Schedule Changes

I suppose this was to be expected but I hate when teams don't have a home/home. I feel cheated when we can't get redemption but it appears it will now be the norm.

http://thegazette.com/2014/02/19/no-protected-rivals-geography-for-b1g-hoops/

Yeah but

It is about as fair as it can be.

Sometimes you get lucky and the tough singles are at home and sometimes you'll get hosed because the tough singles are on the road.

Well it might even out over an eight year period or it might not.

I agree with EGGO!

wshoes wrote:

Well it might even out over an eight year period or it might not.

Well, you might happen to catch a team at their place, the one year they have a good team.

I mean teams like Nebraska or PSU or Ill or some of those teams.

Like, if you had caught Nebraska THIS YEAR, AT THEIR PLACE you would have run into a buzz saw.

But if you had played them LAST YEAR at their place it was no big deal.........

So there's gonna be a little luck involved.

I agree Joe. I guess my point is that in any given year it has a good chance of not being "fair."

'shoes

It doesn't bother me. The schedule has always been uneven as to who you play twice and who you don't. I just enjoy the games, and you go out to beat whoever is on the court against you that night.

Well what it does is make the regular season championship meaningless.

How can you possibly crown a champion on an uneven playing field?

The conference champion will be the Tournament winner and that's all anyone (except for flamers and trolls) will care about.

That happened in the Big Least before it split up. No one cared who won the regular season. All they cared about was winning the Big East Tournament.

That's the way it is in football already.

Michigan could go 12-0 and play Wisconsin who is 8-4 in the B1G Championship game and lose.

No one would care that Michigan was 12-0 in the regular season.

Basketball has become THAT.

joe wrote:

Well what it does is make the regular season championship meaningless.

How can you possibly crown a champion on an uneven playing field?

The conference champion will be the Tournament winner and that's all anyone (except for flamers and trolls) will care about.

That happened in the Big Least before it split up. No one cared who won the regular season. All they cared about was winning the Big East Tournament.

That's the way it is in football already.

Michigan could go 12-0 and play Wisconsin who is 8-4 in the B1G Championship game and lose.

No one would care that Michigan was 12-0 in the regular season.

Basketball has become THAT.

 
No one cares now if UM goes 12-0 in the regular season if they don't win the championship game.  I have no problem with that at all.  The only people that will care are UM fans.  

It will have zero impact on the regular season championship.  The conference champ is the tournament winner.  The regular season champ does not get the automatic bid to the NCAA, the tourney champ does.  All the regular season championship is good for is bragging rights and seeding in the tourney.  It is that way now and will continue to be that way.  You can still hang a regular season banner.

Yes, it is that way now. It wasn't 4 years ago.

Times they are a changin'

It has been that way for basketball since 1998. I like the tourney.

I am bumping this thread as proof that I am not crazy. Both Joe and Fish talked about the reg season being less important.

If you want to do it honestly also say that this thread covers THE FUTURE SCHEDULES.

And in no way did I say that I thought it was more or less important. I was writing about the NCAA Basketball universe not about me.

So, yes, I posted about it. But it was in regards to future schedules and it was not expressing my opinion but wondering what the opinion would be of the nation.

Right?

Eh I'm not trying argue. Reading what you wrote IMO punches some holes in the regular season champion.

I bumped this to prove my mental health not to rub someone's nose in something they said.

Not once did I say it was more important. I said:

No one cares now if UM goes 12-0 in the regular season if they don't win the championship game. I have no problem with that at all. The only people that will care are UM fans.

It will have zero impact on the regular season championship. The conference champ is the tournament winner. The regular season champ does not get the automatic bid to the NCAA, the tourney champ does. All the regular season championship is good for is bragging rights and seeding in the tourney. It is that way now and will continue to be that way. You can still hang a regular season banner.

And:

It has been that way for basketball since 1998. I like the tourney.

I like watching the tournement. I enjoy the win and move on. And I also correctly pointed out that the winner of the tourney gets the auto bid. I also correctly pointed out that the only people that care about the regular season winner are the team and fans of the team that won it.

But, with all that being said,

The NCAA has already decided that the Tournament Champions shall get the automatic bid.

That right there says it doesn't matter jackshit what joe thinks. lol

I personally hate the unbalance season. It matters to me. This year we only played O$U once. I would love to kick their butt 2X . Some teams have an easier run because of this.
Being hot for 30 games or being hot for 4 games , you draw a conclusion

I would lean your way artist.

Unfortunately the NCAA has not only leaned the other way but they have torn down the wall and dragged everyone through it whether they liked it or not.

joe wrote:

I would lean your way artist.

Unfortunately the NCAA has not only leaned the other way but they have torn down the wall and dragged everyone through it whether they liked it or not.

