Jump to content

Bobcats @ Zips — March 1st at 8 pm


akronzips71

Points  

35 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Captain Kangaroo said:

I think the next Dr. Z poll (K.e.n.t. game) should be:

 

"Which percentage will be higher?"

 

A.) The Zips 3-point percentage

B.) The Zips free throw percentage

C.) The Zips offensive conversion percentage within 2 feet of the hoop

 

On a related note is there a rule that stipulates that you can't shoot your free throws from 3? If not, perhaps Reggie should step back a few feet and see if that works better for him.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ace said:

You'd like the ivy league. Tournaments are fun but the regular season should mean more.

I do like the Ivy league conceptually, but not having a tourney is probably just throwing $$$ away.

 

I wouldn't want to do away with the conference tourney, just make it the second biggest prize. I understand why it is the way it is and why it could never happen.

 

It just seems like it hurts the "one bid' leagues as far as making sure their best representative gets into the NCAA while it doesn't hurt the big name conferences at all, in fact conference tourneys often help them get even more teams in the Big Dance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there anyone that really wants to trade experiencing a Zips 3-day ride through The Q...the bars, the environment, the excitement, the program exposure...does anyone want to fast-forward through all of that...just so they can watch the Zips lose in round #1 of the NCAA tourney? 

 

If we simply got a round #1 berth in the tourney for winning the MAC, how many awesome, memorable moments would you have been cheated from experiencing? Our days at The Q under Dambrot have been some of the absolute best experiences I've had as a Zips fan. Even the championship games we've lost have been exhilarating.

 

The Ivy Leaugers may be able to work a protractor, but their 1965 approach to modern-day college basketball is cheating their fans.

 

The MAC Tournament rules.  

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'd certainly want to watch a mid-major or one-bid league conference tourney than one for a conference where a multitude of teams are getting in regardless. It just means more. North Carolina and Duke can meet in the ACC final and it can be a greatly contested game but in the end the loser is still going to the NCAA with a chance to make a deep run. To me that just makes the championship game not mean as much. 

I'll only watch P5 conference tourney games if one or both of the teams need to win to get to the NCAA because those are the games that can have a ripple effect all across the country on who gets in and who doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, GJGood said:

 

I'd certainly want to watch a mid-major or one-bid league conference tourney than one for a conference where a multitude of teams are getting in regardless. It just means more. North Carolina and Duke can meet in the ACC final and it can be a greatly contested game but in the end the loser is still going to the NCAA with a chance to make a deep run. To me that just makes the championship game not mean as much. 

I'll only watch P5 conference tourney games if one or both of the teams need to win to get to the NCAA because those are the games that can have a ripple effect all across the country on who gets in and who doesn't.

 

I would by no means say P5 tournaments are as meaningless as you lead on. They do a great deal towards impacting seeding, which can be more impactful than deciding between 2 teams to determine which 1 is going to be a 12 seed play-in team and which ones going to the NIT. Nobody wants the best 2 teams to meet in the elite then have to settle for some dull final as an undeserving team made it because they had an easy bracket.

 

Edit: History shows that no 16 has beaten a 1. We have seen a 15 can beat a 2 (Happened 3x in past 4 years). Winning a P5 conference tournament might be the difference b/w a near guaranteed 1st round win or a humiliating 1st round exit.

Edited by kreed5120
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

 

I would by no means say P5 tournaments are as meaningless as you lead on. They do a great deal towards impacting seeding, which can be more impactful than deciding between 2 teams to determine which 1 is going to be a 12 seed play-in team and which ones going to the NIT. Nobody wants the best 2 teams to meet in the elite then have to settle for some dull final as an undeserving team made it because they had an easy bracket.

 

I get what you are saying but is there really that much to be learned from two top 15 teams meeting for the third time in a season that wasn't already known from their first two meetings? Can it change seeding? Sure. Ultimately, though, seeding is the committee's responsibility and they have to make judgments all the time comparing teams from different conferences. If they can seed teams relative to each other that never played each other why do they need a third meeting between teams that already met twice to do the same thing?

 

To me a much, much bigger deal is who gets in than where they are seeded. Yes seedings determine the matchups but the games are really more about how styles match up than it is about overall body of work which the seedings are based on. For example, I still state that out of Akron's 4 NCAA appearances the best matchup they had was the one with Notre Dame. That also happened to be a 2 vs. 15 game according to seedings. Akron was far more overmatched when they played Gonzaga and VCU even though the seeding wouldn't have agreed with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, GJGood said:

 

I get what you are saying but is there really that much to be learned from two top 15 teams meeting for the third time in a season that wasn't already known from their first two meetings? Can it change seeding? Sure. Ultimately, though, seeding is the committee's responsibility and they have to make judgments all the time comparing teams from different conferences. If they can seed teams relative to each other that never played each other why do they need a third meeting between teams that already met twice to do the same thing?

 

To me a much, much bigger deal is who gets in than where they are seeded. Yes seedings determine the matchups but the games are really more about how styles match up than it is about overall body of work which the seedings are based on. For example, I still state that out of Akron's 4 NCAA appearances the best matchup they had was the one with Notre Dame. That also happened to be a 2 vs. 15 game according to seedings. Akron was far more overmatched when they played Gonzaga and VCU even though the seeding wouldn't have agreed with that.

 

A 16 has never beaten a 1 seed. We have seen 3 15 seeds beat a 2 seed in just the last 4 years. Perhaps had Duke positioned themselves as a 1 seed, they wouldn't have been humiliated and positioned themselves for a deep tourney run. I feel conference tournaments do a good job of rewarding teams that are playing their best at the end of the season. Perhaps some team was great until their star got injured with 2 games left in the season. That team is no longer as good as what their resume at the end of the regular season suggests. The conference tournament helps correct it some so they more accurately get seeded.

Edited by kreed5120
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree. I just think it is much more intriguing to watch a conference tourney like the MAAC this year. Monmouth may be in position for an at-large bid but every other team in their conference tournament knows they must win the title to make the NCAA. That makes every game "do or die" in a sense but you still know that the best team in the league still has a legitimate shot to get in even if they stumble.

 

You also know that some team that finished 5th in the conference regular season and bowed out in the conference tourney semifinals is not going to get in to the Big Dance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

He didn't hire an agent, so I'm assuming he'll be back. After watching him against Big Dog this year, there's not a chance in my mind he's ready for the NBA. I don't think it'd be a half bad idea for Big Dog to do the same and get the experience of the camps and going against future NBA players

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, zippy5 said:

He didn't hire an agent, so I'm assuming he'll be back. After watching him against Big Dog this year, there's not a chance in my mind he's ready for the NBA. I don't think it'd be a half bad idea for Big Dog to do the same and get the experience of the camps and going against future NBA players

 

DITTO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...