Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 4 of 5 « First<2345
Username Post: One foot in the grave        (Topic#21205)
SomeGuy 
Postdoc
Posts: 4616

Reg: 11-22-04
02-27-18 12:27 AM - Post#249709    
    In response to SRP

It’s not inconceivable that Princeton would avoid the playin in that scenario.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3525

Reg: 02-04-06
02-27-18 12:31 AM - Post#249710    
    In response to SomeGuy

Oh ye of little faith. I am betting all my Bitcoin holdings on this scenario.

 
bradley 
Masters Student
Posts: 792

Age: 69
Reg: 01-15-16
02-27-18 10:04 AM - Post#249722    
    In response to SomeGuy

I agree with you that it is inevitable that a #4 seed wins IvyMadness and it was identified as an issue by some of us who were opposed to the IL Tournament. One of the objections was that #4 regular season teams have been historically weak for many of the past 10+ years. For examples. this year Columbia may finish 6 and 8 in the league and 9-18 overall. They surely will be a #16 seed and might have a play-in game at the Big Dance. The argument by some of us would be that whatever little jolt that would come out of the IL Tournament would be quashed by getting crushed by Virginia/Villanova or whoever. Same holds true as to last year where it almost happened with Penn but at least Penn was 12-15 and a better team than this year's version - Columbia or Cornell. Who wants to watch their alma mater crushed??

What made the issue even more unique is that Penn had the home court advantage last year.

The thought that this year's version of the Tigers playing Virginia/Villanova/Kansas is not very appealing to me but fortunately, it will not happen.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1138

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
02-27-18 11:20 AM - Post#249725    
    In response to bradley

Why not?

Hard Knocks became Hard Cuts, so Hard Cuts would simply have a final episode entitled something like Blunt Force Annihilation. It's all marketing anyway.

 
Go Green 
Masters Student
Posts: 433

Age: 47
Reg: 04-22-10
02-27-18 11:49 AM - Post#249726    
    In response to bradley

  • bradley Said:
For examples. this year Columbia may finish 6 and 8 in the league and 9-18 overall. They surely will be a #16 seed and might have a play-in game at the Big Dance. The argument by some of us would be that whatever little jolt that would come out of the IL Tournament would be quashed by getting crushed by Virginia/Villanova or whoever. Same holds true as to last year where it almost happened with Penn but at least Penn was 12-15 and a better team than this year's version - Columbia or Cornell. Who wants to watch their alma mater crushed??



This situation happens almost every year. Can't recall who it was in 2017, but in 2016 it was Holy Cross who played conference tourney spoiler, Dayton winner, and #1 seed fodder.

Best I could tell, they'd happily do it again this season if they can...

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3525

Reg: 02-04-06
02-27-18 12:42 PM - Post#249729    
    In response to Go Green

Except Carmody apologized in the press conference after they won the Patriot tournament and said Lehigh deserved to go.

 
sparman 
Masters Student
Posts: 884
sparman
Reg: 12-08-04
One foot in the grave
02-27-18 01:07 PM - Post#249735    
    In response to Go Green

Of course they're happy they won. Any team that wins and gets to keep playing is happy they won. This is not an argument in favor of a tournament unless your objective is to give teams that failed to produce during the regular season a second chance to be happy.

You are not creating or increasing "happiness," you are merely substituting one team's happiness for another's. The team that was excellent during the entire year and lost in the tournament is not happy.


 
dperry 
PhD Student
Posts: 1038
dperry
Loc: Oreland, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
02-27-18 10:55 PM - Post#249785    
    In response to Silver Maple

  • Silver Maple Said:
The #1 spot also means we can hoist another Ivy Champs banner to the Palestra rafters, regardless of what happens in the conference tournament. That definitely means a lot to me, and I'll bet it means a lot to the players as well.



