VoyForums

VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12345678910 ]
Subject: What the.....?


Author:
joiseyfan
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 15:57:59 02/19/17 Sun

Meanwhile, back in men's Bball, the wheels have totally come off in New Haven. Just look at this weekend's home stats. Next Friday night at Harvard, looking at four straight losses.

What gives, blues?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
IvyBallFan
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:22:26 02/19/17 Sun

The Princeton loss was not totally off the charts.

However, it may not be fair to blame the Blue for Sunday. Donahue seems to have finally figured out an eight man rotation that is really clicking for Penn. He inserted a couple new starters, including frosh Betley, in the past couple weeks.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
M3
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:28:52 02/19/17 Sun

Hard to see the Eli losing more than 2 out of their last 4.

6/6 should put them in the tourney.

Columbia and Penn both 4-6 and in 4th place, should be interesting.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: This pretty much proves the pro-tourney peoples' points


Author:
Go Green
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:05:37 02/19/17 Sun


A year ago, nobody would care about any game not involving Princeton (and probably not even then even) at this point.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: This pretty much proves the pro-tourney peoples' points


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 19:08:35 02/19/17 Sun

GG, nobody in the anti-tourney crowd ever disputed the fact that holding a tourney keeps the suspense going through the championship game Sunday afternoon. That's common sense not subject to argument.

The anti-tourney crowd for the most part is not against fan interest, they just have a different set of values than you do. If -- and at this point, it's still a huge "if" -- Princeton wins the regular season, I don't think they should have to beat any more Ivy opponents to earn our automatic bid. The worst case scenario would be if the Tigers go 14-0 and wind up in the NIT.

That's not a question of fan interest, that's a question of what we think the regular season should mean. How much of your opinion is based upon the fact that Dartmouth can't win a 14-game regular season and would never in a million years go 14-0?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: This pretty much proves the pro-tourney peoples' points


Author:
M3
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 19:54:38 02/19/17 Sun

GG is correct that the basketball tourney creates excitement/interest.

What it also means is that the winner of the regular season has a meaningless championship as it does not guarantee a spot in the NCAA playoffs.

Something wrong with that.

With Harvard clearly going national in terms of its program my best hope is that in the future the Ivy League will get potentially 2 slots in the tourney so that the regular season is not just a warm up for a 2 game season to see who goes to the national tournament.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: This pretty much proves the pro-tourney peoples' points


Author:
florida lion
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:13:04 02/19/17 Sun

M3. No argument from me on the cheapening of the regular season. The "wild card" concept has come to the Ivy League.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: We clearly have different defintions of "meaningless"


Author:
Go Green
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 23:06:00 02/19/17 Sun


To me, a #1 seed in the league tournament and a guarantee that you won't do any worse than the NIT is not "meaningless."

And the rest of the world seems to be on my side on this point.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: I find it interesting


Author:
Calvin
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 08:01:42 02/20/17 Mon

That when you are in a clear minority you have no hesitation about calling the majority wrong, and now (if) you are in the majority you claim validation.

From where I sit, right or wrong depends on the arguments being made, not who or how many agree with you. As illustrious former Duke scholar Kyrie Irving recently pointed out, there was a time when most people thought the Earth was flat.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: "Vehemently suspect of heresy"


Author:
Diogenes
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 10:06:45 02/20/17 Mon


[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
joiseyfan
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:14:49 02/19/17 Sun

The current SI bracketology has Princeton at a 13 (against #4 UCLA, a sorta spooky replication of 1996). All the other Ivies have lower Sagarin ratings than Bucknell, which is rated a 15, against Carolina. Another Ivy getting even a 14 would involve a good deal of luck. Princeton's chances of improving its seed by beating two lower rated Ivies is zero.

If that doesn't bug you, have a great time at the Palestra rooting for UNC.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
Eastern Sports Fan
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:29:36 02/20/17 Mon

An Ivy regular season champion losing in a misguided tournament would have to be at least 10-seed material to even get a sniff at an at-large berth. Same for a 2nd place regular season finisher dreaming of an at-large. Dream on.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Short memories


Author:
Go Green
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:39:04 02/20/17 Mon


Runner up Princeton women were an 11 seed last year.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Short memories


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 15:24:43 02/20/17 Mon

Is this how lawyers make their cases, by referring to a completely irrelevant fact unconnected to the topic at hand?

The topic is Ivy League *MEN'S* basketball where we have never earned an at-large bid. That it happened for the first time last year on the women's side is no more relevant than the fact Ivy lacrosse or soccer teams routinely get at-large bids.

Some of us believe that playing a double round robin where each team goes head-to-head with every other Ivy, home and away, is the fairest and most legitimate of determining who gets our valuable lone bid.

That other fans put the entertainment of fans and tweeters above the principle of fairness is their opinion. That some players and coaches agree is also their reasonable opinion. It's just not one we share.

