Talk:2012 NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament

Number of Games

Just an FYI to the person (97.91.153.60) who changed the number of games from 67 to 68 under Radio where it says "Dial Global Sports (formerly Westwood One) and SiriusXM have live broadcasts of all 67 games."... There are 67 games, not 68. If there are 68 teams in the tournament, there winds up being 67 losers and one champion when it's all said and done. Therefore, if only 67 teams lose, there are only 67 games. Please do not change it again. BucsWeb (talk) 13:13, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Extra space

Does anyone know why the brackets have extra space for Louisville and Kansas State? I can't figure it out.Topgun530 (talk) 13:24, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't see what extra space you're asking about. Maybe it's been fixed since you posted? --LarryJeff (talk) 19:33, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

"Seed" vs "Rank"

Where the article says the selection committee disclosed the "overall seed" for each team from 1 to 68, is seed the terminology the NCAA uses for it? The reason I ask is because the term seed is not correct as used there—a more accurate term would be "rank". If it truly were a seeding, it would match up with the team's position in the bracket. In other words, teams ranked 1–4 would be 1 seeds, 5–8 would be 2 seeds, and so on down to the teams ranked 61–68 playing in the "first four" round. This, however, is not the case for 2 reasons: (1) the tournament format doesn't put the 8 lowest teams in the play-in games, and (2) some teams were shuffled around in the 12–14 seed range to accommodate BYU's refusal to play on Sundays.

If the NCAA has chosen to use "seed" as the official terminology of the tournament (specifically referring to their ranking of the teams from 1 to 68 as "overall seed"), then the article should reflect that terminology even though it is misused. However, if that comes from the media rather than the NCAA, I suggest Wikipedia should use accurate terms: "seed" for the 16 positions in each region/quadrant of the national bracket, and "rank" for the overall position of the 68 teams as determined by the selection committee. --LarryJeff (talk) 19:26, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The press release for "Hardcore Brackets" uses "team rankings" so I've made that change.Calwatch (talk) 04:31, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

TV announcing teams

I notice the announcing team assignments are missing the regionals. Who's announcing for the various regionals? Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 00:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think an announcement has been made yet. They might be waiting to see who actually advances to the "Sweet 16" first before they assign announcers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:17, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

As a major sports event it is being covered like all others in the media. By which networks etc should be included in the article. But listing all TV persons is eccessive and goes aginst WP:DIRECTORY. In the end the protagonists are the student athletes, not the announcers on TV. --Tikiwont (talk) 10:57, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

This is an article about the tournament not about a TV sports pro gramme. I'm open to arguments but repeatedly reinserting all announcers without even an edit summary won't convince me. Neither the fact that there are more of such lists if one merely copies the other. --Tikiwont (talk) 21:01, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

On the other hand, the TV commentating is a notable part of the tournament, and is the subject of significant news coverage. See, for instance, these links: http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/dan-caesar/fun-loving-reporter-sager-s-wardrobe-speaks-loudly/article_fa7b779e-3c87-543f-97ef-38382862c52f.html

http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2012-articles/march/ncaa-tournament-announcing-power-rankings.html http://www.tampabay.com/sports/shooting-from-the-lip/1220733

See the following for the Super Bowl article: In the United States, the game was televised nationally by NBC.[34] It was also streamed live online, both to computers (via NFL.com and NBCSports.com) and mobile devices (via Verizon Wireless's NFL Mobile app), the first legal online streaming of a Super Bowl telecast in the USA.[35][36] Al Michaels called play-by-play for NBC, marking the eighth time that he was behind the microphone for a Super Bowl and the second time he called a Super Bowl for NBC (Michaels had previously done play-by-play for Super Bowls XXII, XXV, XXIX, XXXIV, XXXVII, and XL for ABC and Super Bowl XLIII for NBC). Cris Collinsworth was the color analyst for the game, his second Super Bowl as a game analyst and first since he was in the booth for Super Bowl XXXIX for Fox. Michele Tafoya was the sideline reporter. Bob Costas and Dan Patrick (who also presided over the trophy presentation ceremony) hosted the pregame, halftime, and postgame coverage for NBC with Football Night in America analysts Tony Dungy and Rodney Harrison and special guest analysts (who were seated next to Costas during the pre-game festivities), Aaron Rodgers and Hines Ward. Also helping out on NBC's broadcast were reporters Alex Flanagan and Randy Moss and NFL insiders Mike Florio and Peter King.

