|
Post by damasa on Mar 2, 2011 13:40:30 GMT -5
The team really getting screwed in this format is Cleveland State. Not only do they have the best overall record in the league, but they tied for the championship...their reward, play 4 games to win the championship. Simply not fair and I don't care what the league office thinks...it's just not Ummm, how is it not fair? It doesn't matter that they have the best overall record in the league, the HL Tourney is all about league play and that's it. CSU should have taken care of business against Milwaukee and maybe they'd be in a different situation. If you don't get business done in league play your play outside of the league means crap (from a seeding standpoint for the HL tourney). But let me guess, it's not fair that both Milwaukee and Butler went on a tear at the end of the season and earned their seeds? Both had an amazing run at the end of the season and it wouldn't be fair if they didn't get rewarded. It was earned.
|
|
|
Post by hckjag on Mar 2, 2011 14:57:31 GMT -5
The tournament format does what it has set out to do. Personally, I like that it rewards the best teams. I do think there is an imbalance between 1-2 and 3-4. The 3-4 seeds could just as easily be rewarded with at least a single bye. But then you would eventually get into the same scenario where the 3rd, 4th and 5th place teams all have the same records during the season and it comes down to tiebreaker.
Of course it sucks that my team didn't get the double bye and has to win 4 games instead of 2, but I think the main idea is that the tournament has accomplished what it set out to do.
I think the way real change would occur would be if the HL somehow became good enough that every year the top two teams could gain an at large bid to the NCAA. Then the HL could look to change the format to give the other teams a better chance at pulling the upset in the tournament so that the HL could get 3 teams into the dance.
For now I'll just be hoping for some good old fashioned upsets (but not until Saturday).
|
|
|
Post by justducky on Mar 2, 2011 16:56:56 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. I chose to quote Moe here because with very few words, he has completely summarized the position of the pro double bye supporters. Thank you Moe. Since I am responsible for restarting this firestorm of arguement just two nights ago, please let me attempt to make our (or at least my) closing statement. I think most of you would agree that the Valpo loss to Loyola would not have happened had it meant something. It did not, we had lost the 1 seed and had only a remote chance at the 2. Let us then imagine that the Mike Rogers layup or tip actually falls in at Milwaukee. Nothing else changes, we still lose at Green Bay and UWM still wins at Cleveland. The results in the standing then become VU at 1 Butler and CSU tied at 2 with Butler having the tiebreaker. UWM drops to 4 , beats JSU last night and comes to the ARC friday to play Detroit. Some numbers have been posted here by myself and others that can give us a general sense of the probabilty of advancement for each seeding position. We can quibble about these numbers , but I believe them to be inthe range of being reasonably accurate. So- we now have UWM (still the hottest team in the Horizon) playing from the 4 seed poition. In my calculations that should reduce their chance for a tournament title from the range of 38-44% down to a range of from 10-18% (I only gave VU and CSU an 8% chance from the 3 and 4 but UWM is as I said THE hot team). To sum it up we now have one shot that Valpo rolled in reduceing the Milwaukee title chances by 26-28%. If you agree that this number is outrageous then some adjustments will have to be made. If you think that the end justifies the means and that the double bye generally will deliver the top 2 teams to the top 2 seeds then we will never change your minds. If parity does break out in the Horizon(as I suspect), then year by year (like global warming) the ice supporting the double bye will shrink crack and collapse. So if you are a double bye supporter who has been vociferous in the condemnation of the other point of view, then you might wish to lower the tone of debate, because eventually we may be the guys deciding who gets pulled first from the freezeing water.
|
|
|
Post by rlh on Mar 2, 2011 17:08:56 GMT -5
The thing that keeps getting lost in this, at least in my position....is that I don't care who the top 2 seeds are or are not....I DON"T like the set up...PERIOD.....some of you keep saying if Valpo was one of the top seeds, we'd feel differently....No i wouldn't....I don't like this set up no matter who it favors year to year. I especially don't like it when you have three teams who EARNED the top spot in the league and one of them is forced to play two additional games to win. My position has nothing to do with the fact that I am a VU fan, it has everything to do with what I think is fair to all.
|
|
|
Post by damasa on Mar 2, 2011 17:51:50 GMT -5
The thing that keeps getting lost in this, at least in my position....is that I don't care who the top 2 seeds are or are not....I DON"T like the set up...PERIOD.....some of you keep saying if Valpo was one of the top seeds, we'd feel differently....No i wouldn't....I don't like this set up no matter who it favors year to year. I especially don't like it when you have three teams who EARNED the top spot in the league and one of them is forced to play two additional games to win. My position has nothing to do with the fact that I am a VU fan, it has everything to do with what I think is fair to all. Noted, you don't like the setup, nor do other people. However, I do like the setup as do other people...PERIOD I think this year is the prime example of why league play is so dang important. If you want the #1 seed, the double-bye to the semis and homecourt, earn the wins in league and get it done.
|
|
|
Post by stlvufan on Mar 2, 2011 18:38:51 GMT -5
The thing that keeps getting lost in this, at least in my position....is that I don't care who the top 2 seeds are or are not....I DON"T like the set up...PERIOD.....some of you keep saying if Valpo was one of the top seeds, we'd feel differently....No i wouldn't....I don't like this set up no matter who it favors year to year. I especially don't like it when you have three teams who EARNED the top spot in the league and one of them is forced to play two additional games to win. My position has nothing to do with the fact that I am a VU fan, it has everything to do with what I think is fair to all. Noted, you don't like the setup, nor do other people. However, I do like the setup as do other people...PERIOD I think this year is the prime example of why league play is so dang important. If you want the #1 seed, the double-bye to the semis and homecourt, earn the wins in league and get it done. No one on either side disputes that this puts a heavy premium on the regular season.
