Tournament Speculation Thread

[norm1909]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

My Bad- NORTH Cacka-lacky. Or I should say 'Heel' not a 'Cock'

NORTH Cocka-lackey

 

[NUProf]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

I
I'm all in favor of the AQ. In fact, I would love to totally eliminate the at-large bids. That's right, you heard me correctly. If you can't win in the playoffs, you don't deserve another playoff chance. One and done -- that's what playoffs is all about. The D1 BB conference playoffs are a complete joke because it doesn't matter whether you win your conference or not. Why even both having them -- other than to make money for the conference...

+1

I finally agreed with Russell.

DI basketball has this malaise during the regular season because it has too many at large bids. Cut those back and only give out a couple to very deserving teams and you would make the regular season mean a lot more.

 

[NUProf]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

Originally Posted by NUProf
(how can a league with Air Force Academy call itself "Atlantic"?)




Same reasoning behind Boise State in the Big Ea$t

I don't buy that one either. Nor do I go for Colorado in the Pacific 12 either. (At least that league can count still, unlike the big 10 (12 teams) and the big 12 (10 teams) or the Northeast 10 (16 teams)

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

Another conversation, though, is strength of schedule. I know the almighty ECAC-West is hands down the best conference in God's universe, but that's partially because they only have five teams. If you only took the top five teams in each conference and eliminated those games against the cellar-dwellers, wouldn't every conference have an other-worldly strength of schedule. I know this only works when all five teams are pretty good (which is the case in the ECAC West), but the more teams the conference has, the more impossible it becomes to compete with the smaller conference, right? Add say Scranton, Lebanon Valley and newcomer Nazareth to the conference, is there any chance the other teams still have the best strength of schedules in the country?

Ding, ding, ding!!!!! Give that man a cigar!

I've been saying this for years, expecially to Scott Biggar and all the other stuck up ECAC West fans. I'm sure NUProf can come up with the algorithm, but it's a matter of math. Sure, like you said, those five teams have to be good, but even if only four are, you still up your SOS big time. Like you said, take the top four in any league, and you'll build a massive SOS.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

So you would rather not see Kentucky, North Carolina, Duke, Kansas, Syracuse in this years NCAA Hoops Tourney?

Correct.

As far as I care, the path to the national title should begin with the conference playoffs. You can't win those, you're done. Just like the teams who lose this weekend are done. It's just they should have been done earlier. No need for second chances. You don't see second chances in the pro league playoffs....

 

[Birdwatcher]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

Correct.

As far as I care, the path to the national title should begin with the conference playoffs. You can't win those, you're done. Just like the teams who lose this weekend are done. It's just they should have been done earlier. No need for second chances. You don't see second chances in the pro league playoffs....

NHL Best of 7??

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

NHL Best of 7??

That's a format issue. Once you decide the format, when you lose you are out. You don't get to play another team to see what happens.

 

[NUProf]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

NHL Best of 7??

I'd love to see best of 3 playoffs, or at least best of two with the possibility of a (dreaded) mini-game. Maybe if we didn't have this pool C nonsense, the leagues would figure out it would be in their best interest to have series instead of ones and done formats.

 

[CARDS_rule_the_Burgh]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

I'd love to see best of 3 playoffs, or at least best of two with the possibility of a (dreaded) mini-game. Maybe if we didn't have this pool C nonsense, the leagues would figure out it would be in their best interest to have series instead of ones and done formats.

I believe trying to improve the chances of getting a Pool C was, in fact, part of the justification by the SUNYAC for scrapping the multi-game series.

 

[OZFEST]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

Correct.

As far as I care, the path to the national title should begin with the conference playoffs. You can't win those, you're done. Just like the teams who lose this weekend are done. It's just they should have been done earlier. No need for second chances. You don't see second chances in the pro league playoffs....

Wow Russell not a hoops fan, only one winner from each conference. Done in a week and not much fun. While I can agree with the logic, I still want to be entertained. I have heard terms like 'bloated' on this board when describing March Madness. I totally disagree. 68 teams to 1 is awesome. I can root for an underdog team from the Patriot League and watch a powerhouse like Kentucky the same night.

 

[NUProf]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

I believe trying to improve the chances of getting a Pool C was, in fact, part of the justification by the SUNYAC for scrapping the multi-game series.

