Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 109
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    There is no way you can credibly say that any tournament which by design sets up games in which one team is completely rested and its opponent is playing its third game in three days, is fair. Now apparently some posters don't think it's important to try to be fair in these tournaments, or don't think that stacking the deck in favor of the teams that finished at the top of the regular season standings constitutes unfairness. I agree that some advantage to the top teams -- like that afforded by their seeding -- is appropriate. But isn't that enough? Why should they also get the advantage of freshness?

    If these conferences, like the Big East, are really intent on ensuring that their top teams advance to the NCAA's and are fully rested for them, then why even bother having the conference tournament? (of course, money. I get it.) If you're going to have the tournament for financial reasons, then why not stack the deck in favor of the top teams even more? Why not have the #1 seed get to host the tournament instead of it being held at a neutral site? (oh yeah: home game = unfair advantage) Why not have the bottom feeder teams get only 1 timeout per half? That'll make em good and tired. Or why not just spot the top teams 15 points or so? That should make sure they win, right?

    I jest of course, but it just seems to me that the advantages being given the top regular season teams are too much. At some point it diminishes the integrity of the tournament when the deck is stacked so heavily. The fix is kind of in, making it nearly impossible for a low seeded team to make a run through the tournament. I say don't be so afraid. The big boys should be able to handle themselves just fine, and if they can't, well, it may say good things about the depth of your conference. If they can't handle a game on Tuesday, followed by a day of rest, then games Thursday through Saturday, then four full days rest before their NCAA opener -- if that simply exhausts them too much -- then they don't have what it takes to be a champion anyway.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    There is no way you can credibly say that any tournament which by design sets up games in which one team is completely rested and its opponent is playing its third game in three days, is fair. Now apparently some posters don't think it's important to try to be fair in these tournaments, or don't think that stacking the deck in favor of the teams that finished at the top of the regular season standings constitutes unfairness. I agree that some advantage to the top teams -- like that afforded by their seeding -- is appropriate. But isn't that enough? Why should they also get the advantage of freshness?

    If these conferences, like the Big East, are really intent on ensuring that their top teams advance to the NCAA's and are fully rested for them, then why even bother having the conference tournament? (of course, money. I get it.) If you're going to have the tournament for financial reasons, then why not stack the deck in favor of the top teams even more? Why not have the #1 seed get to host the tournament instead of it being held at a neutral site? (oh yeah: home game = unfair advantage) Why not have the bottom feeder teams get only 1 timeout per half? That'll make em good and tired. Or why not just spot the top teams 15 points or so? That should make sure they win, right?

    I jest of course, but it just seems to me that the advantages being given the top regular season teams are too much. At some point it diminishes the integrity of the tournament when the deck is stacked so heavily. The fix is kind of in, making it nearly impossible for a low seeded team to make a run through the tournament. I say don't be so afraid. The big boys should be able to handle themselves just fine, and if they can't, well, it may say good things about the depth of your conference. If they can't handle a game on Tuesday, followed by a day of rest, then games Thursday through Saturday, then four full days rest before their NCAA opener -- if that simply exhausts them too much -- then they don't have what it takes to be a champion anyway.
    But everybody has to get a trophy.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    There is no way you can credibly say that any tournament which by design sets up games in which one team is completely rested and its opponent is playing its third game in three days, is fair. Now apparently some posters don't think it's important to try to be fair in these tournaments, or don't think that stacking the deck in favor of the teams that finished at the top of the regular season standings constitutes unfairness. I agree that some advantage to the top teams -- like that afforded by their seeding -- is appropriate. But isn't that enough? Why should they also get the advantage of freshness?

    If these conferences, like the Big East, are really intent on ensuring that their top teams advance to the NCAA's and are fully rested for them, then why even bother having the conference tournament? (of course, money. I get it.) If you're going to have the tournament for financial reasons, then why not stack the deck in favor of the top teams even more? Why not have the #1 seed get to host the tournament instead of it being held at a neutral site? (oh yeah: home game = unfair advantage) Why not have the bottom feeder teams get only 1 timeout per half? That'll make em good and tired. Or why not just spot the top teams 15 points or so? That should make sure they win, right?

