(02-21-2011 08:12 AM)XLance Wrote:  In the ACC every sport since the beginning of the conference has been decided by a championship tournament. The winner of the season ending tournament is the conference champion. There is really no official designation of "regular season champion" in the ACC.

Yes, that's how i remember it from living in ACC territory.

The Big East isn't quite like that - we do recognize a regular season b-ball champ - but it's clearly of lesser import than our tournament.

(02-19-2011 04:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-19-2011 04:28 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(02-19-2011 10:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Nope, it's a PERFECT venue for basketball in all ways, size included.

How many seats?

19,763. That's a lot of seats, and yet there isn't a bad seat in the house, really.

Yeah, MSG is already fairly large for a basketball arena. You want that sold-out atmosphere to provide electricity. Besides, even if you wanted to move it to a larger space, the only other option in the Northeast would be Syracuse (and I doubt many non-Syracuse fans would be in favor of that). There aren't any East Coast domes like there are in the Southeast (Atlanta, New Orleans) or Midwest (Indianapolis, Detroit, Minneapolis, St. Louis).

Frankly, outside of the Final Four, playing basketball games in domes really kills the atmosphere. Michigan State played UNC at Ford Field a couple of years ago and even though there were almost 30,000 people there (a very large crowd for a basketball game), the cavernous nature of the stadium made it feel like the place was empty. I also felt that way watching the ACC Tournaments that have been played at the Georgia Dome - a normally racuous atmosphere in a more intimate place like Greensboro looked like a completely dead crowd in Atlanta (even though there were twice as many people there).

The BEast Tournament is anything but dead. And having the tournament in NYC is a huge draw for the fans too. There's no limit to the things you can do outside of the tourney...

(02-21-2011 09:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Interesting to note that the world's most valuable pro sports league, the English Premier League, doesn't have any type of playoffs.

Well, it depends on how you define 'valuable'. NFL teams are more valuable on a per-team basis (and since there are more NFL than premiership teams, that means their market-cap is almost surely higher as well).

But, it's important to keep in mind how relatively "small" even the richest leagues are. For example, the NFL has a total market-cap of about $30 billion. Some of its sponsors are larger. E.g, the McDonald's corporation is worth almost 3 times that. Nike is worth about three times as much as the entire NBA.

But in any event, i LOVE the way the Premiership determines its champ. Every team plays every other one home and away, and the team with the most points (a system with a bias towards winning, not tying) wins. Whoever wins the Premiership has proven to be best over an 8-month season with everyone playing the same schedule.

To me, playoffs are only useful when the nature of the sport prevents playing the kind of comprehensive season that would enable us to crown a champ based on the regular season. That means each team playing every other team home and away.

Crowing a national champ in college football and basketball being Exhibit A and B, since there are far more teams than could permit this kind of regular season system.

(02-21-2011 10:17 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  The BEast Tournament is anything but dead. And having the tournament in NYC is a huge draw for the fans too. There's no limit to the things you can do outside of the tourney...

That's what I mean - MSG provides pretty much the perfect atmosphere for the BE Tournament. I wouldn't willingly EVER move it out of that building even if someplace else provided a few more seats.

(02-21-2011 09:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Interesting to note that the world's most valuable pro sports league, the English Premier League, doesn't have any type of playoffs.

Actually, the entire season of the English Premier League is a playoff. The bottom teams move down in class to the lower league, and the top teams in the lower league are elevated to the Premier League.

(02-21-2011 08:12 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-19-2011 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-19-2011 11:13 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  As a side note, does anyone hate the use of the word "championship" instead of "tournament" (several conferences now using this). To me, the regular season winner is the conference champion. The tournament is a separate event and shouldn't be thought of as anyone's "championship." Just one pet peeve of mine.

Maybe you have this perspective because you follow a Big 10 school, and in the Big 10, the tournament is a recent thing whereas historically the regular season champ has been the more prestigious title, regarded as your true champion?

It's the exact opposite in the Big East: Like the ACC, we regard our conference tournament winner as clearly more prestigious than the regular season winner, it's the bigger prize, and the tournament winner is thus considered to be the true Big East champion.

To a Big East team, the rank-order of desirable results for a season are:

1) National champ
2) Regional champ (Final 4)
3) Big East Tournament Champ
4) Big East regular season champ

In the ACC every sport since the beginning of the conference has been decided by a championship tournament. The winner of the season ending tournament is the conference champion. There is really no official designation of "regular season champion" in the ACC.

I seem to remember acc football not having a fb championship for years until they took a couple of BE teams.

(02-21-2011 10:29 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-21-2011 10:17 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  The BEast Tournament is anything but dead. And having the tournament in NYC is a huge draw for the fans too. There's no limit to the things you can do outside of the tourney...

That's what I mean - MSG provides pretty much the perfect atmosphere for the BE Tournament. I wouldn't willingly EVER move it out of that building even if someplace else provided a few more seats.

I don't think there's any danger of the BET moving anywhere. Both the Big East and MSG love the current arrangement, and for good reason.

(02-21-2011 10:10 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Besides, even if you wanted to move it to a larger space, the only other option in the Northeast would be Syracuse (and I doubt many non-Syracuse fans would be in favor of that).

The BET was played in the Carrier Dome one year (1981). Guess who won?

And yes, i agree that BIG domes kill the basketball atmosphere. The court just isn't big enough to permit an intimate atmosphere in stadiums built for football or baseball.