I think the confernce made that call when they added the tournament. It's a money making machine. If they had a tournament that didn't decide who gets the bid, it would be unwatched by fans of teams that have no shot of making the NCAAs. As it is right now, any team can get hot and sneak in. Slim chances, but a chance none the less.

The ACC had a conference tournament years before anyone else did. And for years it wasn't just an auto bid, it was the only bid. Many great ACC teams that won the regular season sat home (or went to the NIT). Then it was everything. Now the ACC or Big Ten regular season champs are de facto guaranteed not just a bid but likely a high seed even if it isn't technically automatic.

For me the regular season title is more important by far because it takes sustained great play over 2 1/2 months. The conference tourney title is a nice to have but secondary thing.

'shoes

Yeah shoes, and only 1 B1G team went to a bowl.

fishgoblue22 wrote:

joe wrote:

Well what it does is make the regular season championship meaningless.

How can you possibly crown a champion on an uneven playing field?

The conference champion will be the Tournament winner and that's all anyone (except for flamers and trolls) will care about.

That happened in the Big Least before it split up. No one cared who won the regular season. All they cared about was winning the Big East Tournament.

That's the way it is in football already.

Michigan could go 12-0 and play Wisconsin who is 8-4 in the B1G Championship game and lose.

No one would care that Michigan was 12-0 in the regular season.

Basketball has become THAT.

 
No one cares now if UM goes 12-0 in the regular season if they don't win the championship game.  I have no problem with that at all.  The only people that will care are UM fans.  

It will have zero impact on the regular season championship.  The conference champ is the tournament winner.  The regular season champ does not get the automatic bid to the NCAA, the tourney champ does.  All the regular season championship is good for is bragging rights and seeding in the tourney.  It is that way now and will continue to be that way.  You can still hang a regular season banner.

Ooooh. This is the thread MgoBlue was referring to.

I completely disagree, fwiw. I think going 15-3 over the course of the regular season is more impressive than going 3-0 over the course of a weekend. I've honestly never even considered the two (conference champion vs tournament champion) to be remotely close.

hailtoyourvictor wrote:

Ooooh. This is the thread MgoBlue was referring to.

I completely disagree, fwiw. I think going 15-3 over the course of the regular season is more impressive than going 3-0 over the course of a weekend. I've honestly never even considered the two (conference champion vs tournament champion) to be remotely close.

You guys down play tournaments way to much. You want to say it's not fair because you don't play everyone. Anyone can have a bad game and be eliminated. Blah, blah, blah. This is how it is done people. In pro football, college football, basketball, etc. ask the 2012 NY Giants if they want to give up their Super Bowl trophy because they were 9-7. At the end of the day it doesn't matter what your regular season record is. It needs to be good enough to get you in the tournament or playoffs. Then the real challenge starts.

In the playoffs your record doesn't matter. Look at last years Michigan team. I would take that outcome 100 out of 100 times over being able to brag about a regular season championship. We didn't win the regular season and we didn't win the B1G tourney BUT when the lights were brightest we were the second best team in the field.

MgoBlue, we are talking about the conference tournament. Winning the conference tournament is nowhere near as prestigious as winning the Super Bowl. Going 9-7 in the regular season is nowhere going 14-3 in the Big Ten and being the #1 record in the Big Ten.

No one is saying we want a Big Ten championship over a National Championship, so why would you use the Giant's analogy for any other reason than spinning the discussion?


All we are saying is that if Michigan has a bad game in the Sweet 16 and loses to a Kentucky team that is hitting their shots, was our season therefor not a success?

At this point, Michigan has had a better season than Big Ten. Period. I want even more success, of course, but at the end of the day it's been a GREAT season.

Simple question: If Penn St. gets hot next week and wins the Big Ten tournament, does that mean Michigan has had an unsuccessful season and Penn St. had a better one? What if Stauskas and LeVert both catch the flu and miss next weeks BTT... Would an 0-1 BTT record without two starters on a neutral court suddenly erase the succes we had in the regular season??

let's be cool with the name calling gents.

time to focus on Indiana tomorrow.


I'm going to try to shift this thread a bit. On topic of Indiana, name your favorite John Cougar song.

Here... I'm going to post an unbiased, non-rhetorical, question on the NCAA Rivals College Basketball national board. I'm posting it and linking it here so you guys can read what non-Big Ten and non-Michigan fans think about the regular season champs vs conference tournament champs discussion.

Here it is:
http://collegebasketball.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=2194&tid=171598952&mid=171598952&sid=1146&style=2

Jack and Diane, no question.

ps: also like Robert Earl Keene "road Goes on Forever".

Hurts So Good is the best John Couger song. Also, he had two sons arrested with the son of the IU baseball coach last year. Can't remember what they did.

Be a man Hail. You want to call names do it to my face you punk. It's not my fault you can't keep one thread a part from another.