Normally the first day has at least a few upsets.

Yesterday the match-ups were boring and only VCU/Wichita State was a good upset. UNC-ASH vs. 'Cuse was a good game also.

The rest. borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring.

Maybe the upsets will come today?

I thought there was some really good basketball. Day one of the tourney? Never boring! I liked Iowa St. beating UConn. I liked seeing Murray St. Very impressive team. I liked Gonzaga taking WVU apart. Seeing Huggins at boiling point is always good viewing. Kansas St. beating S. Miss. was a good game.

Great day!

Not really. The field had many solid teams. Just b/c the seeds were generally correct, doesn't mean it's bad.

Of course the Wrestling Championships are where the real action is. PSU looks good, but I've been really taken w/ Minnesota's style. IIRC, their coach comes from Okla St. Obviously Sanderson is from ISU. But there are 4 Big 10 coaches from Iowa, and a few others from their Big 10 alma maters. Seeing style differences is an interesting study.

there just wasn't a lot of exciting matchups. No real Cinderellas. I liked UNC-ASH (a very strong 16) vs 'Cuse. VCU vs. Wichita.

The BEST matchups, IMHO, could be today such as Ohio vs UofM, maybe UofDetroit vs. Kansas, etc.

I like the 'upset specials' in the first round. Then in round two and beyond, it is good quality hoops.

I am going to be in attendance tonight for what I think is the best first round matchup: Memphis vs. St. Louis. The second game is Mich St. and LIU-Brooklyn which may allow me to get out of the parking lot early...

This year hasn't captured my interest as much as previous years. It's probably b/c I'm getting older, can't watch as much...too many kids/family obligations, etc... Whatever. Even the upsets aren't too major unless it's a #1 over 16 or 2 over 15. There is so much parity out there. The smaller or lesser known programs get kids to stay 4 years and have more experience than a lot of the huge programs.

(03-16-2012 06:10 AM)emu steve Wrote:  Normally the first day has at least a few upsets.

Yesterday the match-ups were boring and only VCU/Wichita State was a good upset. UNC-ASH vs. 'Cuse was a good game also.

The rest. borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring.

Maybe the upsets will come today?

Colorado beating UNLV was definitely an upset ((68-64)
Lots of close games (Harvard-Vandy, Baylor-SD ST, Lville-davidson, KSU-USM) and hellacious matchups coming in round 2:

NM-Lville
Murray St-Marquette
FL-Mizzou
Wisky-Cincy
Zaga-OSU


The upsets have been in the NIT with Minnesota(LaSalle) UMASS(MSU) UNI(St Joe's) Bucknell(AZ), Nevada (ORU) & ISU(OleMiss) winning on the road. I'll bet there has never been an NIT opening round when as many as 6 of the 16 home teams lost.

Quick question:

Does anyone think the NCAA should go to 128 teams and the highest 64 host home games in the first round?

Eliminate the NIT, CBI, and CIT.

I've heard this idea tossed around, but I'm not sure how I feel about it?

No way should a 1 play a 32 on its home floor. Neutral courts make the tourney.

(03-16-2012 01:46 PM)EA3 Wrote:  Quick question:

Does anyone think the NCAA should go to 128 teams and the highest 64 host home games in the first round?

Also in the NIT first round Seton Hall survived Stony Brook by 63-61 and Northwestern got by Akron 76-74. 6 higher seeds lost at home and 2 more survived by 2 pts each. SEC had 4 teams in, now down to 1.

Second round matchups include Bucknell and Nevada, 2 teams that won a combined 50 games pre tourney this year, Mid TN vs UTN and UMASS vs Seton Hall.

The only good arguments that I've heard supporting 128 teams and home court games in first round are:

1. a 32 seed probably shouldn't be in the tourney anyhow...what's the difference between home and neutral courts in that matchups?
2. 64 teams are guaranteed a home game that is a sellout. Which is refreshing news if you are a team in the CIT and just forked over 30k to play at home and only got a few thousand people to show up.
3. The teams in the middle #40-80 are widely debated on whethe or not they should be in the tourney. This gives them a chance to earn it on the court.

I'm not advocating this idea. It's just an idea. I like part of it...but I really like the current format.

i dont think you need upsets for a good tourney

Does a #15 winning pep ya up?!?

128 teams means that teams 110-120 in the RPI are "on the bubble"

Blergh.

(03-16-2012 06:27 AM)axeme Wrote:  I thought there was some really good basketball. Day one of the tourney? Never boring! I liked Iowa St. beating UConn. I liked seeing Murray St. Very impressive team. I liked Gonzaga taking WVU apart. Seeing Huggins at boiling point is always good viewing. Kansas St. beating S. Miss. was a good game.

Great day!

I'm still not convinced that meets the 'community standard' for "March Madness".

I think Norfolk State over Mizzou or Ohio over UofM or Lehigh over Duke are what folks hope to see...

How bout two #15 winning? Never happened before in same tourney I would guess. Tell me, did anyone here have Norfolk and/or Lehigh on their bracket??

(03-16-2012 09:19 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  How bout two #15 winning? Never happened before in same tourney I would guess. Tell me, did anyone here have Norfolk and/or Lehigh on their bracket??

Its worth noting that 15 seeds these days are more like 14 seeds of years gone by.

One reason is there are 6 schools at 16. The other is that most low major conferences have expanded and become deeper in men's basketball.