Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 4 of 8 « First<4567>
Username Post: Yale        (Topic#20114)
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1040

Reg: 02-15-15
03-19-17 11:05 AM - Post#227676    
    In response to bradley

  • bradley Said:
The point is that some of us just think that the IL Tournament is foolish and does not support the overarching objective of the IL continuing on its upward trajectory.

Most of us accept that the tournament will exist for a number of years unless a "perfect storm" hits more than one time over the next few years. This year, Robin and her merry men dodged the first bullet.

Many of us also believe that the initial IL Tournament was a testament to amateur hour and hopefully, some lessons have been learned to improve the format, location, etc. but it is doubtful based on what we have seen so far.



The idea that the IL tournament is the product of a conspiracy backed by a small group of people is lunacy. The vast majority of people want this tournament (Players, coaches, AD's, fans). The people on this board are decidedly in the minority. So this isn't Robin Harris' and her merry men.

As Old Bear said, get over it.


 
Tiger81 
Freshman
Posts: 85
Tiger81
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
03-19-17 12:33 PM - Post#227684    
    In response to PennFan10

I did not take that reference as a Trumpian "deep state" paranoid fantasy, but rather as a clever (to me at least) play on words by an anti-tourney advocate.

I have been in that camp too and am now resigned and ready to move on but hope that the league can come up with a format to award the regular season champ more of a built-in advantage. A bye to the title game makes sense to me with a 2/3 play-in. And since they have placed a big emphasis on co-locating the men and women then a neutral court is the best outcome (although I would prefer the 1 seed's home court).

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3114

Reg: 02-04-06
Yale
03-19-17 01:41 PM - Post#227694    
    In response to Tiger81

No is going to "move on" from this idiocy until it is fixed. The PR talk about how wonderful everything is should be taken for what it is--people whose words would actually attract attention if they dissented choosing to "move on" rather than create a distraction for themselves and their teams. (No-filter Bangheart was the only honest voice I heard about the devaluing of the regular season.) But the near-death experience of that first-round 1-4 game this season as well as the poor attendance, compressed schedule, and shambolic tie-breaking rules may concentrate some minds even if the basic folly can't be admitted in public.

Edited by SRP on 03-19-17 01:42 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2045

Reg: 11-23-04
Yale
03-19-17 01:42 PM - Post#227695    
    In response to Tiger81

PennFan: When/IF Penn wins the real title and faces a tough 4 seed at the tourney, held that hypothetical year in Jadwin, you'll change your tune.

The tourney is a consolation prize for the losers and should be regarded and rewarded as such -- a chance for Penny and Harry and Yolanda ---and Billy (sorry, I nearly overlooked you, OB) to build their self esteem and keep them interested in play time. They should all get a little prize for that.

Edited by Tiger69 on 03-19-17 01:47 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4722

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
03-19-17 02:01 PM - Post#227709    
    In response to Tiger69

From the impressions I'm getting, this is unlikely to take place in The Palestra next year. It does seem like it will happen again, though.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1040

Reg: 02-15-15
03-19-17 02:23 PM - Post#227714    
    In response to mrjames

Tiger69,

I can assure you I will not change my tune. The IL tourney is a good thing for the league and college basketball. I encourage them to tweak it.

SRP,

Poor attendance is a fact in just about every regular season and post season game in most college basketball leagues not in the power conferences. That has nothing to do with the existence of a conference tourney. Compressed schedule? The Big Ten teams played 4 games is 4 days. Not a unique problem to the IL. Tie breaker rules definitely need more clarity.

The Tournament is great for everyone but a few of you.

 
bradley 
Masters Student
Posts: 487

Age: 68
Reg: 01-15-16
03-19-17 03:11 PM - Post#227723    
    In response to mrjames

Ironically, Howard's missed FT and Stephens tip in will keep the IL Tournament alive for the time being. I always thought that it would take two perfect storms in a row or 2 out of 3 years to possibly kill the IL tournament and I am happy that the perfect storm did not take place. Seems likely that the league will move the tournament location.

