VoyForums
GIVE FREE FOOD
www.TheHungerSite.com
-> Click Here <-
Fund Free Mammograms with a Click
www.TheBreastCancerSite.com
-> Click Here <-
Non-profit ad served by VoyForums...

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


Author:
IvyBallFan
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 16:22:26 02/19/17 Sun
In reply to: joiseyfan 's message, "What the.....?" on 15:57:59 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.

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

Replies:
[> 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 ]


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 © 1998-2016 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.