LaxPower Back-Up Stick

DA/PU wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 9:19 am Apologies if this has already been floated, but my solution for tournament bids would be to add another play in game that would then play the 2 seed. Make the “mid majors” play that game. That adds an extra team. Could eventually expand play ins to then play top 4 seeds.

Princeton is dancing this year but I’d like to see other deserving ivies make it / not be on the outside looking in under similar circumstances in future seasons.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 10:21 am

DA/PU wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 9:19 am Apologies if this has already been floated, but my solution for tournament bids would be to add another play in game that would then play the 2 seed. Make the “mid majors” play that game. That adds an extra team. Could eventually expand play ins to then play top 4 seeds.

Princeton is dancing this year but I’d like to see other deserving ivies make it / not be on the outside looking in under similar circumstances in future seasons.

Wasn’t there two play in games a few years ago? BTW, how is life?

DA/PU wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 1:44 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 10:21 am

DA/PU wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 9:19 am Apologies if this has already been floated, but my solution for tournament bids would be to add another play in game that would then play the 2 seed. Make the “mid majors” play that game. That adds an extra team. Could eventually expand play ins to then play top 4 seeds.

Princeton is dancing this year but I’d like to see other deserving ivies make it / not be on the outside looking in under similar circumstances in future seasons.

Wasn’t there two play in games a few years ago? BTW, how is life?

Life is good. Even better when the tigers are rolling! MD has kind of been our kryptonite. Maybe we can exorcise the demons.

Lax3 wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 4:16 pm Ivy League fan here through and through. Reality is that the NCAA Tournament doesn't need more games. While the sport has grown exponentially over the past 20-30 years, the number of D1 teams has grown more modestly. Until the number of colleges and universities playing the sport increases significantly, 17 teams are plenty. Might not have been a good year for the Ivies but a one-year downturn is no reason to believe that the system is wrong. I am confident that next year the Ivies will get back to 2-3 teams playing in the tourney based on good-enough performance. That is plenty.

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 2:15 pm I realize this is situations edifice but if you take a step back you have am
Ivy heard complaining about the fairness to a patten that didn’t favor then and many solutions are to change the system to just include them or to “f**k” everyone else in the same system we’re in with that nonsense AQ, they should want to play us OOC because were IVYs even if we’ve changed the system so you don’t have any access of meaning towards postseason. Just be feudal cannon fodder for us.

Of course the framing of earned or deserved but then think of the legacy guys you all know and I know who rolled through their schools and into high levels of life despite being C students and then come back and scream for your rights.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 6:23 pm

Lax3 wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 4:16 pm Ivy League fan here through and through. Reality is that the NCAA Tournament doesn't need more games. While the sport has grown exponentially over the past 20-30 years, the number of D1 teams has grown more modestly. Until the number of colleges and universities playing the sport increases significantly, 17 teams are plenty. Might not have been a good year for the Ivies but a one-year downturn is no reason to believe that the system is wrong. I am confident that next year the Ivies will get back to 2-3 teams playing in the tourney based on good-enough performance. That is plenty.

Just one of those years.

Lax3 wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 4:16 pm Ivy League fan here through and through. Reality is that the NCAA Tournament doesn't need more games. While the sport has grown exponentially over the past 20-30 years, the number of D1 teams has grown more modestly. Until the number of colleges and universities playing the sport increases significantly, 17 teams are plenty. Might not have been a good year for the Ivies but a one-year downturn is no reason to believe that the system is wrong. I am confident that next year the Ivies will get back to 2-3 teams playing in the tourney based on good-enough performance. That is plenty.

Can Opener wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 9:38 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 6:23 pm

Lax3 wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 4:16 pm Ivy League fan here through and through. Reality is that the NCAA Tournament doesn't need more games. While the sport has grown exponentially over the past 20-30 years, the number of D1 teams has grown more modestly. Until the number of colleges and universities playing the sport increases significantly, 17 teams are plenty. Might not have been a good year for the Ivies but a one-year downturn is no reason to believe that the system is wrong. I am confident that next year the Ivies will get back to 2-3 teams playing in the tourney based on good-enough performance. That is plenty.

Just one of those years.

+1 and +1

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 6:23 pm

Lax3 wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 4:16 pm Ivy League fan here through and through. Reality is that the NCAA Tournament doesn't need more games. While the sport has grown exponentially over the past 20-30 years, the number of D1 teams has grown more modestly. Until the number of colleges and universities playing the sport increases significantly, 17 teams are plenty. Might not have been a good year for the Ivies but a one-year downturn is no reason to believe that the system is wrong. I am confident that next year the Ivies will get back to 2-3 teams playing in the tourney based on good-enough performance. That is plenty.

Just one of those years.

