Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 3 of 7 « First<3456>
Username Post: Thoughts from a curmudgeon        (Topic#20133)
Go Green 
Junior
Posts: 261

Age: 46
Reg: 04-22-10
03-13-17 12:06 PM - Post#226745    
    In response to T.P.F.K.A.D.W.

  • T.P.F.K.A.D.W. Said:

Win consistently.



That strategy has not seemed to work for Penn's football team.

I would suggest trying something different in that regard.



 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16006

Reg: 11-21-04
03-13-17 12:19 PM - Post#226746    
    In response to Go Green

For football, it is a completely different issue for the irrelevant 6. Now, all that matters is The Game. The winner of that game gets more attention than the Ivy winner. And that's the way they want it. Unless we eliminate that stranglehold on Ivy football, nothing will ever change.

Accept the FCS tournament bid. It might help Penn if it didn't have a 56,000 seat stadium, because no FCS team draws fans in that number, but you have to make the games meaningful for those other than Harvard and Yale.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1035

Reg: 02-15-15
03-13-17 01:06 PM - Post#226753    
    In response to palestra38

The Big Ten tournament was very poorly attended in DC this year. The final 4 games were maybe 20% full. The League Tournaments are not going to draw full houses. Very few, if any, do. And if they hold it in a neutral site, attendance will plummet further.

That said, The Ivy Tournament is a huge success.

The league will be much stronger long term as a result of it's implementation.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1035

Reg: 02-15-15
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 01:11 PM - Post#226755    
    In response to besnoah

  • besnoah Said:


To the idea that taking the opposite side of "never" is the right course of action in the "getting two bids" argument, of course that is correct. But if the best argument pro-tournament people can make is that never is always analytically wrong, that also strikes me as an inadequate reason to fundamentally alter the structure of the best regular season in sports.



It wasn't an argument anymore than saying we will NEVER GET TWO BIDS is an argument. Mathematically, as an investor, I will usually take the other side of NEVER and ALWAYS because there is little risk and high reward.

But neither are arguments that serve any good purpose. I would like to go back and find all the NEVER and ALWAYS statements from 10 years ago and bring them up now. So saying there will NEVER BE TWO BIDS, is just irrational. It can happen. It may be a less than 5% chance currently, but it's not impossible.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16006

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 01:16 PM - Post#226756    
    In response to PennFan10

You're far too young to make such a statement---we've been hearing from the "Two Bid Ivy" crowd for over 30 years. Your investment strategy is pretty analogous to playing the Powerball. There's about a one in a billion chance that the Ivies will get an at-large bid. My guess is that even if they went to 96, the Ivies would not get one of the at-large bids--they would all go to majors with 15 losses.

But I think I'll still be around in 10 years so I hope you have the right to crow within that time---just doubt that will be the case.

 
T.P.F.K.A.D.W. 
Masters Student
Posts: 703

Loc: Our Nation's Capital
Reg: 01-18-05
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 01:23 PM - Post#226757    
    In response to PennFan10

  • PennFan10 Said:
Mathematically, as an investor, I will usually take the other side of NEVER and ALWAYS because there is little risk and high reward.




Ha! Reminds me of an annoying coworker claiming, emphatically, many years ago that Phil Mickelson will NEVER win a major.

I didn't (and still don't) know a damn thing about golf. Nor do I care to. But I gladly took him up on that.

Edited by T.P.F.K.A.D.W. on 03-13-17 01:24 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 2867

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
03-13-17 01:30 PM - Post#226758    
    In response to palestra38

I agree that the position that the league will NEVER get a second bid is risky at best. That being the case, the relevant question is how frequently can the league expect to get that second bid, even with a conference tournament. PF10's 5% estimate is probably a good one, meaning once every 20 years, suggesting that that's a pretty lousy reason to have a tournament.

However, if your reason to have a tournament is to increase the entertainment value of Ivy hoops (see above post), I'd say that this season indicates you've achieved your goal.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1035

Reg: 02-15-15
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 01:34 PM - Post#226760    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
You're far too young to make such a statement---we've been hearing from the "Two Bid Ivy" crowd for over 30 years. Your investment strategy is pretty analogous to playing the Powerball. There's about a one in a billion chance that the Ivies will get an at-large bid. My guess is that even if they went to 96, the Ivies would not get one of the at-large bids--they would all go to majors with 15 losses.

