Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NCAA Change the Tourney

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

    I get why people like best of 3, I especially get why the NCAA would like it but it seems like a major step backwards if you ask me, a desperate ploy to make sure the "right teams" make it so the NCAA maximizes viewers and ticket sales.
    You nailed it. The main problem with the Best of 3 campus site scenario is that it's "been there, done that." They already tried that format and they changed it for a reason. I don't see them ever going back to it, and I agree with you, it would be a step backwards. As much as we've been looking at things mostly from a profit/attendance perspective, there is an issue of fairness in terms of how the games are played out that has to be examined as well. There is a fundamental fairness inherent with teams playing games in neutral sites and not in the home rink of each season's higher seeds, which would often be an annual mix of BC, North Dakota, Michigan, etc etc. Beating those squads in 1 game is one thing -- having to do it in a multi-game series on their home ice is obviously far more difficult. Ultimately that system would only make it even easier for higher seeded teams and teams that typically finish in the upper tier of their conference to advance (the "right teams" as you call them).

    Variety and diversity among your Frozen Four participants would almost certainly diminish as a consequence. IMO that's not at all something they will want to encourage -- the sentiment that "the same teams make it every year" will only be pushed even further in that direction if you back to campus site QF multi-game series.

    Now single-game elimination on campus sites -- as a prelude to a weekend of 2 regional sites -- that makes a little bit more sense, yet I still don't know if things are such a mess that they'd go there. Alton and I disagree that adding another weekend of games to the current set-up won't tax the fan further in terms of their time/monetary investment in pre-Frozen Four hockey -- to me it'd be like expanding the tournament even though the amount of teams remains the same (yes I know there is a bye week now -- it's not a week in which the NCAA is asking fans to pay to see more games which it would under Alton's three-week playoff system). The bottom line to their proposed concept is that-- no matter where you do it -- you'd be adding another weekend of NCAA games to the current set-up, and given the current attendance issues, that just doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. Yes it solves some things but it adds other issues as well.

    I think overall it's a question of improving what they're doing now, making smarter choices in terms of venue and team seeding, and finding a way to make the current "package" more appealing to consumers while balancing the fairness issue -- not going backwards to an old concept like campus site quarterfinal series (then again, who knows, maybe they'll be desperate!).

    I have enjoyed the conversation big time because I think we all agree they've got to do something...just will be interesting to see what they do because one way or another, something's got to give.
    Last edited by HockeyMan2000; 03-29-2011, 11:36 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

      Originally posted by Craig P. View Post
      AHA teams are not, absent an exceptional season, playing for an at-large bid.
      The AHA champion has finished in the Top 16 of the Pairwise 2 of the last three years, and has won three tournament games in that span.
      The disrespect is reaching Boisesque proportions.
      2010-2011 Atlantic Hockey Pick 'Em Champion!
      2013 Atlantic Hockey Postseason Pick 'Em Champion!
      Air Force Falcons
      2007 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA West Regional
      2008 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA Northeast Regional
      2009 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA East Regional Final
      2011 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA East Regional
      2012 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA Northeast Regional

      Comment


      • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

        My issue with the AHA isn't the top of the conference, it's at the middle and bottom of the conference. Look at NCAA team rankings and you will see that the bottom 10 teams have a very large proportion of AHA members.

        I would also step up my level of respect if AHA got 2 teams in with an at-large bid (as Bemidji did last season). Having more games on tv (cbs cs/espnu) would also help fans like me to see these teams before tourney time.

        Comment


        • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

          Originally posted by HockeyMan2000 View Post
          . . .
          I think overall it's a question of improving what they're doing now, making smarter choices in terms of venue and team seeding, and finding a way to make the current "package" more appealing to consumers while balancing the fairness issue -- not going backwards to an old concept like campus site quarterfinal series (then again, who knows, maybe they'll be desperate!).

          I have enjoyed the conversation big time because I think we all agree they've got to do something...just will be interesting to see what they do because one way or another, something's got to give.
          Great post.