And none of that has anything to do with whether we get an at-large bid on the women's side.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Short memories


Author:
observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:10:30 02/20/17 Mon

Since when is fairness the objective? Or determining the "best" team? All red herrings. This is a league that doesn't break ties when two or three teams have the same record at the top of the standings - it is obvious that they don't care who is "objectively" the "best."

The idea that the old system was "fair" is only an opinion. It doesn't take into account the fact that Saturday games have different officiating pools than Friday games. it doesn't take into account weather disruptions which can affect travel in the northeast (like the recent snowstorm) and disproportionately hurt the southern teams traveling in adverse conditions.

The fairness concept doesn't take into considerations the imbalance of home/road games at the early point of the season, which can affect which teams get off to better starts than others.

The fairness concept doesn't take into consideration exam schedule differences, etc. etc.

It's a made up argument, one of conjecture and not based in objectivity.

What is true is that the current setup is best to keep alumni and students engaged with Ivy League basketball on all 8 campuses (campi?), as well as provide maximum exposure to the eventual NCAA representative on ESPN's family of networks.

The previous format never accomplished this.

If the league is serious about being a division one conference, this is more important than the "fairness" and "objectively the best" issues.

Otherwise, D-3 is the answer. They don't care about attendance, publicity or anything else... so if that's the model you want...

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Fine...


Author:
Go Green
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:56:15 02/20/17 Mon


An Ivy men's team will never get an at-large bid as an 11 seed... until one does.

We never thought the women would get two bids for the longest time either.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
Son of Eli
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:12:32 02/20/17 Mon

Yale will need AJ Brodeur to step it up big time, especially offensively, if they are going to stop this slide.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
Son of Eli
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:14:32 02/20/17 Mon

Sorry, meant Jordan Bruner. Home with the flu. Must be effecting my brain.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:52:05 02/20/17 Mon

Probably worth noting that the coaches and ADs approved the tournament unanimously.

I understand those that like the 14-Game Tournament format to decide the bid. If you define the winner of the 14-GT as the best, then any other team receiving the bid will see discordant.

For me, the fact that the objectively best team isn't guaranteed to win the 14-GT or the four-team tournament makes me less inclined to believe the 14-GT is sacrosanct. We're actually in a sweet spot of the outcome of the four-team tournaments not being *that* different than the 14-GT due to the current parity in the league at the top: And while I appreciate the narrative on the odds of a second bid, it's a myopic view that doesn't take into account how much better the league has been recently (and how much better a currently frosh/soph driven league is about to become).

I'd have preferred to see other much more important changes be made (paid 3rd chair, MTEs every year, rolling back goofy practice limits that aren't keeping the players off the court, but just keeping coaches from their players, etc) that would impact the quality of our game more directly. But I can see an easy path to the reward outweighing the risk here, so I'm willing to wait and see how it goes...

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: The Best Team


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 22:13:36 02/20/17 Mon

Let me say as many positive things about the tournament as possible:

(1) If we're going to have a tournament at all, a four-team tournament is far preferable to an eight-team tournament. Restricting the field to four teams at least makes the "Who will win the fourth spot?" discussion a fun bit of speculation and a meaningful competition, whereas an eight-team field would render the regular season even less meaningful.

(2) Since having the tournament at all is motivated in part by the desire to have "fun," holding the men's and women's tournaments in the same locale and at the same time increases the fun. But this precludes rewarding the #1 seed with home court advantage, except by coincidence, and that's too bad.

(3) One nice thing about the invention of Facebook is getting periodic, though irregular, invitations to be friends from the smoking hot girls in high school, cheerleaders and majorettes, who at the time would not deign to expand their circle of friends beyond the starting backfield of the football team. I just received one tonight and I'm already standing a little taller and a little prouder. Also caught a little wood, too.

(4) I don't define the winner of the 14-game tournament as "best;" I define them as most deserving. Your point, mrjames, is that random variance affects both a 14-game sequence as well as a 2-game sequence, neither of whom are absolutely, positively guaranteed to identify the pure "best" team. **ALL** of sports is not about identifying the "best" team; it's about identifying the most deserving. If the Atlanta Falcons had kicked the 40-yard field goal with two minutes left in the Super Bowl, they still would not have been the best team in the NFL, just the most deserving. As it turned out, they ended up neither.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: The Best Team


Author:
mrjames
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 07:44:17 02/21/17 Tue

Team A goes 13-1
Team B goes 12-2

Team B dumped a road game early in the league season, because stuff happens, but otherwise A&B split.

In the Ivy tourney, Team A loses in round one. Team B wins twice and nabs the bid. Team A is now 13-2. Team B is 14-2. Who is most deserving?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: The Best Team


Author:
Bengal
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:57:58 02/21/17 Tue

What is your opinion?