It means a lot to you and them because you both started in the days when the regular season championship was everything. Based on how other one-bid leagues behave, my suspicion is that as time goes by and memory fades, the regular-season championship will mean less and less.
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!"


 
dperry 
PhD Student
Posts: 1038
dperry
Loc: Oreland, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
02-27-18 11:12 PM - Post#249789    
    In response to Go Green

  • Go Green Said:
  • Tiger69 Said:
But, we aren't ready for it until we are a 2 bid conference.



I presume that you're on board with a tournament for the women, then?

http://www.ivyleague.com/news/2016/3/15/3_15_2 016_...



It's happened once. Call me back when it happens every year because the top two teams are always good enough to get in, abomination or no abomination (which, of course, is precisely what happened two years ago.)
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!"


 
dperry 
PhD Student
Posts: 1038
dperry
Loc: Oreland, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
02-27-18 11:16 PM - Post#249791    
    In response to mrjames

  • mrjames Said:


The second biggest issue is the timing. I don't love a smaller league having its tournament final on a Sunday. The committee will obviously deal with bigger leagues doing so, because it has to, but I feel like there could be a situation in the future where we are adversely impacted due to the difficulty the different scenarios the Ivies could raise, such that we'd pay for it with seeding (or even a two-bid scenario).



Not to mention that the big leagues completely suck all of the air out of the room publicity-wise that weekend, which in the long run is much more important.
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!"


 
dperry 
PhD Student
Posts: 1038
dperry
Loc: Oreland, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
02-27-18 11:45 PM - Post#249793    
    In response to SomeGuy

  • SomeGuy Said:
We’re still a little ways from this scenario, but suppose Penn and Harvard both win out to the Ivy final, and then Harvard wins. At that point, both teams are 14-2, and Harvard is 2-1 head to head with the second win at the Palestra. Who is the “rightful” champ then? Why is what happens over 14 games a better indicator than what happens over 16 with an extra game between the teams?



The problem here is that what is officially happening is not that we are adding more information; instead, we are throwing out the old information and replacing it with new information. There are some years, like this one, where there may not be much difference, but there are some years where there is an enormous difference.

Hypothetical: Say that the automatic bid was decided by a committee, and that each team played each other team three times. The two best teams at the end of the season are Team A and Team B. Team A won the first game by 15 on the road and the second by 20 at home; Team B won the third game at home by two. No-brainer that the committee will pick Team A, right?

Guess what? The first two-thirds of the hypothetical have already happened in the women's season. If part three happens, it's Penn that's got the automatic bid and Princeton that's biting their nails during the selection show, despite the fact that the Tigers have ventilated us twice and have performed better overall. Under that scenario, you've actually lost information. We won't even get into the fun possibility that Princeton could get knocked off in the first round by Harvard or Yale (both of whom they've lost to) and then Penn, with the home advantage, wins easy.

I'll also remind you all that this is the Ivy League championship, not just the top two or three teams championship. Every game in the regular season provides some information, quite a bit of which you lose in the abomination (although admittedly not quite as badly as if all eight teams were in.) If Harvard lost to Columbia as well as to Penn, that says something important, even if the Lions don't make the cut.
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!"


 
dperry 
PhD Student
Posts: 1038
dperry
Loc: Oreland, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
Re: One foot in the grave
02-27-18 11:53 PM - Post#249795    
    In response to penn nation

  • penn nation Said:
All I care about is a chance to play beyond the IL tourney. That tourney will be a true crapshoot.

So yes, the #1 position is very important--not so much for the tourney, but for knowing that at minimum they will be playing after that weekend no matter what.



Last year, I would have been ecstatic to have been in the NIT. This year, however, it's going to be a serious disappointment. I suspect most of the rest of the Penn fans feel the same way.
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!"


 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 11455

Reg: 12-02-04
Re: One foot in the grave
02-28-18 12:00 AM - Post#249796    
    In response to dperry

Would not be disappointed at all. Would be thrilled to see Penn in either the NIT or NCAAs.

I would, however, be quite disappointed if Penn did not have the opportunity to play in either of these.

  • dperry Said:
  • penn nation Said:
All I care about is a chance to play beyond the IL tourney. That tourney will be a true crapshoot.