          I’ve enjoyed this discussion as well, especially since despite some strong opinions it’s managed to stay remarkably civil, somewhat rare for a string that’s getting close to 200 posts.

          I’m in the camp that thinks that the current system isn’t perfect, maybe not even good, but it’s better than any of the alternatives. For sure the NCAA should learn from its mistakes – and a regional in an NHL sized arena in a region with no hockey presence was a mistake – but that doesn’t mean the whole system should be scrapped.

          If the current system fails, it will be because no reasonable venues make bids. I don’t know precisely how the finances work – i.e. who takes the financial bath – but if the regionals continually lose money, the NCAA will have to find an alternative. Maybe it’s a radical change, like some of the proposals in here. Maybe it’s something tinkering, like allowing intraconference matchups in the first round.

          Comment


          • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

            Originally posted by Patman View Post
            While home ice is a reward that is tough to give, I see no problem with best-of-3... at the end of the year, if you happen to be a better team then one should advance on through... I don't see upsets necessarily as a virtue and hockey is a sport where good teams lose more often... not nearly as bad as baseball, but close. Heck, I've given half thoughts to double-elimination, but I don't think that arena reservations, etc, could handle that.

            I don't see necessarily upsets being a virtue of the sport... even then best-of-3 isn't overwhelmingly better than a single game elimination in terms of the ability to separate teams. If you have a 60% chance of winning a game you have a 65% chance of winning a best-of-3.

            Fact of the matter is, winning needs to be worth something, it can't be completely random, otherwise what are you proving? As one of the "non-power" schools, I see no problem in this.... i think you risk credibility if RIT manages to find a way to the Frozen Four every 3rd year w/o dominating their schedule.
            Well, this brings up another issue (I know I might be opening a can of worms). Existentially speaking, why do we have a tournament in the first place? Seriously. The answer is to "crown the NCAA champion." Nothing more...nothing less. The first premise is that we have to dispel this notion that the "best team should win." That's not the way it works...that's what the regular season is for. A tournament is just that...a tournament. We all know that the "best" teams DON'T ALWAYS WIN the championship. We've seen this is every sport. So once we stop trying to "manipulate" it so that "this is prevented" and "that is guaranteed" and "the other thing is assured," then we can just see it for what it is. The whole POINT is that you DON'T have a "series" of games for anything. It SHOULD be one and done. That is the fun of the tournament and what gives it that "edge." It's only a game...a game that we may love, but let's not make it more than what it is.

            Comment


            • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

              Originally posted by Patman View Post
              of winning a best-of-3.

              Fact of the matter is, winning needs to be worth something, it can't be completely random, otherwise what are you proving? As one of the "non-power" schools, I see no problem in this.... i think you risk credibility if RIT manages to find a way to the Frozen Four every 3rd year w/o dominating their schedule.
              The only credibility you risk is that of the leagues who claim so much superiority, and maybe the ranking system you use. the fact that RIT or Air Force or Holy Cross manage to beat a couple of teams that are supposedly vastly superior only proves that they are a good hockey team, I think. And probably that the quality of hockey played in the AHA is continuing to improve.

              Comment


              • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

                Originally posted by billmich88888 View Post
                My issue with the AHA isn't the top of the conference, it's at the middle and bottom of the conference. Look at NCAA team rankings and you will see that the bottom 10 teams have a very large proportion of AHA members.
                The bottom of the WAC is absolutely horrid. New Mexico State, San Jose State and Utah State shouldn't even be D1 programs. Same for the Mountain West with New Mexico, Colorado State and UNLV. But that doesn't mean Boise isn't capable of knocking off Oklahoma or Va. Tech and that TCU can't beat Wisconsin.

