Big 12 Women unbeaten

I REALLY HATE this reseeding idea!

The seeds are what they are, stop mucking with a good system.

Changing seeds because some lower seed gets hot and “should have been higher” or to try to get what someone (who?!?!!) considers a better, competitive bracket than it would otherwise be because some top seeds lost and messed up the “chalk” is RIDICULOUS and UNFAIR to lower seeds who win in R1 & R2!

The real excitement of these tournaments — unless you are a fan of a blue blood — is watching the underdogs advance.

Reseeding is nothing more than an effort to minimize that possibility.

No system is perfect, seeding errors are arguably made every year, but all in all it’s a good system.

I HATE assholes who insist on changing the rules in the middle of the game! ANY game!!

STHU and leave a solid system ALONE!

Pardon my language, and thank you very much for your consideration and patience,

USAF Jayhawk wrote: It's not a real thing, just another puff piece by ESPN to get clicks.

Yeah, I know. Started years ago with them, think the first time I read it was a Metcalf article. Hated the idea then and time has not ameliorated that hate.

My concern is they keep bringing it up and eventually some dim bulb in the powers-that-be might be tempted to try it.

And in spite of my reaction I’m glad port posted it because such fecal matter needs to be addressed and disposed of ASAP.

So thanks porthawk and no worries here. Keep on posting, the articles and ideas you present are appreciated! All a-ok here, amigo!

USAF Jayhawk wrote: There's been talk for years of resetting the Final four matchups based on seed (to be clear, not reseeding). Logistically, that would make building brackets impossible past the elite 8.

Thankfully that logistical drawback will probably remain the biggest stumbling block in that contrived suggestion ever being implemented. Again, that change would punish lower seeds who played themselves into the most favorable positions they could by WINNING while the 1 seeds in their regions failed to advance.

For example — two 1 seeds advance to face each other in one NSF, while 2 lower seeds face each other on the other side of the NSF bracket. If the FF is rearranged so the 1 seeds each face a lower seeded team both those lower seeded teams are put in tougher tracks simply because their regions 1 seeds failed to survive.

Nothing like punishing success.

“But it’s criminal that Blueblood1 and Blueblood2 meet in the NSF and not the title game. That’s the matchup everyone really wants to see.”

Actually I’d be willing to bet that more people would be happy to have one of them eliminated by the other to increase the odds of neither one of them winning.

Screw the television people and their quest for “the best matchup” to televise in the title game. For most people who are not fans of a blue blood it’s the chance to see a new school on the championship dais that brings them to watch the FF. Only the blue blood school fans want to see their favorite win another trophy. I’m all for leaving things alone, especially when it increases the chance for a lower seed to advance.

NCAAT fans love Cinderella, at least until she is playing their school.