|
Post by valpo89 on Mar 1, 2011 23:08:53 GMT -5
In the old, old Mid-Con (pre-1994), the last place team in a nine-team league did not advance to the tournament. I wouldn't be opposed to reinstating that, in other words the last two teams are out. Then you have an even 8-team tourney, 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, 3 vs. 6, 4 vs. 5. Play the first round at home sites, then the rest at the highest remaining seeds to get that "conference" feel with everyone in the same place. You get the reward of hosting if you're No. 1, but you still have to win three games to get the bid.
|
|
|
Post by sanitylost17 on Mar 1, 2011 23:16:40 GMT -5
The problem really comes down to parity in the league. As the league as a whole gets better, I think you are going to see more and more worthy #3 seeds being unfairly punished due some crazy tie breaker scenarios. Example: Both teams do equally well against the top 6 teams, both teams slip up at some point during the season against a bottom feeder, but one team slipped up against the #8 where the other one slips up against the #9. (Giving one of these teams a double bye seems to be about as fair as a coin flip to me eddie....)
You have to have tie breakers for seeding, but is a team that beat the #1 seed twice but lost to the #7 seed twice really better than a team that split with both?
What happens when there is no clear distinction between a team? Argue that an arbitrary tie breaking system proved that Team A had a better season than Team B and that they clearly deserve an advantage of 2 games in the post season tournament?!?! To me that is just crazy.
|
|
|
Post by aurorix2 on Mar 2, 2011 0:14:44 GMT -5
I'd just like to point out that in addition to the WCC already having a double bye for the frost two seeds, this year the WAC and the OVC also adapted that format. Clearly the HL is not the only league interested in protecting top seeds.
|
|
|
Post by wh on Mar 2, 2011 0:37:48 GMT -5
[The fact is that Valpo fans/players/coaches/media knew the tourney format when they joined the league. They knew it before this season started. They knew it when they had a chance to host and lost it by throwing up on their jerseys. Not sure why it suddenly becomes something to whine about every year at this time. Did you have the same criticism for your former athletic director when he whined like a little baby and demanded that "something needs to be done" in the aftermath of your inexcusable loss to the worst team in the league in 2002. Did you send him an email and tell him to quit bellyaching just because your team "threw up on their jerseys." No you didn't, did you? Butler fans should be the last people on the face of the earth to EVER call anyone else "whiners."
|
|
|
Post by cmack on Mar 2, 2011 6:27:40 GMT -5
Hosting and one bye puts value on the regular season just fine. For you Butler fans, some of us have been questioning this from day one, and will continue too....You have your opinion and I'm entitled to mine...by the way, I heard our AD explaining why he likes it tonight...I don't have to agree with him either.....my perogative....had nothing to do with who's where in the seedings...it's just not a good way to do it as far as I'm concerned and I have the right to feel that way now and into the future.....and when we get those two byes sometime, I'll still feel the same way...but I will enjoy going to the dance again I am very glad to hear that at least our AD has a clear understanding of the tournament format and why it is in place. Hopefully he can continue to educate those who just don't seem to get it. I particularly love the argument that it is simply in place to benefit Butler (whom I despise). I really would like someone to explain to me how Butler is inherently a benefactor of a system which rewards teams who dominate the regular season. Why exactly is no one else in any position to do the same? Lame argument to say the least.
|
|
|
Post by wh on Mar 2, 2011 9:03:53 GMT -5
...by the way, I heard our AD explaining why he likes it tonight...I don't have to agree with him either..... How was his body language? Was he looking the person in the eyes? Did he have his fingers crossed? Was he expressionless and speaking in a monotone voice? Was he blinking as if he was trying to send a coded message?
|
|
|
Post by eddiec on Mar 2, 2011 9:09:30 GMT -5
[The fact is that Valpo fans/players/coaches/media knew the tourney format when they joined the league. They knew it before this season started. They knew it when they had a chance to host and lost it by throwing up on their jerseys. Not sure why it suddenly becomes something to whine about every year at this time. Did you have the same criticism for your former athletic director when he whined like a little baby and demanded that "something needs to be done" in the aftermath of your inexcusable loss to the worst team in the league in 2002. Did you send him an email and tell him to quit bellyaching just because your team "threw up on their jerseys." No you didn't, did you? Butler fans should be the last people on the face of the earth to EVER call anyone else "whiners." To the contrary ... I encouraged him to raise heck and tell the HL commish to change the format, which he did. The sooner you guys understand (and accept) who wields the power in this league, the happier your lives will be. FWIW, I'm rooting for you guys this week. I'm pretty confident you'll get some good whistles in Milwaukee this weekend because LeCrone would much rather have a 20 minute drive to Hinkle on Tuesday than a four hour drive back up to The Mecca.