                It's the same argument used against them year after year. Just because you play in a "weak" conference doesn't mean you aren't one of the better teams in the nation. Air Force and RIT have proven that they can play with anyone come tournament time. If four tournament appearances, Air Force is 1-4, with three OT losses, but four of the five games were against #1 seeds. Sure, the bottom feeders in the AHA aren't very good, and the AHA champion gets punished for playing them in the RPI, which means they'll always have an uphill road come tournament time. But that doesn't mean they don't have good teams.
                2010-2011 Atlantic Hockey Pick 'Em Champion!
                2013 Atlantic Hockey Postseason Pick 'Em Champion!
                Air Force Falcons
                2007 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA West Regional
                2008 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA Northeast Regional
                2009 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA East Regional Final
                2011 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA East Regional
                2012 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA Northeast Regional

                Comment


                • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

                  perfect analogy with boise st. thats exactly what i was thinking of. i always thought boise was an awesome team, but i refuse to say that the wac is anything but a mediocre (at best) conference. same might be true about aha as far as im concerned. ill take the wcha #5-8 teams and stack them against other conferences and you will really see the depth and quality of a great conference...same with the sec in football

                  Comment


                  • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

                    So once we stop trying to "manipulate" it so that "this is prevented" and "that is guaranteed" and "the other thing is assured," then we can just see it for what it is. The whole POINT is that you DON'T have a "series" of games for anything. It SHOULD be one and done. That is the fun of the tournament and what gives it that "edge." It's only a game...a game that we may love, but let's not make it more than what it is.
                    Amen to that. IMO the NCAAs need to be played on an even keel. No teams playing in their own barn, no team getting an advantage with a bye over a team that played the day before -- those are aspects that were once part of the NCAA playoff system, that teams and fans all complained about for years, and were all changed. There seems to be no reason to go back to them other than trying to manipulate the system to sell more tickets (which I'm not convinced would even be the case with some of the proposals listed in here).

                    They don't play a Best of 3 or Best of 7 in the hoops. They don't allow teams to play on their home courts. It's one and done and people love it. For years college hockey fans -- most of the ones I knew anyway -- wanted to see that brought to the hockey playoffs, which were imbalanced and antiquated with their two-game total goal campus site series. Now we have that kind of neutral site, single-game elimination, no-extra-perks-to-the-higher-seeds type of format and we're all (me included) complaining that the system isn't working. And okay, so it's not in terms of attendance...but the bottom line to me is going backwards and rethinking the entire NCAA playoff format isn't the solution.

                    Comment


                    • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

                      Originally posted by HockeyMan2000 View Post
                      Amen to that. IMO the NCAAs need to be played on an even keel. No teams playing in their own barn, no team getting an advantage with a bye over a team that played the day before -- those are aspects that were once part of the NCAA playoff system, that teams and fans all complained about for years, and were all changed. There seems to be no reason to go back to them other than trying to manipulate the system to sell more tickets (which I'm not convinced would even be the case with some of the proposals listed in here).

                      They don't play a Best of 3 or Best of 7 in the hoops. They don't allow teams to play on their home courts. It's one and done and people love it. For years college hockey fans -- most of the ones I knew anyway -- wanted to see that brought to the hockey playoffs, which were imbalanced and antiquated with their two-game total goal campus site series. Now we have that kind of neutral site, single-game elimination, no-extra-perks-to-the-higher-seeds type of format and we're all (me included) complaining that the system isn't working. And okay, so it's not in terms of attendance...but the bottom line to me is going backwards and rethinking the entire NCAA playoff format isn't the solution.
                      If the NCAA actually has accomplished those things, it's a pretty recent development. I remember going to a regional at Yost a few years back. For the record, it was a blast and there were some great games. And I really like A2. But neutral it wasn't.
                      1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1995 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2012(!)

                      Comment


                      • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

                        so if you are an upper level aha team, do what boise did, and join a better conference. ( at least til the good teams from the new conference bolted themselves) in any event i do know boise st. has been pro active recently in attempting to be part of the discussion of pac-10 and big 12 expansion plans

                        Comment


                        • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

                          in womens hoops, they allow home games. same in baseball and softball and most other sports i can think of. in fact the ONLY sport with no home courts is mens hoops

                          Comment


                          • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

                            Originally posted by billmich88888 View Post
                            My issue with the AHA isn't the top of the conference, it's at the middle and bottom of the conference. Look at NCAA team rankings and you will see that the bottom 10 teams have a very large proportion of AHA members.

