Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 3 of 6 « First<3456
Username Post: 2019 Ivy Tournament at Yale?        (Topic#21570)
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3759

Reg: 11-22-04
05-28-18 07:15 AM - Post#257256    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

My two criteria for supporting the tourney are:

1. Do the players want it? Overwhelmingly
2. Do I have fun when I watch it? Hell yes. Might be different if Penn doesn't play in the tourney though.

The argument that it removes meaning from the regular season is absurd and is akin to saying you don't watch the regular season of any league, football baseball whatever. Does it reduce the intensity? I mean, sure, I guess. But when Penn played Harvard and Penn played Princeton, my mind wasn't thinking about how the game didn't mean anything. I wanted to win, the players wanted to win. A loss wasn't the end of the world, but heck, a loss in the sacred "14 game tournament" wasn't the end of the world either. You'd just catch them on the other half of the round robin.

Having said that, a few nitpicks with you PF10:

1. Your focus on espn showing "the last few minutes of x game". ESPN always showed that and we usually got credit as the first team to enter the dance. Further, in years where there was a playoff game, I'd argue the exposure was more than in the tournament. You can't rely on having a tie for first of course.

2. Besides the decision to keep it at 4 teams, virtually every decision the IL office makes has been to make the tournament worse, most of the time due to sheer cheapness. It's really reduced my confidence in them:

a. Most importantly, the idea to couple the men and women's tournament to "bring together" the ivy league is stupid and makes things so much more complicated. Initially I thought it was just a way to support the women so I grudgingly put up with it. To find out the women's coaches don't want to have a joint event, makes the decision inexplicable.
b. They really botched the idea of fairness by having it at a lower seed's venue in year 1 and then to double down the next year (though they were saved by Penn unexpectedly being the 1 seed). Now they'll triple down by putting it at an expected lower seed while more than halving the seating. And will they show any sort of forward thinking by posting that this is a round robin that each venue will get to host? No, they want to make up the rules as they go along.
c. They need to either spend some money to have it at a neutral site (which I'm not convinced they can pull off to be anything other than 1K people in a 6k arena but at least would show me they can spend money) or put this in the higher seed's venues.


 
bradley 
Masters Student
Posts: 791

Age: 69
Reg: 01-15-16
05-28-18 08:37 AM - Post#257258    
    In response to Jeff2sf

  • Jeff2sf Said:
My two criteria for supporting the tourney are:

1. Do the players want it? Overwhelmingly
2. Do I have fun when I watch it? Hell yes. Might be different if Penn doesn't play in the tourney though.



You make a number of good points on both ends of the spectrum. I have a somewhat different perspective in that I enjoy the regular IL season and will continue to watch it with great joy even though the regular season has been diminished with the concept that you can get to the Big Dance even though you finish in 4th place with a 6-8 record -- just not right.

Unlike you, I have no interest in watching a single moment of IL Madness and that includes two years ago when the Tigers won the IvyMadness. Try to avoid hypocrisy if at all possible.

The truth is that the IL Tournament has done little, if anything, to enhance the image of the League. Most non-IL fans think that the league is not very good but they will waver for a few days if the IL representative gives a scare to a power team in round 1.

What will really change the perception? If Harvard over the next two years goes on a tear and makes the NCAA tournament as a result of their performance or if IL team does something similar over the next few years. The other possibility is that the IL recruits a great player, i.e. the Bill Bradley of the world, and the national media follows the player in non-league and league games. IvyMadness is a mirage to the real issues in the league and the administration of the tournament is laughable.


 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3513

Reg: 02-04-06
05-28-18 01:13 PM - Post#257259    
    In response to PennFan10

Not an opinion. It's an observation. The league got more coverage when it was the first in the country to "punch a ticket" and when important regular-season games that might affect that ticket happened. Moreover, it wasn't lumped in with all the other tournaments.

 
Go Green 
Masters Student
Posts: 405

Age: 47
Reg: 04-22-10
05-28-18 01:24 PM - Post#257260    
    In response to SRP

  • SRP Said:
The league got more coverage when it was the first in the country to "punch a ticket" and when important regular-season games that might affect that ticket happened. Moreover, it wasn't lumped in with all the other tournaments.



