ohio1317
Moderator
Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
|
RE: Big East Standings
(02-21-2011 05:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote: No question, but these tournaments are not designed to give every team an even chance. Your play in the regular season earns you a higher seeding, or a bye, and thus easier (in theory) path. They feed into each other.
No question there, but it's not an issue of the top seeds having an easier time because of seed, but because of upsets. Let's say the #1 seed faces the highest seeds each round. If that's the case, in a 12 team conference, the the #1 seed would have to play the #8 and #4 seeds in order to make it to the championship. The #2 seed might get lucky though with some upsets before its games and only need to beat the #10 and #6 seeds to make it to the championship. Given these games are back to back, that's a lot easier on the #2 seed going into the tournament championship than the #1.
(02-21-2011 05:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote: If top teams lacked motivation, we'd expect to see a lot of middling teams win these tournaments. But i don't think that's the case. In the ACC, it's Duke and Carolina that seem to win it more years than not, and in the Big East, it's usually a power-team that wins it as well.
And looking back, it seems like it's no handicap playing in the NCAA tournament to do well in your conference tourney. E.g, Duke won the ACC tourney last year, and also won the NCAA tourney. I know that my team, Georgetown, every year they've made the final 4 while in the Big East (07, 85, 84, 82) was also a year they won the Big East tournament.
Both times that Uconn won the national title, in 99 and 04, they too won the Big East tournament. Could be just anecdotal evidence, and i know there are a couple counter-examples (IIIRC, Syracuse won the BET a couple times a few years back, then embarrased the conference by bombing out early in the NCAAs ) but ...
The top teams will still win the most often for sure. They also lose early more than would be expected though. Look at the history of the top seeds in their first day of the Big East Tournament. Last year alone you had 3 of the top 4 lose on their first day. Granted the set-up might also lend itself to that, but I'd think a fresh team would normally be much better off than a team that was playing for the third time in 3 days.
|
|
02-21-2011 09:05 PM |
|
quo vadis
Legend
Posts: 50,007
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2370
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
|
RE: Big East Standings
(02-21-2011 09:05 PM)ohio1317 Wrote: (02-21-2011 05:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote: No question, but these tournaments are not designed to give every team an even chance. Your play in the regular season earns you a higher seeding, or a bye, and thus easier (in theory) path. They feed into each other.
No question there, but it's not an issue of the top seeds having an easier time because of seed, but because of upsets. Let's say the #1 seed faces the highest seeds each round. If that's the case, in a 12 team conference, the the #1 seed would have to play the #8 and #4 seeds in order to make it to the championship. The #2 seed might get lucky though with some upsets before its games and only need to beat the #10 and #6 seeds to make it to the championship. Given these games are back to back, that's a lot easier on the #2 seed going into the tournament championship than the #1.
Upsets are essentially random, so for every time the #2 seed benefits from upsets in his half, the #1 team would benefit as well. I don't see that as a structural concern.
In any event, even if it is true that the BE tournament is a more-flawed, less-valid way of picking a champ than the regular season, that doesn't change the fact that the tournament is the more desirable prize, is the more prestigious title to win. That's just what the values of the conference are.
It's kind of like in tennis: Experts have shown that the US Open is, from a technical point of view, the hardest of the major tournaments to win. Its combination of tough weather (hot, humid) and surface-fairness (basically, both fast and slow court players can play well on it), make it the most challenging.
Nevertheless, Wimbledon remains the most prestigious, most important title to hold. It has the mystique, the tradition, the history, and that overrides the technical issues ...
(This post was last modified: 02-21-2011 09:59 PM by quo vadis.)
|
|
02-21-2011 09:55 PM |
|
ohio1317
Moderator
Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
|
RE: Big East Standings
In the end you are right. It's whatever we as fans end up valuing the most. Given the excitement in Madison Square Garden, I can definitely understand why it's such a big deal.
|
|
02-21-2011 10:03 PM |
|
Bearcats#1
Ad nauseam King
Posts: 45,310
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 1224
I Root For: Pony94
Location: In your head.
|
RE: Big East Standings
(02-20-2011 08:02 PM)mlb Wrote: (02-20-2011 08:01 PM)quo vadis Wrote: (02-20-2011 07:55 PM)bitcruncher Wrote: I stand corrected. But IMO Huggs is far superior...
Come on bit, that's the WVU homer in you coming out (as if it's ever really hidden, LOL). Pitino's record is clearly better.
Pitino is the better recruiter, Huggins in the better coach. Give each coach the other's recruits and Huggins wins hands down, IMO.
co-signed
|
|
02-22-2011 06:10 PM |
|