    I jest of course, but it just seems to me that the advantages being given the top regular season teams are too much. At some point it diminishes the integrity of the tournament when the deck is stacked so heavily. The fix is kind of in, making it nearly impossible for a low seeded team to make a run through the tournament. I say don't be so afraid. The big boys should be able to handle themselves just fine, and if they can't, well, it may say good things about the depth of your conference. If they can't handle a game on Tuesday, followed by a day of rest, then games Thursday through Saturday, then four full days rest before their NCAA opener -- if that simply exhausts them too much -- then they don't have what it takes to be a champion anyway.
    You're missing the point. The conference tournament is intended to crown the conference champion and thus the representative of the conference in the NCAA tournament.

    Why is it fair to the teams that earned it over the course of the season to basically wipe the slate clean and make them go undefeated in a single-elimination tournament?

    The bolded part is the key, in my opinion. It's not a matter of whether or not they can handle it. They handled it by proving to be the best team over the course of the regular season. And now you're going to make that essentially meaningless by deciding things with a single-elimination tournament? That's silly.

    I'm actually against the concept of a conference tournament. I'd rather see a true round-robin regular season, with the winner getting the conference champion automatic bid. Obviously in super-conferences that won't work because it would be too many games. But in your typical 8-10 team league, it would work just fine.

    Single-elimination tournaments are not fair. Round-robin is fair. So if you're going to argue for fairness, that's the route you should go, rather than suggesting that we make the regular season basically meaningless.

  4. #24

    Smile 8-10?

    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    But in your typical 8-10 team league, it would work just fine.
    8-10 typical? Like the A10 or the Big 10?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by dball View Post
    8-10 typical? Like the A10 or the Big 10?
    Well, I was referring more to the mid-majors and the lower conferences. But your joke is duly noted.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    I know that it's silly to get caught up in how every game affects Duke, but (as I said in another thread) I'm bored and need a reason to get engaged in as many games as possible. Do we cheer for Texas and Louisville to win and move out of 8-seed range or does winning (in this round) keep them in that range? Are most of us not threatened by either of those teams? I would personally much rather see a Northern Iowa or UNLV as our second-round opponent.

  7. #27
    A fan in the Weber State - Montana game just had a sign that said "Bring On Duke."

    And Anthony Johnson is just hitting ridiculous shots all second half.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Quote Originally Posted by YourLandlord View Post
    A fan in the Weber State - Montana game just had a sign that said "Bring On Duke."

    And Anthony Johnson is just hitting ridiculous shots all second half.
    Yeah, I'm thinking that sign was made assuming that Weber State wouldn't blow a 20-point halftime lead. Oops.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by juise View Post
    Yeah, I'm thinking that sign was made assuming that Weber State wouldn't blow a 20-point halftime lead. Oops.
    Ridiculous comeback by Montana to win.

    In related news, the losses by Weber State and Quinnipiac in their conference finals tonight push both teams into the NIT (as regular season champs who did not win their tourney). That takes away more space that UNC could potentially fall into. Weber State, hurting the Heels again, even without The Show.

    ETA: Jackson State lost to Grambling in the SWAC quarters, putting them in the NIT as well. That's 7 conference winners who have eaten up NIT spots, leaving just 25 available for the rest of the field.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by pfrduke View Post
    Ridiculous comeback by Montana to win.

    In related news, the losses by Weber State and Quinnipiac in their conference finals tonight push both teams into the NIT (as regular season champs who did not win their tourney). That takes away more space that UNC could potentially fall into. Weber State, hurting the Heels again, even without The Show.

