|
|
Post by Cheerfan on Apr 13, 2014 9:31:13 GMT -5
Personally, I wouldn't mind if the HL went to a neutral site for the tournament if it could be a destination city. I went to the A-10 tournament a few years back when it was in Atlantic City and it was a great week of basketball and gambling. I could see Columbus, Chicago, or Cleveland being great sites. If we are able to add Belmont in the future, I think Nashville would be a great site too. I understand everyone's argument above on why the current format is good for the HL, but at the same time, we want to take this conference to the next level. All of the conferences ranked higher than us play their conference tournament at a single location. If we want to become a top 10 conference, we need to start acting like one. We need to add a few teams that elevate the conference. We need to start scheduling like a top 10 conference and drop the D2/NAIA games. We also need to put on a big time conference tournament at a neutral site.
|
|
|
|
Post by wolf41 on Apr 13, 2014 11:52:45 GMT -5
I do agree with you Cheerfan, expanding the HL should be the very top priority for the HL. I can't think of anything that needs to be addressed by the HL that is more important. Not is it important, it may decide the future or lack thereof for the HL. Right now if a better offer came to WSU, Valpo, or any other school, I suspect they would all jump at it. But if the Commish and university presidents continue to deliberate, ponder, discuss, etc. I can see that we'll all be open to or deliberately seeking other conferences. Right now I doubt that any member currently looks upon the HL as being signicant for their university's future success in any aspect. The HL is very disposable.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhgreen on Apr 13, 2014 15:58:30 GMT -5
I would almost believe any school the MVC asks to join, they will leave the HL.
|
|
|
|
Post by Black PantherU on Apr 13, 2014 18:23:07 GMT -5
I would almost believe any school the MVC asks to join, they will leave the HL. You'd be right. We need to make the HL more attractive to stay in. Step one: do everything Big D says. Sent from my SCH-R970 using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by Rush the Court on Apr 14, 2014 16:01:43 GMT -5
Changing the format again is one of the dumbest thing the HL has ever contemplated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Black PantherU on Apr 14, 2014 18:19:11 GMT -5
Changing the format again is one of the dumbest thing the HL has ever contemplated. It is. We knew it would happen when top seeds couldn't hold court and now it's happening. If GB had taken care of business and beaten us, then beaten you guys, they would have been a real tough out for somebody. If the HL goes no byes, then years like this one will happen more often. Sent from my SCH-R970 using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by wolf41 on Apr 15, 2014 14:20:06 GMT -5
Panther, I'm not sure if I understand your last comment, "If the HL goes no byes, then years like this one will happen more often." The HL had byes this year and apparently whatever "happened" happened. I assume you meant that two lower seeded teams made it to the title game. Is there something wrong with that? I thought the whole idea of the tournament, besides making money of course, was to give everyone a shot at going to the NCAA. If that is the objective, then it worked just fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by wsutommygun on Apr 15, 2014 14:41:32 GMT -5
I think the current tourney format addresses a few different points...attendance...making the regular season mean something...let everyone have a chance to play. The byes lead to all 3 points. You may have a chance to play and anything is possible but, it means a longer route to the title game ( as it should be ). I think it is in the best interest of the HL to send the best teams ( hopefully more than one but, probably at least number one ). If you don't take care of business then shame on you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Black PantherU on Apr 15, 2014 14:41:39 GMT -5
Panther, I'm not sure if I understand your last comment, "If the HL goes no byes, then years like this one will happen more often." The HL had byes this year and apparently whatever "happened" happened. I assume you meant that two lower seeded teams made it to the title game. Is there something wrong with that? I thought the whole idea of the tournament, besides making money of course, was to give everyone a shot at going to the NCAA. If that is the objective, then it worked just fine. What Big D says we need to do is be better in the NCAA tournament. This year we went as the 5 seed, 7-9 in the Horizon. Obviously had Green Bay held court they would have had a better seed and a much better shot at winning. Evening everything out is what will cause more lower seeds to win. The top seed still has to be protected. This coming from someone who just won it the hard way. Sent from my SCH-R970 using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by Tipp City Raider on Apr 15, 2014 20:12:29 GMT -5
The HL really needs to get it's priorities straight. Spending any amount of time discussing this is a waste of time that should be used either discussing scheduling guidelines or HL expansion. To me this is just a smokescreen by LeCrone. He didn't achieve anything in regards to HL expansion this year so he is going to go about changing the HL tournament format so that he can announce something/anything this summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Black PantherU on Apr 15, 2014 20:59:45 GMT -5
The HL really needs to get it's priorities straight. Spending any amount of time discussing this is a waste of time that should be used either discussing scheduling guidelines or HL expansion. To me this is just a smokescreen by LeCrone. He didn't achieve anything in regards to HL expansion this year so he is going to go about changing the HL tournament format so that he can announce something/anything this summer. Oakland was added in May. There's time. Sent from my SCH-R970 using proboards |
|
|
|
Post by wolf41 on Apr 16, 2014 10:15:37 GMT -5
Tipp, I don't know if I can say "yea" or "nay" to your observations, but I do agree with you that expansion is the #1 issue the Commish and presidents should be addressing, not the post-season tournament. Everything else is a distraction from #1.
In regards to the tournament, however, I personally favor playing each game at the higher seeds court rather than at one common, neutral site. That keeps the games cloest to the fan base and insures you maximize the $ gate, which IS the reason these tournaments are played. If a lower seed upsets a higher seed I say "great", that's what a tournament is all about. If you don't think that's great, then why not go back to the regular season winner being given the NCAA bid?
Let's be honest about post season tournaments. They are ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. Teams play about 30 games and then we say, we need a league tournament to "determine" who should represent the league in the NCAA. Then the HL does everything in its power to make sure #1 wins, or maybe, at worst, #2. Now, after all of that, we want to move to a "neutral court", which takes the teams away from their home ticket-buying fan base. What's the message in all of this gibberish? For me it suggests that some folks have their heads where the Sun doesn't shine.
Oh, and be sure to throw a fit if the athletes start to make noise about getting something more for their efforts. I don't know how many games these student/athletes play today versus what they played in 1950, or how many more hours they spend in conditioning/practice sessions, but I'd bet their "real compensation" per hour has significantly declined.
|
|