I know, it there were no Pool C, this excuse would go away. I still think it's silly to build your playoff system with the intent of helping the team that doesn't win get into the tournament, instead of building one that makes it more likely that your best team wins the league tournament.

 

[NUProf]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

Wow Russell not a hoops fan, only one winner from each conference. Done in a week and not much fun. While I can agree with the logic, I still want to be entertained. I have heard terms like 'bloated' on this board when describing March Madness. I totally disagree. 68 teams to 1 is awesome. I can root for an underdog team from the Patriot League and watch a powerhouse like Kentucky the same night.

Why the heck should one league get four or five bids. If you are fifth in your league, you can't be the best team in the nation. Period. In the old days there were 48 teams in the NCAAs, every league champion got in, and no league was allowed more than two bids - which became 3, and then infinite. Again, If you are not the best in your league you are not the national champ. The regular season has become devalued when teams can finish fifth or sixth in their league and still get a chance to play for the national title.

 

[Birdwatcher]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

I'd love to see best of 3 playoffs, or at least best of two with the possibility of a (dreaded) mini-game. Maybe if we didn't have this pool C nonsense, the leagues would figure out it would be in their best interest to have series instead of ones and done formats.

It was like that at one time (best of 2/mini)

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

Wow Russell not a hoops fan, only one winner from each conference. Done in a week and not much fun. While I can agree with the logic, I still want to be entertained. I have heard terms like 'bloated' on this board when describing March Madness. I totally disagree. 68 teams to 1 is awesome. I can root for an underdog team from the Patriot League and watch a powerhouse like Kentucky the same night.

Actually, I'm a big college basketball fan. And, I agree, March Madness is very exciting.

But, that doesn't change my philosophy on what the playoffs should be.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

I believe trying to improve the chances of getting a Pool C was, in fact, part of the justification by the SUNYAC for scrapping the multi-game series.

Correct.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

Why the heck should one league get four or five bids. If you are fifth in your league, you can't be the best team in the nation. Period. In the old days there were 48 teams in the NCAAs, every league champion got in, and no league was allowed more than two bids - which became 3, and then infinite. Again, If you are not the best in your league you are not the national champ. The regular season has become devalued when teams can finish fifth or sixth in their league and still get a chance to play for the national title.

Can you say Villanova? I knew you could.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

I know, it there were no Pool C, this excuse would go away. I still think it's silly to build your playoff system with the intent of helping the team that doesn't win get into the tournament, instead of building one that makes it more likely that your best team wins the league tournament.

Maybe. But as long as the rules of the game are there, you can't blame people for maximizing them to their benefit.

 

[Fishman'81]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

You are contradicting yourself because you said you dislike the AQs and yet you want to let 'the kids decide it on the ice'. Well the AQs DO let the kids decide it on the ice. Would never happen, but I think it would be cool if the NCAA field was 9 teams with the winner of the each conference tourny getting in. No need for rankings, committees, Josh Carey, etc...

Please understand that I was referencing the concept of the kids deciding the field "on the ice", without looking for help from some secret society on dry land... There are going to be hockey games played subsequent to the process, no matter who gets in.

 

[Fishman'81]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

I hate to break it to you, but the AQ is decided by the conference NOT the NCAA.

It is the conference that can decide whether the RS champion gets the AQ. It is the conference that can decide whether the playoff champion gets the AQ. Heck, the conference can select the AQ based on a straw poll for all the NCAA cares.

All the NCAA does is give an AQ to the conference. The conference decides how it is handed out.

I'm all in favor of the AQ. In fact, I would love to totally eliminate the at-large bids. That's right, you heard me correctly. If you can't win in the playoffs, you don't deserve another playoff chance. One and done -- that's what playoffs is all about. The D1 BB conference playoffs are a complete joke because it doesn't matter whether you win your conference or not. Why even both having them -- other than to make money for the conference...

Yes, the conferences can decide their AQs based on their favorite uniform if they like... And that is an argument in favor of what, exactly?

Apparently, you regard the RS in all sports as irrelevant... Interesting, in an illogical sort of way.

I'll float a concept here: body of work x sample-size > one hot weekend at the end of the season. Going on that, the tournaments are clearly the "joke".

 

[Fishman'81]

Re: Tournament Speculation Thread

I never said we hear criticism of the process. I said we hear complaints from the "17th school."

So, actually we do.

You just rendered your own comments meaningless. If you've read all the above posts, you'd realize that this thread is about is all about the process.