So yes, the #1 position is very important--not so much for the tourney, but for knowing that at minimum they will be playing after that weekend no matter what.



Last year, I would have been ecstatic to have been in the NIT. This year, however, it's going to be a serious disappointment. I suspect most of the rest of the Penn fans feel the same way.





 
dperry 
PhD Student
Posts: 1038
dperry
Loc: Oreland, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
One foot in the grave
02-28-18 12:51 AM - Post#249799    
    In response to mrjames

  • mrjames Said:
Yeah, I’ve always found the anti-tourney folks to be more intellectually lazy than the pro-tourney side. That’s not to say all 14GT supporters are intellectually lazy, just that many refuse to engage with this argument as a set of tradeoffs rather than as a moral imperative that the 14GT always leads to the right outcome because the only right outcome is the outcome of the 14GT.

Some arguments from the anti-tourney side have held water over time:

- The Ivy League office would screw up the logistics from a fairness perspective
- The league isn’t good enough to get an at large right now
- It’ll take the focus away from a really exciting title race

But what all of those have in common is that they are probabilistic statements and one’s sentiment about the tourney should be set through how you weigh those odds moving forward, rather than your absolute belief that one side is “right.”

I believe there are non-trivial odds that a first-place team could have a late season injury that drastically changes its competitiveness in the NCAA tourney. I believe there are non-trivial odds that the timing of key injuries could change the quality of the opponents that each of the teams in the title chase play based on the schedule that make the SOS different from a true round robin. I believe there are non-trivial odds that in a sample size as small as 14, a significantly inferior team could win the regular season and the tourney could select for the better team.

For me, the upside from these odds outweigh the expect value of the negatives from a perfectly executed conference tourney. But our current iteration isn’t perfect executed, and is instead repeating the same error that dogged the America East for years (and kept some REALLY good teams out of the tourney at the expense of some 15s and 16s). I’m in the anti-tourney camp for now, but as the expected values change, I expect my stance to do so as well...



My moral outrage comes more from the fact that if this thing continues, we will never have a season like the 2002 men or the 2016 women again. Both of those years are among the most precious of my sports memories, and the Ivies were one of the few places I could experience such things anymore, particularly since baseball f'ed itself up. I would trade ten abominations, even really good ones, for one year like those.

I will also note that some of us have different estimates of the probabilities behind the tradeoffs than others. We may disagree on how much more likely the 14GT is to produce the real champion than the abomination, but I think we do agree that it is more likely. On the other hand, my estimate of how likely it was that the league would not only screw up the logistics, but also the timing, ticket prices, network, etc., was 99.5% (and as I've pointed out before, the irony is that most of the pro-abomination folks would completely agree with me if we were discussing any other aspect of the league's performance, but somehow they thought that this was magically going to go swimmingly.) My estimate of how likely it is that the league will get a second bid in any given year going forward is also much lower than yours, not so much because I don't think we'll continue to improve (I'm a bit more skeptical about that than you are, but not much), but because I do not believe that the NCAA has any plans to be fair in this area--and there's been plenty of evidence the past few years to back me up on that. The loss of our uniqueness has already had negative effects, as we pretty much completely fell off the media radar during championship week last year. It also costs six teams more class time, and probably hurts the two first place teams more than the old system did as well. Add all of that up, and I don't need the 14GT to be too much better to conclude that the other way ain't worth it.

As far as odds go:
1. There are also non-trivial odds that the best team in the league could suffer a major injury in the abomination that would greatly lower their competitiveness in the NCAA's.
2. Any injuries that affect the competitiveness of the round-robin are just as likely to help the best team as anyone else, so in the long run that should be a wash.
3.) There will also be times when a significantly inferior team wins both the regular season AND the postseason, and others when the two championships will be won by two DIFFERENT significantly inferior teams, which need to be factored in when considering the relative merits of the formats.
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!"


