Let me get this out of the way quickly: the NCAA Tournament's "play-in game" is rubbish.
I use that term (A) because it's an underrated gem of an expression from our Brit friends, and (B) because most of the country was tuned into Simon Cowell and "American Idol" Tuesday night instead of this phoney-baloney "first game" of the NCAA Tournament.
If you weren't one of the 37 people watching on ESPN -- a slightly bigger audience than, say, those strongman competitions that used to air at 3 a.m. where a hulk of a human being from Lithuania raced against a Thor-like figure from Sweden to see who can flip a gigantic tire 50 yards the fastest -- Arkansas-Pine Bluff advanced to the real field of 64 with a win over Winthrop and earned itself a monumental beatdown at the hands of Duke on Friday in Jacksonville. Enjoy it while it lasts, boys.
The NCAA came up with his idea in 2001, and it's never added anything remotely interesting to a great event. Doesn't move the dial at all. You want to know what the best proof is? Forget the anemic TV rating; people don't even bother including it in bracket contests that are now as big a part of the tourney as "Selection Sunday" and "One Shining Moment."
It doesn't have to be this way.
When they first came up with this concept of a play-in game, my first reaction was "Why just one?" It seemed really odd that you'd have this one rogue bracket feeding into one region, almost at random, as evidenced by the fact that the winner of this latest game will play the third overall No. 1 seed, Duke. Huh? To borrow from Jerry Seinfeld, "Who were the ad wizards who came up with this?"
Why not have four play-in games, one for each region? There's been a lot of talk about expanding the field to 96 teams. I hope that never happens. The tournament is great right now, and we don't need to see it watered down with ever school that managed to play slightly above .500 in The Dance. But you can find an opportunity for six more teams to earn a spot if you just have a play-in game for each region.
Think about it: There were basically three or four schools that the talking heads really belly-ached about Sunday as the tourney field was announced -- Virginia Tech, Illinois, Mississippi State and Seton Hall. Every year, there are only about five teams they bring up in the serious "snub" talk. If you had a play-in game for each region, you could accomodate all of those and make them prove it, as we use to say during a playground game of H-O-R-S-E.
And instead of having these play-in winners get tossed to Duke as a sacrificial lamb, they could all feed into the tournament as the 9 seeds. It could easily be set up to create some fair and compelling matchups. Think how much more interesting the start of the tournament would be if you had Virginia Tech and Mississippi State playing the first game of a doubleheader in Dayton Tuesday night with Illinois and Seton Hall playing the second game. Then you could have the four other schools (perhaps Ole Miss, Arizona State, UConn and South Florida) playing their doubleheader, either in Dayton earlier that day or a second play-in city
It would also be more fair to teams like Winthrop and Arkansas-Pine Bluff, who actually won the Big South and SWAC. They should be rewarded with a "normal" spot in the tourney, not be forced to play in this dog-and-pony show.
If you want some additional drama, that's the way to do it. Until then, I'd rather watch glorified karaoke on Fox.