I am readding this since there is no consensus and there is just one person complaining. Calwatch (talk) 02:18, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

• To follow up the previous comment: there is a large consensus among those who edit the American sports articles to include the announcers. This includes all the articles related to the Super Bowl, World Series, Stanley Cup Finals, NBA Finals, and other major American sports events. The sports coverage is a major significant part here in the United States, with a lot of American reliable sources tending to report about the coverage of the event itself. Apologies, but it is very difficult for me to explain to someone not living in the United States about this significant aspect of American culture, where in American TV viewers and radio listeners' minds, news and sports announcers help set the tone and mood of the event with their words and voice inflections, much like how a music soundtrack helps set the tone and mood of a film. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:23, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

• All big sporting events should have announcers in articles related to the event. It is information about a event and don't fall under WP:DIRECTORY as someone suggested . Announcers should be added back in this article Theworm777 (talk) 09:20, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Big East W-L record

I just don't know how to edit the code in the conference win-loss percentage chart, but the Big East got 9 teams in, and currently the chart says the Big East is 7-3. Obviously 9 teams did not finish the first round with 10 results, the Big East is 6-3. Louisville, Marquette, Syracuse, Cincy, Georgetown, and South Florida were the 6 winners, UConn, WVU, and Notre Dame were the 3 losers. The winning percentage would also be .66666 repeating rather than .700. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.102.217.243 (talk) 06:15, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

However, South Florida has two wins so far in the tournament, since they played in the First Four. That's how we're to seven wins from six teams after the round of 64. —C.Fred (talk) 12:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Game dates

The tournament brackets need the match dates like in the 2011 articles. 139.194.135.73 (talk) 08:18, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Consistency of Record by Conference table?

I can see the list is sort of ordered by the number of teams in the later rounds... but how is it ordered when there is a tie? Seems like it should either be number of teams in prior rounds, number of bids, or number of wins or something like that. In any case, I can't see why the Big Ten is listed at the top and the Big East underneath. Likewise, it seems like for the next three teams the order should be Big 12, SEC, and then ACC. The MAC only had the one team and yet it's above the A10... why? I'm not sure what the standard is here but none of this is consistent.

It seems like perhaps there would be some precedence going along the lines of the Olympic medal counts, no? List first by gold medals (e.g. the number of teams that are in the latest round) then silver (e.g. the number of teams in the round before the latest round), etc. 70.189.179.33 (talk) 05:22, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

The "Record by Conference table" is sort-able if you click the top of the column it sorts how you want it. I would say the person that made it didnt care much about order because its sort-able. Theworm777 (talk) 07:32, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't address the situation though. You can sort by any one column, sure, but the secondary orders are all still seemingly random. While the technical ability to provide a secondary/tertiary way to sort ties may not be possible, at the very least in the default order it should make sense, no? 70.189.179.33 (talk) 10:57, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Just a note, I have fixed this because nobody else would. I will also make a further edit sorting the tied conferences by alphabetic order. 70.189.179.33 (talk) 03:21, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Note

Rich Waltz, Greg Anthony, Steve Smith, and Tracy Wolfson called the Reese's College All-Star Game on truTV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.208.137 (talk) 06:02, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Brackets

Under the regionals, it says first round, second round, regional semifinals, and regional finals. It should say second round, third round, regional semifinals, and regional finals. They changed the first round to the first four games that are played on the Monday and Tuesday before the tournament starts. I believe they started that in 2011. See last years bracket on the NCAA website.

http://www.ncaa.com/interactive-bracket/basketball-men/d1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.230.249.143 (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

The Round of 64 and Round of 32 should never have been called the Second and Third rounds just because of the creation of the First Four. It was inconsistent and confusing, as it made non-First Four teams that got knocked out in the Round of 64 look like they had won a tournament game, when they not won any (and those knocked out in Round of 32 look like they had won 2, instead of 1)

There were a lot of complaints about this and the NCAA realized its mistake by referring the Round of 64 and 32 and the First and Second Rounds again beginning with the 2016 tournament. All previous references to the Round of 64 and 32 being called the Second and Third Rounds (for the tournaments from 2011-2015) should be retroactively revised to no denote those rounds like that 57.140.32.29 (talk) 20:39, 28 March 2024 (UTC)