Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 1 of 3 ALL123
Username Post: At-Large Bid        (Topic#23392)
Condor 
PhD Student
Posts: 1549

Reg: 11-21-04
10-22-19 08:41 AM - Post#288895    

I am curious as to how MrJames would measure success/disappointment in the OOC for the two favorites, but here is my attempt:

Success:
Penn 8-3 or better
Harvard 12-2 or better

Disappointment:
Penn 6-5 or worse
Harvard 9-5 or worse

I think anything in-between would be viewed as SOP for the Ivy’s.

To persuade the NCAA Tournament Committee to choose an Ivy for an at-large bid, I think Penn &/or Harvard would have to exceed the Success projection with the other minimally matching the success record, and both Penn & Harvard would have to beat up on the other Ivy’s.


 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2421

Reg: 02-15-15
10-22-19 09:49 AM - Post#288899    
    In response to Condor

I think the only chance at an at large bid would be to Have Harvard somewhere near 24-3 with some strong wins OOC, a top 25 ranking, 14-0 in reg season and they lose the ILT championship game to a strong #2 who is 20-7 (Penn hopefully!).

Then there may be a conversation.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 5584

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: At-Large Bid
10-22-19 10:57 AM - Post#288903    
    In response to Condor

As important as the OOC record is, just as important is how many Ivies fall into Tier I or II games. Yale was right near the No. 75 threshold last year, which would have given Harvard a Tier I and Tier II win and Penn was another Tier II win. The league needs a similar (or greater) number of Tier I and II eligible wins available in conference play to have a good shot at an at large.

For Harvard this season, I think 11-4 or better could get it done, but it's going to depend on how the schedule breaks (Northeastern, GW, Cal, USF and UC Irvine could all break either way on being Tier II or III) and the Orlando slate. A simple formula to help with what it takes to be considered could be:

3 * Tier I(A) wins + 2 * Tier I(b) wins + Tier II wins - Tier III losses - 2 * Tier IV losses > 4

Harvard's history includes some headscratching losses (even its best team in history lost at FAU). So, let's put Harvard down for a -3 due to bad losses. That means that it will need about 8 points to get to 5 total points. To me, that involves winning two games in Orlando (and hoping one ends up Tier I(A)). Then, maybe you get another couple Tier II games in the OOC. Then, you get lucky like last year and you take a couple Tier II games in the Ivies.

That's a tough, tough road to 5 points, which was barely enough to get Belmont to the First Four last year.

Penn has a much, much better opportunity to be an at-large team, but it would take a monster campaign like last year (without the bad losses) to do so.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1738

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
10-22-19 11:13 AM - Post#288905    
    In response to PennFan10

Encapsulates how I've felt about the Ivy Tournament. Apparently the snub of Yale in 2015 by both the NCAA and the NIT was a major impetus for the Ivy Tournament. That way, a regular season champ is guaranteed a spot in the NIT if it loses the Ivy Tournament.

The concept of 2BidIvy appears to be a corollary. Unfortunately, the likelihood of two Ivy squads being among the top 35 (or so) teams in the country is extremely unlikely. Thus, the Tournament does increase the chances of 2BidIvy in that it opens the door for a uniquely qualified squad that loses in the Ivy Tournament to be on the bubble for the NCAA Tournament. As PennFan10 points out, that tournament loss can't come to a decidedly weaker team or the potential at large squad's ranking might have been harmed enough to fatally damage the candidate's resume.

Thus, I agree with PennFan10. Not intending any disrespect to any 2020 Ivy squad, here's what I see:
1. it is likely that only Harvard has a shot to be a top 35 squad;
2. the Ivy slate will likely negatively impact a team's SOS so that the 14-0 record (15-0 actually) is necessary;
3. the loss in the Tournament Final must come to a respectably accomplished squad, and Penn may be the only prospect this year; and
4. Harvard must not have any bad losses OOC (the presumed 2 OOC losses in PennFan's scenario). This could be overcome by a win over a top 10 or 20 program over Thanksgiving (Maryland, Marquette).

Even then, the anti Mid-major bias - and, in particular, a likely anti Ivy bias - may be too much to overcome.

This is a major reason why I see the Tournament as a negative. Harvard could go 13-2 OOC, 14-0 in Ivy regular season play, lose in the final, and not make the NCAA's. Hoping that doesn't happen, but all that the Yale backlash now guarantees is a spot in the NIT for this hypothetical 27-2 2020 squad. The stars would have to align in an incredible way for 2BidIvy.

So, in responding to Yale's 2015 snub, I fear the unintended consequence more than I appreciate the guarantee of an NIT bid.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 5584

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
10-22-19 11:47 AM - Post#288914    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

The funny thing is that I don't know for certain that Yale would have had the auto-bid to the NIT in 2015. By the tiebreakers, they split the H2H and their other losses were the same (Dartmouth) or functionally the same because the two teams were tied (Cornell and Columbia).

