good team

Just keep it as it is. The tournament is already great, and why tamper with something that's already great? There will always be teams that will be out, so no matter what the committee does there will always be angry fans. We should just let the tourney be.

Quote: Originally posted by gators55 on 3/16/2010Ole Miss and UAB fans won't be happy with this.

This eliminates nothing to me.

Then they should have done something about it during the season so they weren't in that situation.

The dance isn't for 'every team' and I really dislike expansion but this idea that mets has been saying really does accomplish what many want , while keeping the tournament something that you have to work towards.

If this idea was actually a reality I think it works well as when it comes to Selection Sunday we are really only talking about 6-8 teams for 3-4 spots so now all those would get in, sure you can argue that that creates a 'new bubble', which is true but those teams usually have less impressive resumes then those first two-three ' outs'.

I think the play-in game is grossly unfair to auto-qualifiers out there. I'd much rather have two big conference suckbags duke it out to get in the tournament than take away a kid's dream at UA-PB or Winthrop.

I agree, jslotman. Let the at-large teams duke it out.

The tournament's been tweaked over the years but I think it's pretty close to ideal. Not to say the NCAA hasn't had some bone-head ideas. There was one season when they decided to seed the teams according to how their conferences had done in the previous tournament. I think UCLA and Kansas met in the first round...that was the end of the experiment.