But I think I'll still be around in 10 years so I hope you have the right to crow within that time---just doubt that will be the case.



Actually it's not even close to playing Powerball. That game is a net loser. So is craps and blackjack. The house knows the odds and all they need is volume and table limits and they win.

The house in Powerball band Craps doesn't say NEVER, they just limit their losses to quantifiable, winning outcomes.

Even you say "...I doubt that will be the case". That's entirely different than NEVER. I wouldn't bet against "..I doubt" but I am a big fan of going against "NEVER". As for Powerball, I would prefer to be the house on that bet.

And BTW, you have no idea how old I am but I appreciate the compliment.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16006

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 01:44 PM - Post#226761    
    In response to PennFan10

Just thought that you are a fairly recent addition to our bunch (at least under this name) and use the digit 10 that you were in that class. My "38" goes back to my age at the time I started posting in a different time and website. I'm about to be (gasp) 60!.....so many years of not having 2 bids. It's true--I never say never, but it's never to date. I think 5% is an inflated chance because it essentially requires a loser in the tournament to have a top 40 ranking (and given the big conference bias, even higher).

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1035

Reg: 02-15-15
03-13-17 02:05 PM - Post#226764    
    In response to palestra38

Agree. Under the current format and rules (lack of) 5% is generous.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2041

Reg: 11-23-04
03-13-17 02:06 PM - Post#226765    
    In response to palestra38

Given all their valid alternatives, is it really necessary to try to draw in students? If they come, fine. The better the team, the more likely the students show up. Sure, I like the loud,loyal, and enthusiastic support. But, these are no longer "gentleman C" students. The sun does not rise or set based on the success of their athletic teams. Thank god that Ivy students have their perspectives more in order than some others.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16006

Reg: 11-21-04
03-13-17 02:12 PM - Post#226766    
    In response to Tiger69

Yes, it is important to have students at the game---otherwise, what is the point to having Division 1 sports. Go Division 3, where it's all about participation.

And sure, it's great that today's students have different perspectives, but are you really suggesting that only bad students enjoy school spirit and the game of basketball?

 
Okoro Dude 
Junior
Posts: 265

Loc: Glen Mills, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 02:17 PM - Post#226767    
    In response to Stuart Suss

Stu,

Having met you many times and enjoyed your commitment to the team over the years, I wish I could agree with you about the tournament. I attended all of the games except for the last women's semi-final and thoroughly enjoyed it.

1) Regular season was far more interesting for both players and fans as they fought in second half of season to get in to the tournament. Don't know why you would begrudge the team the joy they felt beating Harvard last Saturday and the chance to play past the end of the regular season instead of one more boring non-conference game against (pick one - Lehigh, Colgate, Howard, Delaware St, Monmouth, Rider . . .) I'll take the third game with Princeton any day.

2) Quality of the games (particularly Saturday) was tremendous - really showcased the young talent this league has

3) Crowd seemed very good. While I will acknowledge that many Penn/Princeton fans left - those who estimated only about 2,000 for Harvard/Yale were smoking crack - it was more than that and the second half had a great atmosphere as you don't need a full house at Palestra to make it noisy and fun.

4) While no one can expect the women's games to draw much when they are on either end of a 4-game day or two hours after the conclusion of the men's championships, I thought they got more attention and focus than they would have ever gotten had it been a separate (or no) tournament. Kudos for the league putting an emphasis on inclusion and (relative) equality for the women's teams.

In terms of problems:
1) I do think they outpriced the event and underpublicized by selling it by themselves. Pricing a bit lower and allowing a Ticketmaster to promote would have filled the building as more Big 5 "locals" without a dog in the fight would have come to see the good basketball.

2) Spring Break timing with no students does suck (though I am not sure how many would come if they weren't on break - seems like that day has come and gone for Penn and Princeton at least).

