Back to Post
| Username | Post: post season BB tourney | |
|---|---|---|
|
internetter PhD Student Posts 1721 |
05-10-12 03:33 PM - Post#129130
At last week's meeting, ADs rejected the proposal.
|
|
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 8784 |
05-10-12 03:42 PM - Post#129131
Any idea as to what the vote was and who voted for/against it? |
|
|
internetter PhD Student Posts 1721 |
05-10-12 04:18 PM - Post#129132
nothing, yet, on vote; some speculation some ADs didn't like the possibility of giving up a league game said meeting may have been this week, not last
|
|
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 8784 |
05-10-12 04:28 PM - Post#129133
To me that would be a deal breaker also. You can't have the Ivies--an 8 team conference, without a full round robin. However, they could simply schedule a December Ivy set of games. |
|
|
gokinsmen Postdoc Posts 2271 |
05-10-12 08:43 PM - Post#129137
nothing, yet, on vote; some speculation some ADs didn't like the possibility of giving up a league game said meeting may have been this week, not last Wasn't it already clarified that it would be a NON-conference game that's cut and not a league game? |
|
|
Dr. V Masters Student Posts 845 |
05-11-12 08:28 AM - Post#129152
I lean toward a "small" tournament, i.e., with the top 4 teams, but my preferences aside, I'd like to know, and I believe we are entitled to know, why the ADs decided what they did and who took what position. The ADs are not, after all, a politburo. That one sentence statement does not cut it. |
|
|
Silver Maple PhD Student Posts 1992 |
05-11-12 09:09 AM - Post#129153
I, too, would like to know why they rejected it. I also would very much like to know what problem the ADs believe a tournament would solve, or what opportunity they believe it would leverage. But I have trouble agreeing that we are 'entitled' to any of that information. |
|
|
Condor PhD Student Posts 1276 |
05-11-12 02:21 PM - Post#129171
NYT Blog Ivy League Rejects Idea for Conference Basketball Tournament By THE NEW YORK TIMES The athletic directors of the Ivy League have turned down a proposal by its coaches for a postseason conference tournament in men’s and women’s basketball, the league said Thursday. “After careful consideration of these proposals, the athletics directors decided that our current method of determining the Ivy League champion and our automatic bid recipient to the N.C.A.A. championship is the best model moving forward,” Robin Harris, the Ivy League’s executive director, said in a statement. The prospect of an Ivy League basketball tournament comes up every now and then, and Jonathan Tannenwald showed where the old guard of men’s coaches stood on the issue in 2008. The Harvard Crimson outlined the structure of the proposal last month, describing a two-round tournament for the top four finishers in the conference’s regular-season standings. In an interview with The Daily Princetonian last month, Kyle Smith, the men’s basketball coach at Columbia, explained why coaches favored a conference tournament, citing the possibility of having multiple teams in the national tournament or perhaps improving the league’s seeding. There were other pros, of course: attracting new recruits, the possibility of the title game being televised and increasing participation for alumni. Among the negatives were the break with tradition and the possibility of the league’s best team being upset and missing the N.C.A.A. tournament altogether. Some traditionalists voiced disgust with the proposal or at least supported the current system, which awards the N.C.A.A. automatic bid to the winner of a 14-game round-robin. Each team plays the other seven teams twice, home and away, mostly on Friday and Saturday nights, and some people have even come to refer to the Ivy League season as the 14-Game Tournament. Harvard won the men’s title last season, its first outright Ivy League title ever after sharing it with Princeton the season before, then lost to Vanderbilt in the N.C.A.A. tournament. Princeton won the women’s title for the third consecutive year, then lost to Kansas State. |
|
|
Dr. V Masters Student Posts 845 |
05-11-12 03:00 PM - Post#129177
Re entitlement, I think that those of us who are season ticket holders, contributors etc. deserve to know what the reasoning is behind policy decisions relating to those activities that we're asked to support. I don't think we're entitled to have a voice, but I do think we're entitled to know what's going on and why policy-wise. Policy decision are different from, e.g., personnel decisions or financial decisions. |
|
|
gokinsmen Postdoc Posts 2271 |
05-12-12 06:55 PM - Post#129193
Article Summary: "Mysterious Cabal Rejects Proposal Supported by All Eight Head Coaches Without Giving Any Reason Whatsoever or Revealing Who Voted For or Against." Well done, Ivy ADs! |
|
|
Tiger69 Masters Student Posts 536 |
05-13-12 12:33 PM - Post#129201
Oh please, go away Bad Idea!  What is the entire Ivy season for if the champ doesn't even get the prize? It's not like an Ivy team is ever going to win the NCAA tournament, no matter who represents us. If we MUST have a d**n post season tournament, see my earlier idea about giving the winner of it a nice shiny trophy and grumbling rights (and the second NCAA bid, if that ever happens). The SEASON winner should earn the automatic right to dance. Always. |
|
|
 |
|
| Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved. Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution. |
|