Guest post: A Rant on the First Four

This post comes courtesy of BIAH tweep @dscribefreeman, who needed more than 140 characters to speak his mind on the First Four.

Midway through March Madness, and we already have a bevy of magical moments, blown calls, phantom calls, missed calls (cause Sprint gets bad service in the Verizon Center), Big East Beast missteps, and Belle’s galore. But what is most over-looked in the rubble that is the average sports fan’s bracket (i.e. mine) is the gross misuse of the "First Four"; the play-in games.

I could spend a day elaborating on the foolishness of the idea behind the "First Four", but honestly twitter has made me leery of things over 140 characters so here are a few tweets in writing as cliff notes:

• You got teams who already earned the right to play in the tournament playing to re-earn the right to play in the tournament.
• How the f--k do 60 out of 68 teams get a first round bye?
• Who really wants to see two teams we never heard about or seen until a week ago battle it out to see who gets their ass whopped by a College Basketball Super Giant? (that one may need twitlonger)
• You still got teams running amok in the NIT who probably deserved a valid shot at the tourney over a team who backed in barely.

The solution: we make the "First Four" play-in games. Now, I don’t know if the NCAA uses a different unabridged version of Webster’s word compendium, but I mean actual play-in games, not these sad puppy gladiator battles to see who gets picked last in the middle school kick ball game. Every year there is talk of the last four in, the last four out, and then the impending snubs. Why not just make the last four in, play the last four out to earn the right to get their at-large bid into the actual 64 team tournament. Four Play-in Games. This solves so much!

1. You're no longer forcing lesser conference tourney winners who already earned their right to play in the tournament to re-earn the right to play in the tournament. And on the same note, you still get your 1 vs 16 style "cake-walk" match-up those top teams "earned."

2. Your create a buffer zone of error for the selection committee. Instead of them having to go through an error prone and subjective process of widdling out teams who by all means may not have much in common to compare, you give them a chance to say "Hey, of these 8 teams, we are unsure of which ones really deserve this. So play for it, earn it, and prove you deserve to be here over the others." No one can claim to be snubbed if they lose fair and square in a 40 minute fight under the lights.

3. (One the NCAA will love!) You turn the "First Four" into a cash cow. No one wants to see the Eastern Shore of the Placida College Bean Bags take on the Bumble F--k State Cicada's. (The games were on TRUtv! In SD! Because no one cared!) But I guarantee Virginia Tech vs USC, or Clemson vs Alabama would have got huge viewership, which leads to sponsors, which leads to better TV slots, which leads to Mo’ Money Mo’ Money Mo’ Money Mo’! And how can they argue with money? It’s the real reason they expanded the tournament in the first place, right?

4. This actually shakes up the bracket system. Whats more dangerous during March Madness: a dominant 1-4 seed who didn’t get tested much during the season, or a 6-13 seed (maybe even a 3 like UConn?) that comes in on a winning streak or off a big win and now has some confidence -- dare I say swagger? -- about themselves? I’ll give you a few hints: one is represented by the likes of Purdue and Pittsburgh. The other? Butler and VCU.

5. I no longer have to try to devise reasons to explain why 60 teams got a first round bye while the Bean Bags and Cicadas play to a rousing 45 -37 finish in front of 1,212 spectators, 4 sheep, and a blind police dog.

6. You screw over the NIT! Seriously, does anybody besides scouts watch the NIT. Is it on TRUtv this year?

All I’m saying is the NCAA should take a word of advice from their own words. Stop trying to make the "First Four" the first round and turn it into what its name suggest: A play-in.