3) Not sustainable to give Penn home court every year, but I can't see the tournament succeeding in another building to be honest. Combo of locating in big city, room enough to host all the fans, atmosphere, etc. isn't easily solved anywhere else. Other alternative is home games at higher seeds and those tournaments aren't really tournaments at all in any real sense.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2041

Reg: 11-23-04
Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 02:32 PM - Post#226770    
    In response to palestra38

P38, you know that I didn't mean that only bad students have school spirit. It is much more nuanced than that. There is the time, the money, the alternatives available, the connection to the particular sport or players, the interest, etc. You and I are big college bball fans. But, that is not a criterion for admission to an Ivy. Rather, it is some form of exceptional potential in leadership in some field. (I know THAT remark will get parsed!). The draw to other much more numerous alternatives is a lot stronger today when I am 70 and you are 60, than when we were in our salad days

Besides, now we can catch the game on ILDN

Edited by Tiger69 on 03-13-17 02:35 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16006

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 02:36 PM - Post#226772    
    In response to Okoro Dude

My suggestion would be to really market the tournament with hotel and restaurant tie-ins and have the men play a doubleheader at 7 pm Friday, the women play Saturday afternoon, and the finals on Sunday as currently scheduled. 4 games is too much for one day and the quality of the men's final would be better with a day off (the women's selection is a day later so there is more time to get that in).

Expecting people to drive in with nothing scheduled around the tournament is not a winning marketing strategy.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3437

Reg: 11-22-04
03-13-17 02:40 PM - Post#226774    
    In response to palestra38

the thing is, a lot of the students are big college basketball fans. just not penn fans. can't speak to what princeton is doing. and maybe 100% of students were back in the 70s and now the number definitely <> 100%. but there are plenty of college basketball fan students who aren't going.

 
westphillywarrior 
Sophomore
Posts: 138

Age: 36
Reg: 01-08-11
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 02:49 PM - Post#226776    
    In response to Stuart Suss

The one thing I definitely agree with Stuart Suss about is that no matter how the league defines champion or co-champions,
there is only one real champion, the team that wins the prize. The team that wins the NCAA berth.

And the best way to earn that championship is the 14 game tournament.

But if there has to be a league tournament, let's play the two semi-final games on the higher seeds home courts. This will guarantee well attended games and excited crowds. It will also make the 14 games more meaningful by giving the top two finishers and their fans a significant reward.

The two semi-final games could be middle of the week. Then have a men's and women's championship doubleheader on the weekend at a decent sized neutral court. Hopefully, the neutral court could rotate around the league's geographic area. To make things fair, next year's should be in New England.

The neutral court for the championship final makes sure that no one gets an unearned home court advantage, makes sure the championship games are in a good sized arena and accomplishes the league's goal of having the men's and women's championships together.

And, as long as the tournament keeps getting debated, I'm going to keep posting this.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3112

Reg: 02-04-06
03-13-17 02:55 PM - Post#226778    
    In response to Jeff2sf

All this talk about how great the tournament is for the fans and players angling for the fourth spot ignores the huge loss in entertainment and engagement and attention for the good teams. There was none of the near-playoff atmosphere leading up to and through the previously critical head-to-head matchups among leaders--you could even see on these boards how much more blasé the Harvard fans were throughout the season than in previous years. Everybody rooting for the leader to be upset--gone. The players are all competitors so they care at some basic level, but the lower stakes in the top teams' games was palpable. And of course publicity and attention was drained away from the season and the good teams in-conference and nationally.

 
Old Bear 
Postdoc
Posts: 3272

Reg: 11-23-04
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 02:57 PM - Post#226782    
    In response to westphillywarrior

Amen.

 
caughtinasnare 
Senior
Posts: 307

Age: 28
Reg: 02-21-09
Re: Thoughts from a curmudgeon
03-13-17 02:57 PM - Post#226783    
    In response to palestra38

I remember a few years ago, during the Cornell run, they were ranked at one point. It's not completely out of the question to think it can happen, but it will take some league-building. We need to league, as a whole, to get better. That said, it has been doing just that.

Furthermore, we need to schedule more OOC games with higher quality opponents. Frankly, Penn has the good fortune of having the Big Five give them some higher quality opponents, but we struggle to get more than that these days. However, as the quality improves, we will hopefully get back to the place where we can get UNC to come to the Palestra like we did almost 10 years ago.

It surely will not happen overnight. However, with strong freshman classes at several schools and several strong recruiting classes coming in, with the trend continuing, in a few years the league might have 3 or 4 top 100 teams, at which point it'll start getting some real attention. Once that happens, we might be well positioned to sustain a higher recruiting profile as a league, plus get some better OOC games to boost our tournament profile. It's all a building process, and right now we're working on the foundation. Let them build the house.

 
 Page 3 of 7 « First<3456>
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

6766 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: 0.205 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 05:29 AM
Top