In my opinion, it is Team A, clearly. Over the course of seven weeks in which every team starts out in the same place, and plays their opponents twice, once at home and once away, they had the best record. While much of this is a matter of opinion, my opinion is that it is unfair to deprive Team A of the automatic NCAA bid based on one weekend of performance in a league where no men's team has obtained an at-large bid.

And your hypothetical, while interesting in theory, hardly describes the universe of potential outcomes where, in just one example, Team A, at 13-1, loses in a tournament in which a 10-4 team wins the tourney. What is your opinion as to who was most deserving in that case?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: The Best Team


Author:
Go Green
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:11:50 02/21/17 Tue


Even if Team B lost their games because their star player was sidelined with a temporary illness?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: The Best Team


Author:
Bengal
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:27:26 02/21/17 Tue

Did Team A lose two veteran, senior starters to injury before the Ivy season began? Or did someone flunk out, or get benched for indiscreet behavior on Team A or B? Did Team A, in your hypothetical, lose its tourney game "because their star player was sidelined with a temporary illness?"

At the start of the season, any of these things can happen to any team. They all play 14 games, one at home, one away against each opponent. In a one bid league, it is the fairest way to award a post-season NCAA bid.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: The Best Team


Author:
An Observer
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 14:17:16 02/21/17 Tue

mrjames, in your example, obviously it's a close call to say which of Team A or Team B is most deserving. We're splitting hairs here. But suppose one believes that Team A's second loss is "better" due to it having taken place against a tournament team, potentially a better loss than Team B's random loss. Who's to say that Team A isn't still more deserving?

And if Team A does lose in the tournament, does it deserve another bite at the apple, that is, another chance to beat the tournament winner? After all, Team B got its second chance to mitigate its second loss.

I guess the larger question is, "At what point do you stop counting?" America believes in second chances but then why not a third chance? If two is good, then three must be better, right? Fourteen games afforded every team an opportunity, home and away, even Steven.

I'm the first to concede that, given the looming threats to our free press and the separation of powers in our government, this particular issue does not rise high on the list of my concerns. But the inevitable clash between fairness and "entertainment/fan interest/extending the relevance of last season games for second division teams" just happens to be exacerbated this year because there is a chance -- only a chance -- that a 14-0 regular season champ will have to play a #4 seed on an eight-game winning streak on its home court. I'd rather have the answers to why Trump loves Putin, but the Ivy tournament is also on my mind.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
Bengal
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 13:02:23 02/21/17 Tue

It is not a question of which format -- 14 games or two post-season games -- produces the "best" team. As I remarked years ago when this issue was discussed, you would need a committee of basketball philosopher kings to determine who the best team is in many years.

And if you want to define 'best' as who has a chance to go the furthest in the NCAAs, in some years back in the distant day, Princeton might have been the "best" pick because teams not used to our style then would have a more difficult time against us then against the League winner.

The issue, to me, as I mentioned in a different post in this thread, is what is fair under current circumstances. To me, under current circumstances, that is the League winner after the 14 game season.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
Old Eli
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 05:40:55 02/21/17 Tue

we are kicking around the same argument that most div 1 conferences have faced at one point or another. our calculus is a bit different than, say, the big ten or pac-10, where there will be at-large bids for teams that don't win the tourney and the revenue questions are completely different.

however, all the other small fry leagues have the same question we do where you can expect one and only one slot in the tournament.

no one can claim full authority over the simple issue of whether you want to reward the team that performed well over the whole season, or a team that might have put it all together and is the hottest at the end of the season, or the team that performed the best under the biggest pressure, etc. but i look around and just about everyone else has sided on a conference tournament. insert the ascii shrug guy here, if you please.

if we do end up in a scenario where princeton runs the table in the regular season and then loses in the tournament, oh well, them's the rules kids. i would reckon that somehow, some way, the ivy league, princeton university and civilization as a whole will overcome such a horrid outcome.

apologize for no caps, feeling a bit ee cummings-ish today.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
Diogenes
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 11:56:57 02/21/17 Tue

Agree with voy vey.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Tournaments


Author:
voy vey
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 09:46:51 02/21/17 Tue

Just my opinion, but...

Tournaments serve one primary purpose in sports: determining the champion of a grouping where round-robin play is not feasible.

All NFL teams can't play each other, so a process is warranted whereby the most deserving teams are slotted and play down to one champion.

This is no more obviously relevant than NCAA national championships, where 350+ teams play wildly-varying and relatively-limited schedules. The same holds true for state championships at the interscholastic level.

In a grouping where every team plays every other team -- twice -- during the season, what competitive purpose does a tournament serve?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> Subject: Re: What the.....?


Author:
Jerrylh
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 17:30:31 02/21/17 Tue

FWIW

I think the IVY tourney is a great idea.
Do you think the winner of the IVY league tournament is going to the NCAA final four??
Just look at this as an additional opportunity to watch the best IVY teams go at each other.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]


VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
* Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:


Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2017 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.