    ETA: Jackson State lost to Grambling in the SWAC quarters, putting them in the NIT as well. That's 7 conference winners who have eaten up NIT spots, leaving just 25 available for the rest of the field.
    Getting closer to the dream scenario: UNC is rejected by the NIT, accepts an invitation to the CBI for the extra games and practice time, makes the CBI championship series - and has to decide whether to hang a CBI banner.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Getting closer to the dream scenario: UNC is rejected by the NIT, accepts an invitation to the CBI for the extra games and practice time, makes the CBI championship series - and has to decide whether to hang a CBI banner.
    In said scenario, I think Duke should offer to invite Deon Thompson and Marcus Ginyard back to the Dean Dome for the Duke-UNC game and dedicate a "CBI runner-up" banner in their honor to hang in Carolina in perpetuity.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Getting closer to the dream scenario: UNC ... has to decide whether to hang a CBI banner.
    I don't think they'd even blink.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Allawah, NSW Australia (near Sydney)
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    It's been that way for a few years in the Big East, and I actually like the way the Big East tournament is set up. It uses a shocking concept - actually giving a real weight to the regular season.

    They didn't want to wear out their best teams (and hurt those teams' NCAA chances) by making them have to play 4 games to win the conference tournament. It's not fair to the really good teams to have to play more games than similar teams from other conferences just so that a couple of really crappy teams can get a bailout chance at a title.

    It also reduces the chances that a really crappy team (like DePaul, Rutgers, etc) sneaks in a gets a bid and potentially takes a bid away from a stronger bubble team from the conference. Though that's not really part of the reasoning.

    So, they came up with a system that allowed their top 4 teams to only have to play 3 games to win it, but also still allowed the entire conference a chance to win. Sure, it's not equally "fair" to all the teams. But basically, I don't see a need for more "fairness." That was the point of playing the regular season. Is it fair to the teams that played the best all season to have the slate almost completely wiped clean and have to play a single-elimination conference tournament? No. The worst teams had their chance to make their tourney lives easier by winning more regular season games. They failed to do so. They don't deserve a nearly-complete "do-over" in the conference tournament.

    Granted, I'm also someone who thinks there are too many teams in the tournament already. Really - teams who go .500 in conference don't deserve a chance to be the conference (or national) champion in my opinion.
    Completely agree about the Big East tournament but nto about the size of the NCAAs. Ever since the tournament expanded to 64 teams, IMO we should set that figure right alongside 90 feet between the bases as two examples from sports that demonstrate just how close mankind can come to perfection.

    And, no, I do NOT acknowledge the play-in game as part of the tournament. I refuse to let some money-driven compromise mess with my 64-sided perfection.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    It took me a while to figure out why there was only one first round game in the Pac-10 tournament (or whatever we're calling it this year... demolition derby?). I was wondering if somehow I missed that only the top 9 teams made the tournament. Then I realized that USC was missing. For shame, Tim Floyd and OJ Mayo. For shame.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    A few good ones going on outside the ACC. Texas Tech trails Kansas by only 2 at half (I'm guessing that one will be double digits before all is said and done). Georgetown leads Syracuse by 7 with less than 8:00 remaining.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    In other news, Georgetown has bounded out to a 7 point lead over Syracuse with under 8 minutes to play, in a game that the Orange led most of the way.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by juise View Post
    A few good ones going on outside the ACC. Texas Tech trails Kansas by only 2 at half (I'm guessing that one will be double digits before all is said and done). Georgetown leads Syracuse by 7 with less than 8:00 remaining.
    Great minds think alike.

    KU has some history of lackadaisical Big XII tourney performances; last year they lost to a 5-11 Baylor team in this very game.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    The Kansas game is shaping up to about what I expected.

    In other news, Memphis (a bubble team) is struggling with Houston. This could be problematic for their bid. Elliot is 0-6 from the field (6-8 from the line). For his sake, I hope they can put together a late run.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Does anyone think Marquette has a chance at winning today. I know Nova has not played great lately but I just don't think they will lose.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Lunardi had Memphis as one of the last 4 in going into today. Houston's one-point victory over Memphis could change that.

Similar Threads

  1. Non-ACC Conference Tournament Thread
    By Acymetric in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-07-2010, 07:17 PM
  2. The Second Best Conference
    By NYC Duke Fan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-04-2010, 06:40 PM
  3. (pre) ACC Tournament discussion thread
    By feldspar in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 03-10-2009, 03:39 PM
  4. Idol- discussion and who won?
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-26-2007, 02:49 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •