2018 NCAA Tournament

Started by Ralph Turner, February 25, 2018, 07:33:27 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lmitzel

Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 08, 2018, 09:33:30 AM
Something I'd like to see is for conferences to diminish their conference tournaments. It's a great story to have some low seeded team get hot and make their way in but it diminishes the value of the regular season. If you know your conference is a one bid league then why bother playing the regular season if all that matters is a few games in February?
I'd be all for the UAA model of no tournament but if you had to have one, do something like:
a) 2 vs 5 and 3 vs 4 then the winner of that pod plays the 1 in the final
b) 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 and if the winner is someone other than the 1 they have to play the 1 seed

This topic came up in the CCIW board a couple months ago when the conference announced it was expanding its conference tournament from four to six. I'm actually a fan of the expansion. With it for next year I think the number came out to roughly 62 percent of teams nationwide play in their conference's tournament (factoring in that the UAA doesn't have one).

I can see the argument that it diminishes the regular season (which is why I'm glad that most conferences don't just invite everyone to the postseason tournament) but you're arguably adding more value to the regular season in that more games will matter in the grand scheme of things.

Yeah, the conference tournaments can boost team's Pool C chances if they lose, or increase the likelihood of hosting a weekend or two in the NCAA's, but those extra 1-3 games don't count any more than a Tip Off Tournament game in November or a first matchup between rivals in January.
Official D-III Championship BeltTM Cartographer
2022 CCIW Football Pick 'Em Co-Champion
#THREEEEEEEEE

Gregory Sager

Quote from: fantastic50 on March 08, 2018, 09:09:54 AM
This is all fun to dream about, but between funding, logistical issues with travel, and missed class time, I don't think expansion beyond 64 stands a realistic chance of getting approved at the NCAA level.

I definitely agree, but I think that this conversation serves a purpose beyond mere wishful thinking or the idle chatter of fans stuck in midweek-wait mode. It's always good to examine the motivations behind NCAA policy and bracket construction. F'rinstance, you'll never see D1 fans introduce missed class time as a factor in talking about how to shape brackets.
"To see what is in front of one's nose is a constant struggle." -- George Orwell

sac

It would be great to play a 30 game regular season too.

smedindy

Quote from: sac on March 08, 2018, 11:41:02 AM
It would be great to play a 30 game regular season too.

Like the NAIA? No thanks.

I know overworked SIDs who would not approve of hoops intruding in on the fall sports cavalcade. (Here, it's football, CC, women's soccer, volleyball, and rugby - the women with XV's and the men with 7's - when exhibition hoops starts we have to almost clone people).

lefty2

Quote from: smedindy on March 08, 2018, 12:41:34 PM
Quote from: sac on March 08, 2018, 11:41:02 AM
It would be great to play a 30 game regular season too.

Like the NAIA? No thanks.

I know overworked SIDs who would not approve of hoops intruding in on the fall sports cavalcade. (Here, it's football, CC, women's soccer, volleyball, and rugby - the women with XV's and the men with 7's - when exhibition hoops starts we have to almost clone people).
No decision has ever been made with SID's in mind.
The person who says something can't be done shouldn't stand in the way of the one who's doing it.

Dave 'd-mac' McHugh



The Sectional Round games are here. Soon 16 teams on both the men's and women's brackets will be whittled to eight ... and before we know it just four will remain.

Who will advance, who will fall short of the final weekend, and who is best prepared? Hard to answer all of those questions, but on Thursday's edition of Hoopsville Dave will have plenty of guests who will give us their insight on their programs.

Hoopsville is presented by D3hoops.com and airs from the WBCA/NABC Studio. You can watch the show LIVE starting at 7pm ET right here:http://bit.ly/2FBCA0N.

If you have questions, be sure to email them to hoopsville@d3hoops.com or interact with the show via the social media avenues.

Guests include (in order of appearance):
- Bob Amsberry, No. 2 Wartburg women's coach
- Brian Morehouse, No. 4 Hope women's coach (WBCA Center Court)
- Glenn Robinson, Franklin & Marshall men's coach
- Charlie Brock, Springfield men's coach
- Eric Bridgeland, No. 1 Whitman men's coach
- Jim Scheible, No. 16 Rochester women's coach

If you enjoy the show via the podcasts instead, you can get access to them or subscribe one of the three following ways (click on the images when necessary):
SoundCloud: www.soundcloud.com/hoopsville



Don't forget you can always interact with us:
Website: www.d3hoopsville.com
Twitter: @d3hoopsville or #Hoopsville
Facebook: www.facebook.com/Hoopsville
Email: hoopsville@d3hoops.com
YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/d3hoopsville
Host of Hoopsville. USBWA Executive Board member. Broadcast Director for D3sports.com. Broadcaster for NCAA.com & several colleges. PA Announcer for Gophers & Brigade. Follow me on Twitter: @davemchugh or @d3hoopsville.