|
|
|
Post by valpotentate on Mar 2, 2011 9:20:52 GMT -5
The problem really comes down to parity in the league. As the league as a whole gets better, I think you are going to see more and more worthy #3 seeds being unfairly punished due some crazy tie breaker scenarios. Example: Both teams do equally well against the top 6 teams, both teams slip up at some point during the season against a bottom feeder, but one team slipped up against the #8 where the other one slips up against the #9. (Giving one of these teams a double bye seems to be about as fair as a coin flip to me eddie....) You have to have tie breakers for seeding, but is a team that beat the #1 seed twice but lost to the #7 seed twice really better than a team that split with both? What happens when there is no clear distinction between a team? Argue that an arbitrary tie breaking system proved that Team A had a better season than Team B and that they clearly deserve an advantage of 2 games in the post season tournament?!?! To me that is just crazy. Great point, and this is the issue that the supporters of the current model want to ignore. It's defensible to give the top two teams such a massive advantage when the top two are easy to define. When they aren't (as they aren't this year), then the punitive nature of the format becomes much harder to defend.
|
|
|
Post by crusaderjoe on Mar 2, 2011 9:55:45 GMT -5
The problem really comes down to parity in the league. As the league as a whole gets better, I think you are going to see more and more worthy #3 seeds being unfairly punished due some crazy tie breaker scenarios. Example: Both teams do equally well against the top 6 teams, both teams slip up at some point during the season against a bottom feeder, but one team slipped up against the #8 where the other one slips up against the #9. (Giving one of these teams a double bye seems to be about as fair as a coin flip to me eddie....) You have to have tie breakers for seeding, but is a team that beat the #1 seed twice but lost to the #7 seed twice really better than a team that split with both? What happens when there is no clear distinction between a team? Argue that an arbitrary tie breaking system proved that Team A had a better season than Team B and that they clearly deserve an advantage of 2 games in the post season tournament?!?! To me that is just crazy. IMO, the tiebreaker is not arbitrary since at least initially the distinction between the tied teams is determined by those tied teams themselves: 3. If three or more teams are tied, compare the combined record of each of the tied teams agains the other teams involved in the tie until an advantage is gained. (Example: Team A’s combined record against both Team B and Team C as compared to Team B’s combined record against both A and C, etc.) www.horizonleague.org/2011mbbchampionshipIf you take care of business during the regular season and when given the opportunity to control your own destiny in league play you win games against teams that you should, and don't crap the bed down the stretch, everything will take care of itself.* *Valpo and Cleveland State please take note.
|
|
|
Post by vufan75 on Mar 2, 2011 10:21:14 GMT -5
Did you have the same criticism for your former athletic director when he whined like a little baby and demanded that "something needs to be done" in the aftermath of your inexcusable loss to the worst team in the league in 2002. Did you send him an email and tell him to quit bellyaching just because your team "threw up on their jerseys." No you didn't, did you? Butler fans should be the last people on the face of the earth to EVER call anyone else "whiners." To the contrary ... I encouraged him to raise heck and tell the HL commish to change the format, which he did. The sooner you guys understand (and accept) who wields the power in this league, the happier your lives will be. FWIW, I'm rooting for you guys this week. I'm pretty confident you'll get some good whistles in Milwaukee this weekend because LeCrone would much rather have a 20 minute drive to Hinkle on Tuesday than a four hour drive back up to The Mecca. eddiec...I just hope you were reading the posts made and stood up and commented on them on the Butler message board a few weeks back. After some apparently disappointing losses in conference, some of the posters were very disappointed and ready to jump ship and write off the season. They really needed a reassuring voice to lecture them that maybe "the sky wasn't falling" for Butler basketball this year, as it seemed from reading some of the messages posted. As I recall, there were message board posters who I assume are loyal Butler fans who were very disappointed the way things were going, and were calling for drastic changes in players minutes, questioning the merits and decision making of Coach Brad Stevens, how the defense played was terrible, how certain players were not playing up to fan expectations, etc etc. I appreciate your "concern" for Valpo basketball and the fans who support Valpo and express their ideas and thoughts on this message board. We have our opinions and thoughts on HL issues, and you certainly are entitled to your opinion. Will we always agree, obviously no. The topic of the HL post season tourney is just one example where there are a wide range of opinions as to the current format. Thanks for your support and rooting for Valpo this week.
