Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Why Not Re-Seed?

J-R-K

J-R-K

Well-Known Member
It makes no sense that UCLA wins the conference and has to play Arizona while Oregon finishes third but gets Utah. And had we won yesterday we would have had a gripe about having to play UCLA while Utah who won 5 less conference game's then we did gets to play Oregon. I know this is the standard for all conference tournaments but I don't understand the logic.

And why is UCLA-Arizona on PAC-12 Network while Utah-Oregon is on ESPN, not a smart move for improving the conference's national visibility and profile or for ESPN's ratings.
 
Luck of the draw. The seedings are set before the tournament starts, you know your path. Why should Utah be penalized by having to play UCLA instead of Oregon just because they are a lower seed? They won the games presented to them, they follow along the designated path. I get the philosophy of re-seeding, but I really don't think it makes all that much difference over time. Upsets happen, good on the lower seed.
 
boulder77 said:
Why should Utah be penalized by having to play UCLA instead of Oregon just because they are a lower seed?
Click to expand...

Maybe because they went 5-13 in conference this year? You make it sound like seeding's are just an arbitrary thing that are pulled out of a hat before the tourney starts. The whole logic behind seeding is that teams who had better seasons end up with an easier tournament draw.
 
I think its a pretty simple concept... Just win. Whoever you play.
 
I can't believe I'm actually saying this (and for the 2nd time in the past week no less :huh:) ... but I think JRK actually has a valid point here. The NFL essentially "re-seeds" after each of the first two rounds (Wild Card and Divisional playoffs). And I see no reason why it wouldn't be plausible for the conference tournaments, since all the conference teams go to the same venue for 4 days.

It wouldn't be plausible for the NCAA tourney ... since travel plans have to be made once the brackets are announced on Sunday, and potentially for the succeeding rounds if a team advances. Not to mention the utter havoc it would wreak with millions of office pools!
 
There is a logistical issue, too. Coaches need to know what time they are playing the next day. Imagine if the Buffs didn't know their Thursday game time until after the last Wednesday night game. Horrible from a coaching standpoint.
 
J-R-K said:
Maybe because they went 5-13 in conference this year? You make it sound like seeding's are just an arbitrary thing that are pulled out of a hat before the tourney starts. The whole logic behind seeding is that teams who had better seasons end up with an easier tournament draw.
Click to expand...
And, because they were 5-13 in league play, they had to play an opening round game - which they won. They then played the #2 seed - and won. I really don't see how their path is any easier than anyone else. Ultimately, they just need to play the games assigned.

I never said that the seeding is arbitrary. I said that the schedule is set before the tournament begins. And, based on that, the higher seeded teams benefit from being scheduled against the lower seeded teams. Everyone then knows who they will play, and who they might play. When a lower seeded team steps up and wins a game or two, I don't think they should be penalized because they are the lower seed. They are following the path set forth (as is everyone else) before them. Again, I understand the concept behind re-seeding, I just don't feel that it makes that much of a difference. Keep winning, and it really doesn't matter what the other teams are seeded.

torerobuff said:
I think its a pretty simple concept... Just win. Whoever you play.
Click to expand...
^^^^^ This.
 
J-R-K said:
It makes no sense that UCLA wins the conference and has to play Arizona while Oregon finishes third but gets Utah. And had we won yesterday we would have had a gripe about having to play UCLA while Utah who won 5 less conference game's then we did gets to play Oregon. I know this is the standard for all conference tournaments but I don't understand the logic.

And why is UCLA-Arizona on PAC-12 Network while Utah-Oregon is on ESPN, not a smart move for improving the conference's national visibility and profile or for ESPN's ratings.
Click to expand...
They could be trying to do: ESPN 2 strategy even if it's unintentional in this case because those times are locked. They figure by putting prominent games on their network, people will call and complain and eventually will be widely available.
 
Keep in mind that no one was clamoring for a re-seed last year, when the beavers knocked off washington, which had they re-seeded at some point we would have had zona in the semi's and not the title game.
 
I think the re-seeding has been tried by other conferences and I don't think any do it.

Like with most things, keeping things simple and straightforward works.
 
If there was a day off in between games, you could. But if you reseed, it is possible to play the night cap and then play at noon the next day.

Cant do it.

end of argument.
end of thread.
 
I've never liked the idea of reseeding for either a conference tournament or especially the NCAA tournament. They've talked in the past about reseeding at the Final Four which I think is a terrible idea. If you're gonna do that then why not reseed through the whole tournament? No.
 
wyobuff said:
Keep in mind that no one was clamoring for a re-seed last year, when the beavers knocked off washington, which had they re-seeded at some point we would have had zona in the semi's and not the title game.
Click to expand...
Reminds of the outrage after the US women were eliminated a few years ago in the World Cup in PKs, the outrage... can't end a major sporting event like that. Yet, in 1999 when Brandi Chastain had that famous goal, this logic didn't apply. Truth be told, people are only outraged when the rules adversely affect them.
 
CarolinaBuff said:
I've never liked the idea of reseeding for either a conference tournament or especially the NCAA tournament. They've talked in the past about reseeding at the Final Four which I think is a terrible idea. If you're gonna do that then why not reseed through the whole tournament? No.
Click to expand...
Teams are playing on different days and at different sites for one. So a re-seeding would make for much more travel especially with a short turnaround.

If they did so at the Final Four(which I'm not in favor of), it wouldn't involved a change of travel plans.
 
Yeah but I ended the thread 3 posts ago..... So everything else after just wasted Internet space.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top