So, this one would have gone to the old "formula" tiebreaker (Sagarin/KenPom/BPI/RPI). It would have been REALLY close (and I don't have the pre-playoff data for all of them), but Yale was up a bit in BPI (final) and KenPom (pre-playoff), while Harvard was up in Sagarin (final) and they were tied in the RPI (pre-playoff). I think it would have been Yale by a nose, but it's not a safe assumption, to be sure.

 
Naismith 
Freshman
Posts: 62

Loc: RI
Reg: 11-11-18
10-22-19 03:49 PM - Post#288933    
    In response to mrjames

The 8-team Ivy league is the smallest basketball group in NCAA Division 1. Why should it even think about a 2nd bid? Overall, its teams collectively do not play the kind of OOC schedules that might even put the league in the running for a legitimate shot at what still would be a miracle 2nd bid. Thus instead of rewarding the "14-game tournament" League Champion, a godawful post season event is now in place. It's only hope is to create a scenario where one really-really good team emerges in the regular season, and then everyone else prays they will lose in this godawful post season event and deprive the league with a real chance for national attention. Knowing the NCAA and their "love' for the Ivy League, I'm sure the really-really good team that loses will gain maybe a nice seed in the NIT, while the League's Cinderella champion will enjoy a Monday night Play-in to even get into the main event, or will be sent directly to #16 seed assignment. Granted, there are tournaments in many other sports and that's a good thing. However basketball is the only sport where the Ivy League gets a chance at massive national exposure. Winning a first round March Madness game creates more Ivy national media exposure than all other sports combined. It should always send its best.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 22781

Reg: 11-21-04
10-22-19 04:12 PM - Post#288936    
    In response to Naismith

Well, as it turns out, the last 2 years resulted in the 2 teams that tied for the regular season title playing for the title in the Ivy Tournament. So I suggest to you that your outrage is a bit misplaced. Had there been no formal tournament, there would have been a playoff with the same 2 teams. The only game that has threatened the stability of the universe was the Penn-Princeton game the first year, and a missed foul shot prevented matter from touching anti-matter in that game. So calm down, it's not as drastic as it seems. And the best team (everyone says so so it must be true) has the home court advantage in this year's Tournament. So what can possibly go wrong?

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1738

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
10-22-19 08:12 PM - Post#288951    
    In response to palestra38

Yes, but HCA may have influenced the past two events and certainly gave Penn an unearned boost vs Princeton in the inaugural event. That early message was loud, clear and unheeded.

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 13673

Reg: 12-02-04
10-22-19 08:49 PM - Post#288952    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Yeah, what has transpired is that home court is now much less important when Penn plays Princeton in the league schedule since, at least at Penn, it's when students are off.

That doesn't seem right to by far the two most storied teams in the league.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1738

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
10-22-19 08:53 PM - Post#288953    
    In response to penn nation

Also, why should the most important games take place at outlier locations while most students are on break. Yup, let's scrap this tournament concept and get back to the way it should be ... unless the spector of a second bid is so worthwhile that it's best for our athletes to play their most important games where and when their fellow students are unable to attend.

Can't even blame this fiasco on the money!

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2421

Reg: 02-15-15
10-22-19 10:36 PM - Post#288955    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

HCA had nothing to do with last years blowout win by Yale in the ILT title game.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1738

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
10-22-19 11:46 PM - Post#288956    
    In response to PennFan10

I'm not intending to demean a very good Yale team. But I disagree. To say it had "nothing to do with it" = WOW.


 
bradley 
PhD Student
Posts: 1270

Age: 70
Reg: 01-15-16
10-23-19 06:43 AM - Post#288959    
    In response to Naismith

Way too logical but I am sure that the "Drink the Kool Aid" supporters will disagree.

The reality, facts so far, is that IL is 0 for 3 as to receiving a 2nd NCAA bid and it has not been close as to getting a 2ne bid. I remember the logic of some that a second bid was right around the corner when the topic was discussed after IvyMadness was introduced. Time would tell if the supporters were correct in their assessment.

It is possible that it will happen one year, maybe even this year, that the league gets two bids - hopefully so. I hope that it happens but time will tell if your analysis is spot on regarding a 2nd bid.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2421

Reg: 02-15-15
At-Large Bid
10-23-19 09:00 AM - Post#288972    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Well the empiricists would say HCA is worth 3pts? That may have had an impact in 2018 in a 3pt loss but that's not the difference in a double digit, second half blow out in 2019. So if you want to say Harvard would have lost by 3 pts less on a neutral floor, I would concede that. That's not my opinion, that's the empiricists data.