|
|
|
Post by damasa on Mar 2, 2011 20:32:44 GMT -5
Noted, you don't like the setup, nor do other people. However, I do like the setup as do other people...PERIOD I think this year is the prime example of why league play is so dang important. If you want the #1 seed, the double-bye to the semis and homecourt, earn the wins in league and get it done. No one on either side disputes that this puts a heavy premium on the regular season. Very valid point. I think the tournament format will continue to be a heated debate until the end of days.
|
|
|
Post by wh on Mar 2, 2011 20:50:45 GMT -5
I especially don't like it when you have three teams who EARNED the top spot in the league and one of them is forced to play two additional games to win. That is exactly the case. Cleveland State, Butler and Milwaukee are officially 2010-2011 Men's Basketball Co-Champions. There are no tie-breakers for the regular season.
|
|
|
Post by valpo89 on Mar 2, 2011 21:16:49 GMT -5
If Milwaukee loses, do they get the automatic NIT bid since they were the No. 1 seed?
|
|
|
Post by drewsaders11 on Mar 2, 2011 21:33:16 GMT -5
no...its whoever gets the furthest in the conference tourney. So if we beat them in the semis and Butler or CSU in the finals, then Butler or CSU gets the auto to the NIT, given they don't go to the NCAA's.
|
|
|
Post by blackpantheruwm on Mar 2, 2011 21:35:36 GMT -5
Really? Cleveland State is 1-3 against the other two. I would say that isn't "earning" it.
Put it this way. Three teams with a 20-10 record are on the NCAA Bubble for two spots. One team is 3-1 against the top 50, one is 2-2, and one is 1-3. They have nearly identical RPI's.
Who gets in?
|
|
|
Post by milanmiracle on Mar 2, 2011 21:50:16 GMT -5
The thing that keeps getting lost in this, at least in my position....is that I don't care who the top 2 seeds are or are not....I DON"T like the set up...PERIOD.....some of you keep saying if Valpo was one of the top seeds, we'd feel differently....No i wouldn't....I don't like this set up no matter who it favors year to year. I especially don't like it when you have three teams who EARNED the top spot in the league and one of them is forced to play two additional games to win. My position has nothing to do with the fact that I am a VU fan, it has everything to do with what I think is fair to all. Let me say this rant isn't directed toward RLH, I am just using his quote. (thank you kind sir) And that's the issue. It's not supposed to be fair to all. It's supposed to be fair to the top 2 teams. It's not like the tiebreakers were a secret and revealed after Cleveland State finished 3rd. And we want to talk about things we hate, I despise the tied for first theory. You have a tiebreaker to decide seeding, then have a tiebreaker for the Horizon League championship. Don't list co-champs. There's one champ...Milwaukee. Milwaukee was 1st, Butler was 2nd, and CSU was third. They weren't all tied for first when they seeded the HL tourney were they? If you aren't fighting for a 1 or 2 seed and a significant advantage in the Horizon League tournament, then who really cares about conference standings? A conference is just teams getting together to make scheduling easier and to guarantee an automatic bid to the NCAA's. Might as well finish last in conference as well as finishing first because you're playing the same teams in the end, right? Knock off number 1 in the opening round, and in essence you're the 1 seed. At that point, everything really is preparation for the Horizon League tourney and nothing else. If you really want to make it fair, go the Ivy League route and reward the regular season champ with the NCAA bid and cancel the tournament. Oh, but then there's that darn money issue again.. I don't think you can have it both ways. You can't have the regular season mean something, and have the conference tournament fair to everyone. There's my rant, enjoy!
|
|
|
Post by valpotentate on Mar 3, 2011 8:27:57 GMT -5
Supporters of the current tournament model:
I see a lot of support for the concept that a team just needs to "take care of business", "win the games that matter", etc when it comes to the regular season. I'm confused why you don't think that this same concept translates to the tournament. Shouldn't the quality teams be able to win four (or three) games in the tournament without the excessive advantage of a double bye? I think an argument can just as easily be made that a team that can't make it through a conference tournament didn't "take care of business" and isn't the best representative of the conference in the NCAA tourney.
|
|
|
Post by browntown on Mar 3, 2011 10:21:00 GMT -5
Not to change the subject (back to the thread's title), but I think it will be interesting to see how VU reacts being an "underdog" of sorts. All of the unraveling at the end of the season was partly due to other teams trying to knock off a top team, and partly due to VU not being able to handle the onslaught. Even for Round 1, we were at home. Perhaps --if we can get past Detroit tomorrow-- we'll be primed to knock off a higher seed and get to the championship game. It'll be an interesting weekend (again, IF we can get past Detroit).
|
|
|
Post by milanmiracle on Mar 3, 2011 15:06:54 GMT -5
I get what you're saying, but mentally they appear to be done. Once you get kicked in the teeth like they did, it's tough to recover. Look at the YSU game. Instead of playing like they deserved to be winning by a large margin, it seemed they did everything they could to help YSU come back. Quick shots, silly turnovers, ect. Those are things a team serious about winning a conference tournament can't do.
I guess we'll see, but I think they're done after this game.
|
|