The flip side to this argument is that the league got zero coverage during championship week because we were already done with our season.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3513

Reg: 02-04-06
05-28-18 07:41 PM - Post#257264    
    In response to Go Green

Yes, you have to take the integral under the daily coverage curve to see the total impact. My observation, as a person who watches SportsCenter almost every day and sees other sources as well, is that the IL got more and higher-quality coverage pre-tournament. If someone has data on this it would be interesting to test the accuracy of that observation, but I'm fairly confident.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3216

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
05-29-18 10:13 AM - Post#257273    
    In response to SRP

I'm sure you're right that the conference got more coverage on programs like SC pre-tournament. However, while that specific type of exposure might have diminished in the last two years, now the league is getting its conference tournament games broadcast in their entirety on ESPN (and they've been great games). Which coverage is more valuable, and how does that vary by audience segment? I don't know, but it's a fairly straightforward question from a market research standpoint. I wonder if the league does any sort of regular tracking research to see how awareness of the conference, and the quality of that awareness, has changed since the institution of the conference tournament.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1108

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
2019 Ivy Tournament at Yale?
05-29-18 10:45 AM - Post#257275    
    In response to Silver Maple

I love Ivy League Basketball. But I see increased exposure as a double edged sword. I went to the Barclays Center for some of the ACC tournament and watched teams seeded in the teens in that tournament's early rounds. As much as I love Harvard basketball, 0-18 Pitt would have likely played in our tournament, maybe even winning it (especially if it was played at the larger arena - in Pittsburgh).

I am probably wearing rose colored glasses when I watch Harvard games, and maybe even other Ivy games. But when I watch other midmajors play, it is painfully evident that there is usually a gap between a middling Power 5 game and even a top midmajor game. Sure there are exceptions (Gonzaga, St. Mary's, Wichita St.), but this season our league was mediocre nationally. No team was very good on a national basis. Under such circumstances, increased exposure could merely serve to confirm the bias against us that already exists.

Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 05-29-18 10:47 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
Quakers03 
Professor
Posts: 7628

Reg: 12-07-04
05-29-18 01:33 PM - Post#257290    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

I just have two questions on all of this.

1. How in the world is the league not able to "afford" a neutral site venue. Where is all the money??

2. So again we're stuck dealing with a noon game on a Sunday meaning the seeding will probably already be locked in, no matter who wins. Worked out really well this year...

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 18623

Reg: 11-21-04
05-29-18 01:45 PM - Post#257297    
    In response to Quakers03

I cannot imagine that it would have cost all that much money to hold the event at the Webster Bank Arena---which is a half hour from Yale. But there is no way they would fill more than half of it in the current format.

BU or Monmouth would have been fine size-wise and cost even less. But a 5000 seat arena is pretty much the minimum size that makes sense.

 
mountainred 
Junior
Posts: 276

Age: 51
Loc: Charleston, WV
Reg: 04-11-10
05-29-18 02:50 PM - Post#257304    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:

BU or Monmouth would have been fine size-wise and cost even less. But a 5000 seat arena is pretty much the minimum size that makes sense.



The optics of holding the ILT on the campus of BU or Monmouth would be terrible and, IMHO, would be worse for the league's brand than having the event in a venue that is too small (i.e. Yale).

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 18623

Reg: 11-21-04
05-29-18 03:34 PM - Post#257307    
    In response to mountainred

I agree with you---but then the tournament should simply be at the Palestra, for it is the only Ivy arena with the optics. Of course, they could do home court of top team, but that would eliminate the fiction that it brings us all together. Fairness and optics are simply not parallel.