I agree with your thoughts that the IL is on an upward trajectory and the IL Tournament will be probably be less risky over time if the same format is maintained although time will tell.

In retrospect, it was a risky play to introduce the IL Tournament with four teams at the Palestra this year. It turned out that this year's 4th seed had an 18% chance to win the IL Tournament and represent the league as a 16th seed. Two good players, Howard and AJ would have tried to fend off the Polish kid and Collins in the post or some other #1 seed and probably lose by 20 points or more based on historical stats over the past 20+ years. Yale probably would have played Kentucky or UNC and been trampled in all likelihood -- very tough being a #15 or #16 seed. Nothing good for the league's reputation would have come out of it.

Some of us who objected to the IL tournament were predicting this risk way back when. Did the IL Tournament really think through the format and location?? -- you would hope so. If anyone objectively looked at the quality of the IL team that have finished in 4th place over the past 10 years, I do not think that you would have recommended the format. As a professor once stated, you better think through the consequences of what you recommend.

Let's hope as you suggest that the IL will be on an upward trajectory if the league continues on with the tournament.

 
TigerFan 
Masters Student
Posts: 872

Reg: 11-21-04
03-19-17 03:24 PM - Post#227724    
    In response to PennFan10

Any comparisons of the IL to a "Power 5" conference are absurd. There is very little riding on the outcome of those power conferences' post-season tournaments. The IL has constructed a two-day tournament with everything (i.e. the NCAA tournament bid) riding on it. The league needs to find an appropriate way to provide an advantage to the regular season champion if it is going to persist with this folly.

PS I don't understand the obsession with having the men's and women's tournaments in the same location. Do the Ivies do this for any other sport? Lacrosse tournaments are held at home of the regular season champions.



 
Go Green 
Junior
Posts: 261

Age: 46
Reg: 04-22-10
03-19-17 03:55 PM - Post#227725    
    In response to mrjames

  • mrjames Said:
From the impressions I'm getting, this is unlikely to take place in The Palestra next year. It does seem like it will happen again, though.



Ok.

Where then?

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2045

Reg: 11-23-04
03-19-17 03:59 PM - Post#227727    
    In response to mrjames

I HATE to paraphrase Wharton's most famous alumnus, but the tourney is for LOSERS.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2045

Reg: 11-23-04
03-19-17 04:24 PM - Post#227729    
    In response to Tiger69

Power conferences:
--Regular conference season is for tournament seedings.
--Tournament games for lifting EVERYONE's RPI for NCAA seeding and extra bids for mediocre teams. (9, that's NINE .. to the ACC this year!)

We get 1, that's ONE, bid We are different. Better? What the hell is the tourney for, except to shoot ourselves in the face? Unless, of course, we use it to award a consolation prize to the runners up to the champion.

Tail wagging dog: our circumstances don't match multi bid conferences. Just because other single bid conferences are foolish enough to cave to NCAA and possibly place an inferior team in the Dance through a tourney upset doesn't mean we have to ape their timidity. We simply send our champ and then have a tourney to showcase our runners up. Will the winner get an NIT bid? Let's take our chances and not get jerked around by the NCAA like a bunch of pussies. If a tourney winner from a single bid is good enough for the NCAA, it is certainly worthy of the less distinguished NIT (or, TAR --Tourney of Also Rans).

Come on, Ivies. Get some cajones.

 
Go Green 
Junior
Posts: 261

Age: 46
Reg: 04-22-10
03-19-17 04:34 PM - Post#227731    
    In response to Tiger69

  • Tiger69 Said:
Let's take our chances and not get jerked around by the NCAA like a bunch of pussies.



We tried that in 1966.

We lost. http://www.phillyvoice.com/fifty-years-ago-penn- wa...

What makes you think this time will be different?