(02-21-2011 09:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-19-2011 02:03 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I know I'm in a deep minority in that position. In the end though, I guess a lot goes to my thoughts on the regular season vs. postseason. If you win the regular season title, it always feels to me like you really, really earned it. One and done tournaments though, especially with so many teams, it feels more like equal parts skill and luck. In 1999 Ohio State made the Final Four (vacated now, but it still happened) and was 2nd in the Big Ten. Last year we lost in the Sweet 16, but won the Big Ten (tied, but it's still a title). I look at the results and I just can't say that 1999 was a better year just because Ohio State won their Sweet 16 (and then Elite 8) game.

Well, I don't agree that a regular season conference championship is worth more than a Final Four. That's ultimately the goal of every team in America. Arguably, the Bears had a better pverall season than the Packers since the former won the NFC North, but simply making the Super Bowl (much less winning it) does ultimately mean that the Packers had a more successful season since how you finish should matter more. I do value a regular season Big Ten championship much more than winning the Big Ten tournament (and virtually all Big Ten fans would agree). I'm sure part of that is historical since the ACC and Big East tournaments have been around much longer. I'd rank them:

(1) National Championship
(2) Final Four
(3) Big Ten regular season championship
(4) Elite Eight
(5) Sweet Sixteen
(6) Big Ten tournament championship

ACC and Big East fans would probably switch the regular season and tournament championship positions.

Interesting to note that the world's most valuable pro sports league, the English Premier League, doesn't have any type of playoffs. Their champ is crowned strictly based on the overall regular season record. Now, the flip side is the bottom teams get bumped down to the equivalent of the minor leagues (and top second tier teams get moved up).

I was personally torn between a Final Four and regular season Big Ten champs which is why I ranked them 2a and 2b. I know I'm in the vast minority in that viewpoint and maybe I'll change viewpoints come March. The regular season championship just feels like something the team is striving for so long though and it's hard to give it up for one win in the Elite 8.

(02-19-2011 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  To a Big East team, the rank-order of desirable results for a season are:

1) National champ
2) Regional champ (Final 4)
3) Big East Tournament Champ
4) Big East regular season champ

I agree.
5) Would be Sweet 16

For the record, I think most Big Ten fans (not crazy ones like me ) would rank it exactly like Frank did.

1. National Championship
2. Final Four
3. Big Ten (regular season) Champs
4. Elite 8
5. Sweet 16
6. Big Ten Tournament winners

(02-21-2011 10:01 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  For the record, I think most Big Ten fans (not crazy ones like me ) would rank it exactly like Frank did.

1. National Championship
2. Final Four
3. Big Ten (regular season) Champs
4. Elite 8
5. Sweet 16
6. Big Ten Tournament winners

.. and believe it or not, that's the way i would have guessed that Big 10 fans would have valued it. To me, everyone wants to win the national title first and make the final 4 second, those are the big national-level achievements.

But after that, since the Big 10 regular season champ has a long and storied history, whereas the tournament dates from only 1998, it makes sense that the regular season title is more prestigious.

btw, as it pertains to our other discussion: i note that in 10/13 years, the #1 or #2 seed has won the Big 10 tournament. Only 3 times has another seed won the event. So it seems like the top seeds are pretty motivated ....

You're probably right about the motivation aspect and it's probably not as big a deal as it feels to me.

MSG is pumping 800 million dollars into their own renovation.... it will be done in 3 years

http://msgtransformation.com/Transformation.aspx#

I would move ACC Champion up to #2 behind NCAA Champion.

(02-22-2011 07:58 AM)XLance Wrote:  I would move ACC Champion up to #2 behind NCAA Champion.

I vote to change the name of the ACC Championship to "The Annual Duke or UNC Conference Top Team Award."

The announcer can say "This year it goes to Duke." "This year it goes to UNC." "This year it goes to Duke" "This year it goes to UNC." etc..etc...

Without looking on the internet, I can name the past 15 ACC champs with about 90 percent accuracy: Duke and UNC. There I did it.

Once in a blue moon somebody else wins the ACC. But basically, you're right, froggie. You could go back further than 15 years too, and you still wouldn't have to look it up...

(02-21-2011 10:01 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  For the record, I think most Big Ten fans (not crazy ones like me ) would rank it exactly like Frank did.

1. National Championship
2. Final Four
3. Big Ten (regular season) Champs
4. Elite 8
5. Sweet 16
6. Big Ten Tournament winners

You know. Now that I've had some time to think about this, I can see your point. Ohio State only has 17 Big Tin Championships since the Big Tin formed in 1913. Those do stick in the memory. Don't they?

(02-22-2011 11:31 AM)frogman Wrote:  

(02-22-2011 07:58 AM)XLance Wrote:  I would move ACC Champion up to #2 behind NCAA Champion.

I vote to change the name of the ACC Championship to "The Annual Duke or UNC Conference Top Team Award."

The announcer can say "This year it goes to Duke." "This year it goes to UNC." "This year it goes to Duke" "This year it goes to UNC." etc..etc...

Without looking on the internet, I can name the past 15 ACC champs with about 90 percent accuracy: Duke and UNC. There I did it.

Not a bad idea frog.
Since 1991 the ACC championship has been won by either Dook or Carolina 16 times.
In the last 20 years it has been easier to get to the Final Four for Carolina (nine times) than to win the ACC Championship (six times)

i don't know about the BE tourney, but most conference tournaments (especially the ACC) are just a money grab. You play the whole season to determine who will go to the NCAA tournament. That should be good enough