 
Local Observer 
Junior
Posts: 224
Local Observer
Reg: 03-30-14
05-29-18 06:28 PM - Post#257320    
    In response to palestra38

You Penn guys are having a devil of a time wrestling with this, aren't you? From the beginning I said we didn't need the stupid tournament. Then the idea of having it in your own backyard, with the concomitant home court advantage kind of crept up on you guys, didn't it? All of a sudden the stupid tournament had a sort of appeal! If we HAVE to have it, the home court of the regular season winner is the only sensible solution. Who needs some .500 4th place team lucking out to "win" the tournament, aided by home court advantage?
As I recall, the rationale is that it would help the odds of getting not-one-but-two teams into the NCAA's - both the regular season winner and the tournament winner. Hasn't worked yet, and it won't ever. The only way the Ivies get two teams in the NCAA's is when they start recruiting better players and beating better teams out of conference.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3216

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
05-29-18 07:17 PM - Post#257322    
    In response to Local Observer

  • Local Observer Said:

The only way the Ivies get two teams in the NCAA's is when they start recruiting better players and beating better teams out of conference.



I doubt even that will do it. The NCAA tournament is an event by and for the major conference teams. The only reason the seeding committee even lets the mid-major conferences continue to have one automatic bid each is that they feel they have no choice. At large bids for mid-major teams will remain rare.


 
sparman 
Masters Student
Posts: 877
sparman
Reg: 12-08-04
05-29-18 08:07 PM - Post#257323    
    In response to Silver Maple

Yes, the "ILT helps with a second bid" narrative was always incredibly naive and unrealistic.

But then I always thought most of the narratives advanced for the tourney were naive and unrealistic.

 
bradley 
Masters Student
Posts: 791

Age: 69
Reg: 01-15-16
05-29-18 09:49 PM - Post#257324    
    In response to sparman

It is possible that the Crimson could get a 2nd bid if they lose IvyMadness this year or more likely next year but a 2nd bid will be an aberration going forward. If Harvard cannot get a 2nd bid with the recruiting class of two years ago the likelihood of a two bid league is highly questionable to put it mildly.

If Robin and the administrators were only focused on image, they would have kept the tournament at the Palestra as it is clearly recognized as being a top ten collegiate basketball arena but the switch was made based on the legitimate grumblings as to fairness. Quaker fans are naturally disappointed in losing home court advantage. 2nd tier league fans like the concept of IvyMadness as it gives them a puncher's chance, i.e. Cornell last year.

The proponents of IvyMadness have tried their best to "slap" things against the wall to see if anything sticks. It would have been great if IL administrators had the courage to maintain the rich tradition of the IL regular season but .....



 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 18623

Reg: 11-21-04
05-29-18 10:14 PM - Post#257326    
    In response to Local Observer

You either don't read or you're intentionally obtuse. More Penn fans than any other group opposed the idea of a Tournament. We have 1 or 2 posters who love it---just about everyone else sees the same things you do and the Princeton guys. It's just we take the League officials at their word---they want a spectacle and a gathering of the alumni--there is only one place to do that in the Ivies. But of course that is not fair. If we want fairness, Penn should have been playing Harvard at a neutral site as has been the case for 60+ years. That's fine with us. But the idea of a tournament didn't arise with Penn nor do we have the bulk of its supporters.


 
Quakers03 
Professor
Posts: 7628

Reg: 12-07-04
05-30-18 12:17 AM - Post#257333    
    In response to Local Observer

  • Local Observer Said:
You Penn guys are having a devil of a time wrestling with this, aren't you?


What a pathetic and completely uninformed post. That axe to grind with Penn fans, as evidenced by this little gem in the thread on the Penn board...

  • Local Observer Said:
Could we hold the door?


...isn't showing so well.

#IvyChamps

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2270

Reg: 11-23-04
05-30-18 03:28 AM - Post#257336    
    In response to Quakers03

The record is stuck. Is there anything new to say? Or should we vote our preference?

1). No tournament -- return to old format of "14 game Tournament" with possible playoff for bid in case of tie(s).
2). 4 team playoff at Palestra
3). 4 team playoff at regular season champ's court
4). None of the above

I vote 1).

 
84grad 
Freshman
Posts: 67

Age: 58
Reg: 11-09-17
05-30-18 07:51 AM - Post#257339    
    In response to Tiger69

I vote 1.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1108

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
05-30-18 09:21 AM - Post#257348    
    In response to 84grad

I vote 1 as well.

Interesting that the current format - League choosing/rotating/experim enting with location isn't one of the options.

 
 Page 3 of 6 « First<3456
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

3565 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: 0.112 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 10:48 AM
Top