Edited by PennFan10 on 10-23-19 09:02 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1738

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
10-23-19 09:42 AM - Post#288974    
    In response to PennFan10

Not quite how it worked that day. Harnessing the home crowd for a run worked well for Yale.

For 37.5 minutes, Harvard actually outscored Yale, despite having to foul at the end.

After beating Yale twice during the regular season (same with Penn and Princeton, the other tournament participants), Harvard trailed by 1 point with just under 11 minutes remaining.

For the next 150 seconds, Harvard went cold, Amaker put out an unusual lineup, and Yale went on a run. Harvard's sloppiness and Yale's confidence was absolutely supported loudly (fueled?) by the home crowd.

Yale was definitely the better team for that two minutes and 30 second period midway through the second half, going on a 13 point run to take a 60-59 lead up to 73-59. But for that 2:30 second run, Harvard outscored Yale in that game, as well as in both earlier contests.

At the game, it certainly felt like Harvard was battling all aspects of the HCA. Absolutely admitting that I am looking through Harvard colored glasses, I can only wonder what would have happened had my Crimson played in neutral site tie-breakers the last two seasons as a league co-champion. Could have meant two more trips to the NCAA's (making it 6 NCAA trips in 8 years), and maybe even a healthy Seth Towns.

Wonder if your perspective will change as Penn travels to Lavietes and Jadwin these next two seasons and far off venues in Hanover, Ithaca and Providence thereafter. Get used to it. We've already paid our dues.

 
Naismith 
Freshman
Posts: 62

Loc: RI
Reg: 11-11-18
10-23-19 09:53 AM - Post#288975    
    In response to palestra38

So what can possibly go wrong?

It already has. The announcement that the League would run future tournaments on a rotating basis to all eight locations is inexplicable. Almost appears the Harvard selection in 2020 is a consolation prize for being victimized the last two years. So, America will get to see an actual Division 1 tournament game played in an arena of 1,800 spectators. Even thinking of a 2nd bid within that message is delusion.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 2421

Reg: 02-15-15
10-23-19 10:05 AM - Post#288977    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

My perspective won't change (other than I probably won't be able to get seats this year) I can guarantee you that.

Where is the science in the idea that "Harvard was battling all aspects of the HCA"? Did Harvard stop being able to play defense during that 2:30 stretch because the crowd overwhelmed them? Was Amaker overcome with noise and unable to communicate with his team? Did HCA account for a top 100 defense giving up 97 points (Yale only made 5 3pters BTW) or was Yale's 51st rated offense just better in this game. As you note, Harvard had already played and won @Yale with a much more partisan crowd than was at the ILT. I was at the game as well. The crowd was much less Yale dominated than the game the Crimson won in New Haven during the round robin. The game is 40 minutes. Whether you get blown out in the first 2:30 or the last 2:30, it all counts and Yale was the better team over 40 minutes, by a lot more than 3pts worth of HCA (which is empirically what its worth).

I don't understand why some Harvard folks can't simply admit the better team won.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1738

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
10-23-19 03:53 PM - Post#288981    
    In response to PennFan10

Yale played very well. For 2.5 minutes Harvard did not. Was Yale the better team that day, as we define outcomes, certainly.

Would Yale have been the better team at Lavietes? They weren't when Harvard beat them there.

Would Yale have been the better team on a neutral court? Who knows. But Harvard did beat Yale 2 of 3 contests.

I find your descripton of the aspects of HCA strange. No, Harvard didn't have to vanquish Yale's band or cheerleaders. But from where I was sitting the arena was heavily tilted towards Yale and a rocking crowd certainly helped Yale's roll. Travel, familiarity, etc. matter. Even if one uses your modest analytics, an 11 point loss minus the average 3pt HCA is not a blowout - it's an 8 point difference. Did Harvard BLOW OUT Penn the day prior? The neutral court difference was 8 points. Your words and definition, not mine.

By the way, Blow Out or not, Yale won 1 of 3 from Yale, Princeton was 0-2 vs Harvard, and Penn lost all 3 vs Harvard. This is why the Tournament stinks.

 
bradley 
PhD Student
Posts: 1270

Age: 70
Reg: 01-15-16
10-23-19 04:37 PM - Post#288982    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

It would be silly to suggest that a team is not adversely effected by playing at the home court of the other team vs. a neutral court when they had identical win/loss records during the regular season. It is also silly to suggest that Harvard has not experienced great challenges in overcoming significant injuries to their two best players over the past two years; significantly more than other IL teams.

For someone like you who thought that IvyMadness was indeed IvyMadness, I emphasize with but it is what it is. For other Harvard fans or other fans that have supported IvyMadness you sometimes get what you wish for.

My only suggestion is to save your breadth.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1738

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
10-23-19 04:46 PM - Post#288983    
    In response to bradley

Agreed.



 
 Page 1 of 3 ALL123
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

1552 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: 0.242 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 12:17 PM
Top