10stone5 wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 10:03 am

Can Opener wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 9:38 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 6:23 pm

Lax3 wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 4:16 pm Ivy League fan here through and through. Reality is that the NCAA Tournament doesn't need more games. While the sport has grown exponentially over the past 20-30 years, the number of D1 teams has grown more modestly. Until the number of colleges and universities playing the sport increases significantly, 17 teams are plenty. Might not have been a good year for the Ivies but a one-year downturn is no reason to believe that the system is wrong. I am confident that next year the Ivies will get back to 2-3 teams playing in the tourney based on good-enough performance. That is plenty.

Just one of those years.

+1 and +1

Here is what I came up with, percent in NCAAs,

W DI - 22.308%, M DI - 22.667%

wgdsr wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 10:03 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 6:23 pm

Lax3 wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 4:16 pm Ivy League fan here through and through. Reality is that the NCAA Tournament doesn't need more games. While the sport has grown exponentially over the past 20-30 years, the number of D1 teams has grown more modestly. Until the number of colleges and universities playing the sport increases significantly, 17 teams are plenty. Might not have been a good year for the Ivies but a one-year downturn is no reason to believe that the system is wrong. I am confident that next year the Ivies will get back to 2-3 teams playing in the tourney based on good-enough performance. That is plenty.

Just one of those years.

don't be on the bubble.

10stone5 wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 10:03 am

Can Opener wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 9:38 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 6:23 pm

Lax3 wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 4:16 pm Ivy League fan here through and through. Reality is that the NCAA Tournament doesn't need more games. While the sport has grown exponentially over the past 20-30 years, the number of D1 teams has grown more modestly. Until the number of colleges and universities playing the sport increases significantly, 17 teams are plenty. Might not have been a good year for the Ivies but a one-year downturn is no reason to believe that the system is wrong. I am confident that next year the Ivies will get back to 2-3 teams playing in the tourney based on good-enough performance. That is plenty.

Just one of those years.

+1 and +1

Here is what I came up with, percent in NCAAs,

W DI - 22.308%, M DI - 22.667%

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 10:10 am

wgdsr wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 10:03 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 6:23 pm

Lax3 wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 4:16 pm Ivy League fan here through and through. Reality is that the NCAA Tournament doesn't need more games. While the sport has grown exponentially over the past 20-30 years, the number of D1 teams has grown more modestly. Until the number of colleges and universities playing the sport increases significantly, 17 teams are plenty. Might not have been a good year for the Ivies but a one-year downturn is no reason to believe that the system is wrong. I am confident that next year the Ivies will get back to 2-3 teams playing in the tourney based on good-enough performance. That is plenty.

Just one of those years.

don't be on the bubble.

That’s absolutely right.

The Orfling wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 9:28 am

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 2:15 pm I realize this is situations edifice but if you take a step back you have am
Ivy heard complaining about the fairness to a patten that didn’t favor then and many solutions are to change the system to just include them or to “f**k” everyone else in the same system we’re in with that nonsense AQ, they should want to play us OOC because were IVYs even if we’ve changed the system so you don’t have any access of meaning towards postseason. Just be feudal cannon fodder for us.

Of course the framing of earned or deserved but then think of the legacy guys you all know and I know who rolled through their schools and into high levels of life despite being C students and then come back and scream for your rights.

Geneva, I like the phrase "situations edifice." Maybe I'm too close to it but I think most Ivy fans understand the situation (not enough out-of-conference wins; bid-steals for at large spots; two low-RPI conference members this year rather than one). Anytime you have something that feels off -- Notre Dame not getting a bid in 2022 or the Ivy League, a strong conference, being a one-bid league in 2024 -- it's not surprising that people will ponder whether there's a better way to do it within the constraints (20% ratio of tournament teams to total teams, etc.). And generally the answer is that "the system mostly works and there are constraints that would make fixes like additional play-in games difficult." What I am not seeing -- perhaps you are? -- is the kind of (frequently misogynistic) nastiness that was aimed at one person (the female Athletic Director who chaired the selection committee) in 2024. I'm honestly not seeing a lot of whining, just normal hot-stove chewing over of the process.

I guess I'd add that there IS probably some irritation from Ivy fans of the "one-way ratchet" mindset where 2022 Notre Dame being caught up in the gears of the RPI-heavy selection system was a cosmic injustice but Cornell/Penn being caught in those same gears doesn't merit a comment (or if it does, it's of the "poking in the eye with stick" variety). So maybe there's some hotter language around that. But that's sports for you, too; not an arena of even-handed, cool analysis.

PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 1:27 pm FFS, stop the b*tching and whining. If more Ivy teams had won more games, they would have made the tourney. You sound like a bunch of ACC fans.