Edited by dperry on 02-28-18 12:52 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
Go Green 
Masters Student
Posts: 433

Age: 47
Reg: 04-22-10
02-28-18 09:07 AM - Post#249806    
    In response to dperry

  • dperry Said:


It means a lot to you and them because you both started in the days when the regular season championship was everything. Based on how other one-bid leagues behave, my suspicion is that as time goes by and memory fades, the regular-season championship will mean less and less.



Fairness dictates that this work both ways.

If people's memories will dull over time what a regular season championship means as time passes, then the same should necessarily happen to any suggestions that a conference tournament is an "abomination."

 
bradley 
Masters Student
Posts: 792

Age: 69
Reg: 01-15-16
Re: One foot in the grave
02-28-18 09:47 AM - Post#249814    
    In response to dperry

Needless to say, I agree with the vast majority of points that you have raised. IvyMadness is just that. The non-trivial justification as to the role of injuries, and many other pro IL Tournament arguments are interesting but are not good reasons for change. The goal of change is to improve something and if IvYMadness improved the situation, current opponents would endorse change. The implementation of the IL Tournament has demonstrated the inability of Robin and her Court to effectively implement change and indeed, that is no great surprise and was predictable back when.

Steve Pikiell, Rutgers coach, was interviewed last evening prior to the Big Tenn championship at MSG. He has a perspective based on being at small schools (Stony Brook) one bid leagues and multiple bid leagues, Big Ten/UConn. He clearly differentiated between the two. The introduction of IvyMadness would have been at least rational if the Ivies were really a two bid league. It was simply too early to introduce IvyMadness until the league reached this threshold - the league has actually taken a step back this year although partially due to injuries. Pikiell did not talk about the joy of going to the NIT if Stony Brook failed to win their league tournament. He talked about having a 18 game winning streak and being nervous as hell that SB would not be the league's NCAA representative.

The fans who advocated for IvyMadness because they thought that their team could not beat H, Y or P may be disapointed such as Penn this year.

The arguments over the past tow years have been many -- improve the chances of getting two bids, improved IL attendance, greater exposure for the league, recruiting, injuries, etc. sounds like grasping for straws.

I am no fan of Penn but I hope they win IvyMadness if they are the regular season champs.

 
sparman 
Masters Student
Posts: 884
sparman
Reg: 12-08-04
One foot in the grave
03-02-18 01:40 PM - Post#250162    
    In response to SRP

  • dperry Said:
My estimate of how likely it is that the league will get a second bid in any given year going forward is .... because I do not believe that the NCAA has any plans to be fair in this area--and there's been plenty of evidence the past few years to back me up on that.


This is true only you believe the NCAA and the major conference teams only care about maximizing their $$ and winning at all costs, including paying players regardless of rules. I mean, who could believe that?

Speaking of miraculous comebacks, anyone see UVA pull out a W last night over Louisville being down 4 points and under 1 SECOND to play?

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 18995

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: One foot in the grave
03-02-18 01:47 PM - Post#250164    
    In response to sparman

It was a 2 point lead. Lousiville's inbound man took steps behind the baseline and got called for it. Then UVA inbounded for a winning bank that clearly was not intended as a bank.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/game?g...

 
sparman 
Masters Student
Posts: 884
sparman
Reg: 12-08-04
Re: One foot in the grave
03-02-18 01:51 PM - Post#250166    
    In response to palestra38

It was a 4 point lead when L'ville fouled a UVA 3PT shooter at 0.9 seconds to play.

"And then Louisville made the one more to go up by four! But Virginia’s Ty Jerome got fouled shooting a desperation three-pointer with 0.9 seconds left — down four, remember, which is probably a moment when you don’t need to foul the guy shooting a three-pointer — and then Jerome made the first two free throws to draw his team within two, which set up the final insanity."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/...

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 11455

Reg: 12-02-04
Re: One foot in the grave
03-02-18 01:53 PM - Post#250167    
    In response to sparman

And the third foul shot was waved off because of a foul line violation in Virginia.

Which was dwarved by the subsequent end line violation by Louisville.

 
 Page 4 of 5 « First<2345
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

3742 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: 0.2 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 03:13 PM
Top