+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: MACbbs (/forum-513.html)
+---- Forum: Archives (/forum-462.html)
+----- Forum: MACbbs Archives (/forum-480.html)
+----- Thread: New Tournament Seeding (/thread-560324.html)
New Tournament Seeding - BullBoy - 03-10-2012 11:37 PM
You got to think the MAC got exactly what it wanted with the new tournament seeding... Top four teams went to the Semifinals and if you were a casual fan, you were treated to two fantastic semifinal games.
Then tonight you got a great championship game between Akron and Ohio.
I think from the MAC's standpoint, the change in tournament format was a success.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - exCincy Kid - 03-10-2012 11:43 PM
You got it. It makes no sense whatsover to not give our top seeds every advantage of advancing in hopes that we might get back to having two teams "dancing" like we used to see at least once every 3-4 years back in the 90's.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - Campbell4President - 03-11-2012 12:01 AM
I agree. It makes the whole MAC season meaningful.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - JSF - 03-11-2012 03:40 AM
Agree wholeheartedly.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - emu steve - 03-11-2012 04:40 AM
I too agree.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - FlashFan - 03-11-2012 08:49 AM
Add me.
Just thought the same thing. Those who went Friday and Saturday were treated to three great games. It was a great introduction to MAC basketball for casual fans.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - ksu sucks - 03-11-2012 10:13 AM
Agree 1000%.
Great games, great atmosphere.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - Louis Kitton - 03-11-2012 10:25 AM
(03-11-2012 12:01 AM)Beckman4President Wrote: I agree. It makes the whole MAC season meaningful.
It adds another tier to the MAC season.
1) Race for the regular season title.
2) Race for a Top 4 seed.
3) Race for a first round home game.
This gives almost everybody something to play for heading down the stretch of MAC play.
Kudos for Steinbrecher getting the format approved past the pesky MAC presidents. He also squeezed 6 million out of the Big East and has done a good job of matching schools in bowls (Toledo vs. Air Force).
There are a lot of Chryst lovers on here but I think Steinbrecher is turning out to be a very good commish.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - MileHighBronco - 03-11-2012 01:46 PM
If they stay with this format, what is the point of divisions? Scrap them.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - UofToledoFans - 03-11-2012 02:24 PM
I've said this before. SCRAP DIVISIONS!
Bottom 2 seeds shouldn't make the MAC tourney.
First Round in Cleveland:
game 1: 10 vs. 5
game 2: 9 vs. 6
game 3: 8 vs. 7
Quarter Final Round:
4 vs. game 3 winner.
3 vs. game 2 winner.
2 vs. game 1 winner.
Semi's:
1 seed vs. 4/game 3 winner.
3 vs. game 2 winner VS. 2 vs. game 1 winner.
Finals:
...
RE: New Tournament Seeding - axeme - 03-11-2012 02:39 PM
I've said that for years, but there really is no sentiment around the league to leave teams out of the conference tourney. It is just not happening. They have at least made it very difficult for those teams to advance very far.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - Louis Kitton - 03-11-2012 04:25 PM
(03-11-2012 02:39 PM)axeme Wrote: I've said that for years, but there really is no sentiment around the league to leave teams out of the conference tourney. It is just not happening. They have at least made it very difficult for those teams to advance very far.
It hurts recruiting to leave schools out as undeserving as they may be.
RE: New Tournament Seeding - huskiebob - 03-11-2012 08:38 PM
(03-11-2012 02:24 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote: I've said this before. SCRAP DIVISIONS!
Bottom 2 seeds shouldn't make the MAC tourney.
First Round in Cleveland:
game 1: 10 vs. 5
game 2: 9 vs. 6
game 3: 8 vs. 7
Quarter Final Round:
4 vs. game 3 winner.
3 vs. game 2 winner.
2 vs. game 1 winner.
Semi's:
1 seed vs. 4/game 3 winner.
3 vs. game 2 winner VS. 2 vs. game 1 winner.
Finals:
...
This is the best of both worlds, IMO. Rewards only the regular season winner with a bye into the semis. I have no problem with leaving out the bottom two teams. Hurts recruiting? I can't see it; every coach is gonna say they're good enough to make the top 10.