KnightSlappy

Quote from: lmitzel on March 08, 2018, 10:58:14 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 08, 2018, 09:33:30 AM
Something I'd like to see is for conferences to diminish their conference tournaments. It's a great story to have some low seeded team get hot and make their way in but it diminishes the value of the regular season. If you know your conference is a one bid league then why bother playing the regular season if all that matters is a few games in February?
I'd be all for the UAA model of no tournament but if you had to have one, do something like:
a) 2 vs 5 and 3 vs 4 then the winner of that pod plays the 1 in the final
b) 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 and if the winner is someone other than the 1 they have to play the 1 seed

This topic came up in the CCIW board a couple months ago when the conference announced it was expanding its conference tournament from four to six. I'm actually a fan of the expansion. With it for next year I think the number came out to roughly 62 percent of teams nationwide play in their conference's tournament (factoring in that the UAA doesn't have one).

I can see the argument that it diminishes the regular season (which is why I'm glad that most conferences don't just invite everyone to the postseason tournament) but you're arguably adding more value to the regular season in that more games will matter in the grand scheme of things.

Yeah, the conference tournaments can boost team's Pool C chances if they lose, or increase the likelihood of hosting a weekend or two in the NCAA's, but those extra 1-3 games don't count any more than a Tip Off Tournament game in November or a first matchup between rivals in January.

This is my take. It's really not much fun to play games when you're eliminated. If everyone's invited to the conference tournament then everybody has something to play for in every single game. Even if it's not for seeding, it's to get better and to keep working to grow as a team.

I like the idea that a team's season doesn't have to end until they lose a tournament game of some sort. If I was the Sports Czar, I'd stipulate that conferences only get an AQ if they award it to their tournament champion with every conference member receiving a invite.

Greek Tragedy

Quote from: KnightSlappy on March 08, 2018, 08:48:31 PM
Quote from: lmitzel on March 08, 2018, 10:58:14 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 08, 2018, 09:33:30 AM
Something I'd like to see is for conferences to diminish their conference tournaments. It's a great story to have some low seeded team get hot and make their way in but it diminishes the value of the regular season. If you know your conference is a one bid league then why bother playing the regular season if all that matters is a few games in February?
I'd be all for the UAA model of no tournament but if you had to have one, do something like:
a) 2 vs 5 and 3 vs 4 then the winner of that pod plays the 1 in the final
b) 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 and if the winner is someone other than the 1 they have to play the 1 seed

This topic came up in the CCIW board a couple months ago when the conference announced it was expanding its conference tournament from four to six. I'm actually a fan of the expansion. With it for next year I think the number came out to roughly 62 percent of teams nationwide play in their conference's tournament (factoring in that the UAA doesn't have one).

I can see the argument that it diminishes the regular season (which is why I'm glad that most conferences don't just invite everyone to the postseason tournament) but you're arguably adding more value to the regular season in that more games will matter in the grand scheme of things.

Yeah, the conference tournaments can boost team's Pool C chances if they lose, or increase the likelihood of hosting a weekend or two in the NCAA's, but those extra 1-3 games don't count any more than a Tip Off Tournament game in November or a first matchup between rivals in January.

This is my take. It's really not much fun to play games when you're eliminated. If everyone's invited to the conference tournament then everybody has something to play for in every single game. Even if it's not for seeding, it's to get better and to keep working to grow as a team.

I like the idea that a team's season doesn't have to end until they lose a tournament game of some sort. If I was the Sports Czar, I'd stipulate that conferences only get an AQ if they award it to their tournament champion with every conference member receiving a invite.

So on one hand you're saying everyone should be invited so they have something to play for and then you say if you aren't playing for seeding, play to get better and grow as a team.

So, if I'm already eliminated from the conference tournament if only the top 4 get bids, I'm still playing for something by growing as a team and working on getting better, right?
Pointers
Breed of a Champion
2004, 2005, 2010 and 2015 National Champions

Fantasy Leagues Commissioner

TGHIJGSTO!!!

Mr. Ypsi

Quote from: KnightSlappy on March 08, 2018, 08:48:31 PM
Quote from: lmitzel on March 08, 2018, 10:58:14 AM
Quote from: FCGrizzliesGrad on March 08, 2018, 09:33:30 AM
Something I'd like to see is for conferences to diminish their conference tournaments. It's a great story to have some low seeded team get hot and make their way in but it diminishes the value of the regular season. If you know your conference is a one bid league then why bother playing the regular season if all that matters is a few games in February?
I'd be all for the UAA model of no tournament but if you had to have one, do something like:
a) 2 vs 5 and 3 vs 4 then the winner of that pod plays the 1 in the final
b) 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 and if the winner is someone other than the 1 they have to play the 1 seed

This topic came up in the CCIW board a couple months ago when the conference announced it was expanding its conference tournament from four to six. I'm actually a fan of the expansion. With it for next year I think the number came out to roughly 62 percent of teams nationwide play in their conference's tournament (factoring in that the UAA doesn't have one).

I can see the argument that it diminishes the regular season (which is why I'm glad that most conferences don't just invite everyone to the postseason tournament) but you're arguably adding more value to the regular season in that more games will matter in the grand scheme of things.