                            I would also step up my level of respect if AHA got 2 teams in with an at-large bid (as Bemidji did last season). Having more games on tv (cbs cs/espnu) would also help fans like me to see these teams before tourney time.
                            What do you mean "my issue" in the context of this string? The middle and the bottom of the AHA don't make the NCAA tournament. If you want to say that the AHA champion has an easier schedule, fine; just note that the past few years has shown the arguably easier schedule doesn't mean they're not worthy of being in the tournament.

                            ill take the wcha #5-8 teams and stack them against other conferences and you will really see the depth and quality of a great conference...
                            If you want to have a hockey version of the NIT for mediocre teams, fine; I'm sure the power conferences would win it every year. But of what relevance is that to the NCAA tournament that's being discussed here? I hope you're not arguing that the #5-8 WCHA teams are being screwed because they're not in this tournament. If so I have a lot of trouble having any sympathy for them.

                            Comment


                            • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

                              Originally posted by chickod View Post
                              Well, this brings up another issue (I know I might be opening a can of worms). Existentially speaking, why do we have a tournament in the first place? Seriously. The answer is to "crown the NCAA champion." . . .
                              No, because nobody has defined what "champion" means. For some, North Dakota has already won it because they are the highest rated team in the polls, which implies that they were the best team over the course of the season, not over the last four games of the year. If we concede that the best team doesn't always win, the object of the tournament is circular. We have the tournament to determine the winner of the tournament. Put that way, it's kinda pointless. The real reason that we have the tournament is is because people love it, as evidenced by the passion that's gone into some of the posts in here. In my view, the win or go home aspect and the level playing field are part of the reason that I love it. What makes someone else love it -- big crowds and atmosphere, determining the "best", might be different, and that's why we don't agree on how the tournament should be structured.

                              Comment


                              • Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

                                Originally posted by billmich88888 View Post
                                in womens hoops, they allow home games. same in baseball and softball and most other sports i can think of. in fact the ONLY sport with no home courts is mens hoops
                                Well, that's sort of true. The Top 4 teams do host the first weekend in womens basketball exactly for the reason that playing in a neutral site would generate 50 fans...but it is also a huge complaint by womens coaches that they have to play say UCONN and Tennessee at home and the NCAA has moved further and further away from that. In baseball the first rounds aren't at campus sites, I don't think. Teams can bid to host but the games are usually in neutral facilities. Last year for example, UCONN hosted but they didn't paly at Christiansen Field. They played at a minor league facility in Norwich. In any case, you end up having multiple teams playing at the host site. I guess I don't have a huge issue with someplace like Yost hosting a regional if its a good site. In particular if it is an 8 team event and 2 go on. I don't think you need to do that in the northeast, where as someone pointed out earlier there are lots of teams and lots of facilities all within pretty close proximity. Bridgeport, Providence, Manchester, Worcester, Hartford, Springfield, Albany,Portland even Rochester are all pretty reasonably located and more or less both Neutral and close enough to potential participants to maybe work. If Portalnd gets the planned upgrades, it might be a great location...terrific little city, very reasonable travel from Boston, UMaine, UNH, Merrimack, Worcester, Hartford...and I can attest that it has some pretty nice bars, too.

                                On the subject of the AHA, I think Boise is a great example. Good team in a weak league. That's the situation in the AHA, although I think the depth is much much better than it was a few years ago. RIT and Air Force are both very good hockey clubs, but Robert Morris, Holy Cross, Niagara and UCONN weren't terrible ones either. I'm not suggesting that any of them would win Hockey East or the WCHA, but they'd compete. The problem of course is at the very bottom which is quite weak.

                                By the way, what "better conference" did Bosie join? That argument is not particularly applicable to college hockey given the number of leagues out there. What league do you suggest RIT join and how?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X