This isn’t about which team gets which seed (based on record, strength of schedule, and current wind direction in Sri Lanka).
Ok, so there are 4 regions: South, East, West and Midwest. Why no North? Though I suppose Midwest is a decent substitute for North.
Why did Wisconsin get the #1 seed in the SOUTH? I get that not every team is put in the best matching region, but why not the #1 seed? is it based on the majority of teams, or the current price of barley futures?
Also, why are the first games in the South region being played in Seattle? (unless I heard that incorrectly). can’t get much less south in the contiguous US .
Thanks,
Brian
(was at UW-Platteville at the same time as Bo Ryan was basketball coach)
My understanding is that the committee first picks the best four teams, ranks them in order, and then gives the very best team the most geographically logical region, then the second best, and so on. So Wisconsin was probably considered the fourth-best team and had to take what was left over. With regard to lower seeds, they apparently put more consideration on putting them in the “right” region geographically. Why South regional games are being played in Seattle I will leave for someone else.
I remember years ago there was Mideast Region but I don’t think that would fly these days.
I can’t figure out why in some regions two 16 seeds are in the play-in game and in some regions two 11 seeds are in the play-in game. Why do some 16 seeds get to skip the play-in while some better seeded teams have to play the extra game in Dayton?
And of course, in scheduling it is absolutely essential that Duke doesn’t have to leave its home state in the first two rounds.
The last 4 ranked teams (68, 67, 66, 65) that earned a bid, all 16 seeds, have to play in a play-in game. The next 2 (64, 63) get to skip the play in game. Those teams all earned automatic bids by winning their conference.
The last 4 at large teams by ranking, seeded 11 or 12 usually, all have to play in a play in game.
Why? Well the tournament used to be just 64 teams. Then a conference was added to the NCAA. That conference earned an automatic bid, but the NCAA did not want to take away an at large bid, so they expanded to 65 teams and the two worst teams had to play in the play in game. A few years back, they decided to expand by 3 more teams, mostly from pressure from coaches and AD’s who liked to keep their jobs by making the tournament.
As far as regions and the South region playing in the west, there is a reason for that as well.
The regions really refer to the Sweet 16 and Elite 8, where the games are actually played in a city in that region. For the first two rounds of the tournament (round of 64 and 32), the created the pod system about 10 years ago. The objective is to keep teams closer to home (giving priority to the better seeded team) to reduce travel costs and fatigue and to give fans easier access to games in the early rounds (which are not as easy to sell tickets to, or wasn’t before the pod system). It does make things a little awkward, but I think it actually works.
Yes, this play-in scenario is just dumb. If there have to be 4 play-in games, make it the 4 16 seeds! I mean, seriously, having to play on Tuesday or Wednesday is clearly a disadvantage. Why burden 11 seed teams that disadvantage when there are plenty of worse seeded teams?
I’m especially burned up about this as a Dayton Flyer fan this year. First, they got jobbed with an 11 seed, and to add insult to injury they have to play an early play-in game. At least it’s on home court, but that’s of little comfort.
I think the regions are what they are because of a balance issue - remember, something like 80% of the people live in the eastern half of the country. There would also be arguments as to what “north” and “south” should be. (Note that “South” was originally “Southeast,” which is what it really is.)
As for how the #1 teams are seeded, somebody already mentioned this; the overall #1 seed is put into its closest region, and Lexington, KY is closer to Cleveland (site of the Mideast regional final) than to Houston (South), Syracuse (North), or Los Angeles (West). The #2 overall seed is put into whichever of the remaining three is closest to its campus, then the #3 overall seed is put into the closer of the remaining two.
As for first weekend games not being played in their listed regions, they did play within the regions for a long time, but somebody felt that it was asking too much of the better teams’ fans to have to travel across the country for two consecutive weekends, so they invented what is called the “pod” system; each of the eight first weekend host two blocks of four teams, based mainly on putting the #1 seeds near their campuses first, then the #2 teams, then the #3 teams, and finally the #4 teams.
And if you’re wondering why the “first two” rounds are called the “second round” and “third round”; it’s because the NCAA was tired of everybody calling the Dayton games “play-in” games, as it implied that the losers were not NCAA tournament teams. (Some people - Jim Rome comes to mind - have, in fact, said that the 16 seeds that lose in Dayton should not be considered tournament teams, and the winners should not be allowed to claim that they have won an NCAA tournament game.) In the future, the NCAA is supposed to go back to calling them the “first round” and “second round.”
As much as I hate to say it, I agree with Jim Rome. The “first round” is really just a play-in. They’re playing for the right to compete in the tournament. The real first round is when teams play the appropriately seeded opposition. Two 16 seeds facing off is not a first round game. If you don’t win the play-in game, you don’t get in the tournament.
Then let’s make the tournament 96 teams. Guess what? The 16 and 17 seeds play each other, with the winner playing a #1 seed in the round of 64. Are the 16 and 17 seeds all in the tournament now?
The only problem I have with the system is, the winner of a “16 seed game” gets an extra full share of the TV money for the next six years (well, its conference does, anyway). That’s rewarding a team for being the #63 team in the tournament over being the #62 team.