worst first round ever?

[Jason2112]

Okay folks, this has got to be the most undramatic, boring first round in the history of March Madness. I know the best teams are advancing for the most part and it will set up awesome later rounds, but DAMN. I'm a college basketball nut and can't believe I'm writing this, but there's usually a lot more to talk about. Okay, just now the Siena-OSU and Wisc.-FSU games probably saved this from being the worst ever.

[Chip Douglass]

Re: worst first round ever?

Probably 2007.

The biggest upset of the first round (and the biggest upset of the entire tournament that year) was VCU over Duke...and VCU was a very trendy pick.

[Tovarich]

Re: worst first round ever?

Had Arizona lost, and the 2 late games didn't go to OT and Double OT, I would've said this was pretty boring, yes, but the night games were great.

[TimmeH]

Re: worst first round ever?

Oklahoma St-Tennessee, Marquette-Utah St, Siena-Ohio St, Florida St-Wisconsin, Memphis-CS Northridge, UCLA-VCU, etc all would like to argue with the topic-starter.


The tourney got off to a slow start, but it picked up. We got close games, upsets, and last second shots. I can't complain.

2007 is definitely the worst.

[J0nnD0ugh]

Re: worst first round ever?

People said last year was boring too.

Get used to it. The committee is more informed than ever before about these teams. There is more data online & teams fill the TV schedule. Surprises come from not knowing. That isn't the case anymore. Teams are appropriately seeded for the most part. Makes for fewer upsets & drama.

[Sportsforever]

Re: worst first round ever?

Every year we see this type of post...I have to be honest, I don't really dig the upsets early or the little guy taking down the big guy. I like to see the marquee matchups as we get deeper into the tourney.

[TimmeH]

Re: worst first round ever?

People said last year was boring too.

Get used to it. The committee is more informed than ever before about these teams. There is more data online & teams fill the TV schedule. Surprises come from not knowing. That isn't the case anymore. Teams are appropriately seeded for the most part. Makes for fewer upsets & drama.

The thing is, there were as many upsets this year as year's past.

IMO, an upset is when a team defeats another team ranked four seeds better(so basically, in the first round, all seeds lower than a 10 I consider an upset). Going by that, look at the amount of first round upsets over this decade:

2009 - 5
2008 - 5
2007 - 2
2006 - 6
2005 - 4
2004 - 2
2003 - 3
2002 - 6
2001 - 7
2000 - 1


This year's bracket ranks on the high end compared to year's past. I think it just doesn't feel like it because the underdogs are Wisconsin(perennial power), Arizona(perennial power), Dayton(always a dangerous upper-mid-major), and Western Kentucky(did the same thing last year. Cleveland St is the only truly unsuspecting team.

I think more than anything else, the lack of mid-majors hurts the feel of the first round. Usually we have at least six at-large bids coming from outside of the Big-Six. This year I believe there's only four. So instead of having upsets by teams like St. Mary's & San Diego St, we have upsets by Arizona & Wisconsin...teams that don't feel like underdogs.

[elicoleman]

Re: worst first round ever?

Probably 2007.

The biggest upset of the first round (and the biggest upset of the entire tournament that year) was VCU over Duke...and VCU was a very trendy pick.

Pretty much.

[Laettner32]

Re: worst first round ever?

People said last year was boring too.

Get used to it. The committee is more informed than ever before about these teams. There is more data online & teams fill the TV schedule. Surprises come from not knowing. That isn't the case anymore. Teams are appropriately seeded for the most part. Makes for fewer upsets & drama.

Don't forget the "pod" system. The better teams play as close to "home" as the committee can get them, both Duke and UNC playing in Greensboro is pretty sweet for them. I remember when a team got sent out west...they really got sent out west.

[NC State-31 UNC-27]

Re: worst first round ever?

Seriously, people say this every year. We can't have 15 seeds hitting crazy buzzer beaters every year, it just doesn't happen like that.

Thursday and the first half of Friday had some good games but for the most part the underdogs just couldn't quite pull it off in the final minute or two.

[J0nnD0ugh]

Re: worst first round ever?

Now, I will say this has been the worse 2nd round ever for upsets. All #3 seeds made the Sweet 16, & 14 of the top 16 advanced. Purdue is a Cinderella @ #5.

[ehh]

Re: worst first round ever?

It leads to good games next round though, a lot of casual fans love the upsets of March Madness but when you have upsets that generally means you have some really crappy Sweet 16 games.

Next weekend is going to be unbelievable, especially the Friday schedule.

7:07 (12) Arizona vs (1) Louisville - Indianapolis,IN
7:27 (3) Syracuse vs (2) Oklahoma - Memphis,TN
9:37 (3) Kansas vs (2) Michigan St - Indianapolis,IN
9:57 (4) Gonzaga vs (1) North Carolina - Memphis,TN

I mean, are you serious? Look at those match ups. I'll take a "weak" first weekend if it means I can watch that Sweet 16 each year.

[KG]

Re: worst first round ever?

Every year we see this type of post...I have to be honest, I don't really dig the upsets early or the little guy taking down the big guy. I like to see the marquee matchups as we get deeper into the tourney.

I feel the same way. Give me the big dog matchups between schools with NBA talent on their rosters and a history of dramatics. As a hoops fan you cannot look at the Sweet 16 and potential Elite 8 matchups and not get amped.

[elicoleman]

Re: worst first round ever?

I still don't see it.

Just because we have top seeds doesn't mean we'll get good games.

Just look at last years Sweet 16:
#1 UNC beats #4 Washington by 21
#3 Louisville beats #2 Tennessee by 19
#1 Memphis beats #5 Michigan State by 18
#2 Texas beats #3 Stanford by 20

The only game that was even in single digits was an OT game vs #3 and #7. And the second closest game was #12 WKU against #1 UCLA.

And last year, atleast we have a top heavy tournament. This year, even the tops teams this year wouldn't compare to the top teams of years past. Luckily Memphis is still in this thing or I might have already lost interest.

[ehh]

Re: worst first round ever?

I still don't see it.

Just because we have top seeds doesn't mean we'll get good games.

Just look at last years Sweet 16:
#1 UNC beats #4 Washington by 21
#3 Louisville beats #2 Tennessee by 19
#1 Memphis beats #5 Michigan State by 18
#2 Texas beats #3 Stanford by 20

The only game that was even in single digits was an OT game vs #3 and #7. And the second closest game was #12 WKU against #1 UCLA.

And last year, atleast we have a top heavy tournament. This year, even the tops teams this year wouldn't compare to the top teams of years past. Luckily Memphis is still in this thing or I might have already lost interest.

It depends on the year, none of those Sweet 16 match ups you posted from last year excited me before hand. They were all foregone conclusions IMO.