Yeah, the conference tournaments can boost team's Pool C chances if they lose, or increase the likelihood of hosting a weekend or two in the NCAA's, but those extra 1-3 games don't count any more than a Tip Off Tournament game in November or a first matchup between rivals in January.

This is my take. It's really not much fun to play games when you're eliminated. If everyone's invited to the conference tournament then everybody has something to play for in every single game. Even if it's not for seeding, it's to get better and to keep working to grow as a team.

I like the idea that a team's season doesn't have to end until they lose a tournament game of some sort. If I was the Sports Czar, I'd stipulate that conferences only get an AQ if they award it to their tournament champion with every conference member receiving a invite.

Undecided if I agree or disagree.  Unless some provision is made to benefit the top teams in the regular season, it seems to me this makes the entire regular season just a 'preseason', and the entire 'season' is 3 (or however many) games in February.

I'd probably totally disagree is if were not for the 2010 baseball season!  IWU barely made it into the conference playoffs, won them, won the regional, and won the national title.  On the other hand, they DID have to finish fourth (of eight) in the conference to have that opportunity.  If a team finishes in the bottom of their conference, do they really deserve a chance to get hot (or lucky) for a short stretch, negating everything that has happened during the season?

You're a stats guy.  Do you really want a small sample to potentially outweigh a much larger sample? ::)

Ralph Turner

We had Berry and Hendrix (3-11 records in the SAA).  That is real Cinderella.  Let's give Centre the regular season trophy!  They earned it, but the underclassmen will know what it takes to move to the next level and the seniors will go thru life with a valuable life lesson.

KnightSlappy

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 08, 2018, 10:34:11 PM
Undecided if I agree or disagree.  Unless some provision is made to benefit the top teams in the regular season, it seems to me this makes the entire regular season just a 'preseason', and the entire 'season' is 3 (or however many) games in February.

The conference championship is a worthy goal on its own, no? There are over 400 teams in Division III. Only one will win the national championship.

Sure, give a bye or a double bye, whatever. I just like the idea of a Berry getting to play for that AQ.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 08, 2018, 10:34:11 PM
You're a stats guy.  Do you really want a small sample to potentially outweigh a much larger sample? ::)

The national tournament (and conference tournaments, for that matter) have never been about determining the best teams. They're about crowning a champion. In this case I like small sample size. Small sample size means fun things can happen!

Mr. Ypsi

Quote from: KnightSlappy on March 08, 2018, 11:01:02 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 08, 2018, 10:34:11 PM
Undecided if I agree or disagree.  Unless some provision is made to benefit the top teams in the regular season, it seems to me this makes the entire regular season just a 'preseason', and the entire 'season' is 3 (or however many) games in February.

The conference championship is a worthy goal on its own, no? There are over 400 teams in Division III. Only one will win the national championship.

Sure, give a bye or a double bye, whatever. I just like the idea of a Berry getting to play for that AQ.

Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 08, 2018, 10:34:11 PM
You're a stats guy.  Do you really want a small sample to potentially outweigh a much larger sample? ::)

The national tournament (and conference tournaments, for that matter) have never been about determining the best teams. They're about crowning a champion. In this case I like small sample size. Small sample size means fun things can happen!

Again I am undecided!

The national tourneys are large enough that I'm not sure we've ever had one where a 'likely' contender has not been included.  So the national tourneys ARE about determining the 'best' team, if only at that moment.  That does not necessarily mean the 'best' team for the overall season (as I freely admitted about the 2010 baseball tourney, still up on this site).  (And, as i would contend, Va Wes winning in 2006, when it should have been IWU! ;D)  But it does mean not letting a really bad team get on a hot streak and win it all.  THAT would be making the regular season meaningless.

Just Bill

I've always thought the best size for a Division III conference tournament is half the membership (rounded up to make an even number). I think that keeps enough teams in the race and competitive all the way to the end of the season. I don't like putting everyone into the conference tournament at this level, because I think you ultimately hurt the top seeds who might be competing nationally for at-large bids, and there's not nearly as many at-large bids available as in D-I.
"That seems silly and pointless..." - Hoops Fan

The first and still most accurate description of the D3 Championship BeltTM thread.

KnightSlappy

Quote from: Just Bill on March 09, 2018, 09:47:10 AM
I've always thought the best size for a Division III conference tournament is half the membership (rounded up to make an even number). I think that keeps enough teams in the race and competitive all the way to the end of the season. I don't like putting everyone into the conference tournament at this level, because I think you ultimately hurt the top seeds who might be competing nationally for at-large bids, and there's not nearly as many at-large bids available as in D-I.

I think I would be in favor of limiting the criteria to the 25 game regular season schedule. Conference tournaments can be for the AQ. Your regular season is to establish your Pool C bona fides.

Greek Tragedy

Based on the poll, looks like everyone is pretty confident that Augustana will advance. The other 42 votes are spread evenly, well exactly, amongst the other 3 pods not going the hosts' way. 14 votes apiece.
Pointers
Breed of a Champion
2004, 2005, 2010 and 2015 National Champions

Fantasy Leagues Commissioner

TGHIJGSTO!!!