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Mar 2, 2011 10:44:21 GMT -5
Did you have the same criticism for your former athletic director when he whined like a little baby and demanded that "something needs to be done" in the aftermath of your inexcusable loss to the worst team in the league in 2002. Did you send him an email and tell him to quit bellyaching just because your team "threw up on their jerseys." No you didn't, did you? Butler fans should be the last people on the face of the earth to EVER call anyone else "whiners." To the contrary ... I encouraged him to raise heck and tell the HL commish to change the format, which he did. The sooner you guys understand (and accept) who wields the power in this league, the happier your lives will be. FWIW, I'm rooting for you guys this week. I'm pretty confident you'll get some good whistles in Milwaukee this weekend because LeCrone would much rather have a 20 minute drive to Hinkle on Tuesday than a four hour drive back up to The Mecca. /sarcasm alert
|
|
|
Post by milldew1 on Mar 2, 2011 10:49:25 GMT -5
Interesting tidbit ... The Ohio Valley this year changed its tourney format from a rather normal format to one almost exactly like the HL style. Seeds 1 and 2 get double byes and seeds 3 and 4 get single byes. Seeds 6-10 play the first round, 3 and 4 join in the quarters and so on. I'm a Murray State grad and loved the tournament the way it always was. Not a fan of the new format.
|
|
|
Post by drewsaders11 on Mar 2, 2011 11:15:10 GMT -5
Still don't like the double bye....never have...never will....even if it was ours.....It sucks and everyone (almost) in the nation knows it but our conference. if not, more would do it....Using your premise, if we had deserved two teams that year, we would have gotten two teams in the tournament. Obviously, we did not....PERIOD !!!!! False..other conferences use it, or something similar. - Big East: 1-4 double bye 5-8 single bye 9-16 no bye
- Big West: 3 teams do not make the tourney out of 9, 1-2 get a bye
- OVC: Bottom three teams do not make tourney, 1-2 double bye, 3-4 single bye, 4-8 play first round
- WAC:Top 2 get a double bye, 3-4 get a bye, 4-8 play first round
- WCC:Top 2 get a double bye, 3-4 get a bye, 4-8 play first round
Several conferences do not allow the bottom one, two, or three teams in the tourney. I would advocate for this, and maybe have the double bye for 1 and 2 (Butler, Milwaukee), single bye for 3 and 4 (CSU, Valpo), and have 5-8 play each other (WSU, Detroit, GB, Loyola), and don't even bother with 9 and 10 (UIC, Y St). Honestly, I think this would be the most equitable (3 conferences do that exactly, with the BE similar, so it must be decent). Thus, 5 out of 30 conferences with a conference tourney and NCAA bid (eliminating the GW and Ivy) have a double bye, with the BW eliminating 3 teams, and mandating 1 and 2 seeds only need win 2 games. That is 20% of conferences in the NCAA. So I disagree that "everyone knows it sucks," and moreso, that "it sucks." Also, would everyone be whining if we actually did what we were supposed to and got the 1 seed? Even in CSU's case, they were in the driver's seat. And as has been said before, the goal is to get the best team to the Dance. I would honestly advocate for no conference tourney ahead of having no byes as rewards for the top teams.
|
|
|
Post by crusadermoe on Mar 2, 2011 11:22:44 GMT -5
I think the double bye and #1 seed host are both great ideas. It really puts meaning into the regular season. Protecting the high seeds is also smart. Let's face it, the Horizon League benefits by putting its strongest 1 or 2 teams into the NCAA.
All the tie-breaker crap in the world doesn't matter if you just win out and make your layups in crunch time.
|
|
|
Post by CO_VU_Fan on Mar 2, 2011 12:20:42 GMT -5
The problem really comes down to parity in the league. As the league as a whole gets better, I think you are going to see more and more worthy #3 seeds being unfairly punished due some crazy tie breaker scenarios. Example: Both teams do equally well against the top 6 teams, both teams slip up at some point during the season against a bottom feeder, but one team slipped up against the #8 where the other one slips up against the #9. (Giving one of these teams a double bye seems to be about as fair as a coin flip to me eddie....) You have to have tie breakers for seeding, but is a team that beat the #1 seed twice but lost to the #7 seed twice really better than a team that split with both? What happens when there is no clear distinction between a team? Argue that an arbitrary tie breaking system proved that Team A had a better season than Team B and that they clearly deserve an advantage of 2 games in the post season tournament?!?! To me that is just crazy. Great point, and this is the issue that the supporters of the current model want to ignore. It's defensible to give the top two teams such a massive advantage when the top two are easy to define. When they aren't (as they aren't this year), then the punitive nature of the format becomes much harder to defend. Thought it had been awhile since I've seen that avatar! Welcome back Valpotentate!
|
|