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2045

Reg: 11-23-04
03-19-17 04:48 PM - Post#227734    
    In response to Go Green

That's the dark ages.

 
bradley 
Masters Student
Posts: 487

Age: 68
Reg: 01-15-16
Re: Yale
03-19-17 05:30 PM - Post#227740    
    In response to SRP

Some of the pro IL Tournament supporters have suggested that individuals that have different perspectives are "loose" with facts, fear mongers, etc.

There has been little if any commentary from the pro IL supporters as to being 12 seconds away from concerns that were raised by a number of us -- why?? It does not fit their soliloquy?? I am sure that there have been errors made by each side as to facts but the major difference has been the interpretation of facts. Looking back at to what actually occurred is a good way to reassess the format and location of the tournament putting aside the issue if the tournament is right or wrong. For me, it was not that mind boggling to identify the risks and build a format that made sense if the IL was going to go down this crazy road.

When all else fails, Penn/Dartmouth and some other fans will pull out the infamous "get over it" rather than let's make it better or get it right.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2045

Reg: 11-23-04
Re: Yale
03-19-17 05:47 PM - Post#227742    
    In response to bradley

GoGreen ironically refers to the 1.6 controversy in which the NCAA tried to tell the Ivies about academic standards (I know, stop laughing). The IL would not be bullied. Sadly, the Penn bball team was a victim of this tiff and sacrificed the Ivy bid to the Dance as a consequence. But, a year later, point made, the Ivies were back in the tournament. I'm assuming that GG is not an atty as I wouldn't have much confidence in him to represent me in anything. Sometimes it is necessary to push back rather than roll over.

Edited by Tiger69 on 03-19-17 05:48 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1040

Reg: 02-15-15
03-19-17 07:23 PM - Post#227746    
    In response to TigerFan

  • TigerFan Said:
Any comparisons of the IL to a "Power 5" conference are absurd. There is very little riding on the outcome of those power conferences' post-season tournaments. The IL has constructed a two-day tournament with everything (i.e. the NCAA tournament bid) riding on it. The league needs to find an appropriate way to provide an advantage to the regular season champion if it is going to persist with this folly.

PS I don't understand the obsession with having the men's and women's tournaments in the same location. Do the Ivies do this for any other sport? Lacrosse tournaments are held at home of the regular season champions.





Who compared the IL to power 5? The only thing I did was point out none of the issues raised here are unique to IL.

And you guys talk like there is some small group of decision makers in a room deciding the details about this tournament and no one else agrees. The reality is the anti-IL complainers on here are in the definitive minority. Almost everyone wants the tourney.

 
Go Green 
Junior
Posts: 261

Age: 46
Reg: 04-22-10
Re: Yale
03-19-17 08:23 PM - Post#227754    
    In response to Tiger69

  • Tiger69 Said:
Sometimes it is necessary to push back rather than roll over.



Tell that to the 1966 Penn team.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4722

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Yale
03-19-17 08:50 PM - Post#227758    
    In response to bradley

I assume this refers to me, and I stand by the fears being overblown.

Where I absolutely agree and always have agreed is that the fears are on point as it pertains to a road game for the top seed. That's crazy, and it bit the AmEast so many times that they finally changed it. It bit the MAAC this year too. It actually does shift the odds to the point that it's hard to justify the tourney even with the most liberal of extra bid assumptions. It needs to be corrected moving forward.

 
Go Green 
Junior
Posts: 261

Age: 46
Reg: 04-22-10
Re: Yale
03-19-17 08:53 PM - Post#227759    
    In response to mrjames

  • mrjames Said:


That's crazy ... It needs to be corrected moving forward.



Again, where then?

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2045

Reg: 11-23-04
Re: Yale
03-19-17 09:28 PM - Post#227760    
    In response to Go Green

You really can't get over that 1966 penn team. Did your grandfather play on it?

 
 Page 4 of 8 « First<4567>
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

4833 Views




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.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.118 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 05:58 AM
Top