Rules Changes Revisited
09.08.04
I wasn't planning on continuing the discussion of college rules experiments this soon, but there's been some breaking news. Unbeknownst to me, the WNBA altered its three point line this year from 19-9 to 20-6, mimicking the college rules experiment. (Also unbeknownst to me, the WNBA season is actually in progress.)
Kevin Pelton, who works for the Seattle NBA/WNBA franchises, has posted the data on what has transpired in the WNBA this season. Go ahead and read his piece on it, I'll wait.
The WNBA data tends to support the trends we saw in the NCAA exempt games last year. Scoring has decreased along with the pace of play. There are some differences - most notably 3 point accuracy somehow has improved at the longer distance, while the number of attempts has decreased more than it did for the college men. Scoring hasn't dropped as much as it did in the NCAA, but keep in mind that the WNBA isn't using the international style lane.
The WNBA changes provide further confirmation that moving the line back does not lead to a better brand of basketball. I think we can also conclude that widening the lane has an additional contribution to slowing down the game. I wonder if the NCAA rules committee is paying attention.
Selection Sunday in November Part 2
09.01.04
Last week I mentioned the fact that preseason polls do a good job at predicting the future, with some notable exceptions. I detailed the few teams that were ranked in the preseason top 10 and missed the NCAA Tourney.
In this election year, it’s only fair to give equal time to the other side – the surprises that were overlooked in the preseason. I arbitrarily decided that getting a #1 seed in the tournament would define a great season. What follows is the list of teams that were not ranked in the preseason top 20 (AP poll) and earned a number 1 seed in the postseason prom. It has happened more often than I expected.
What's striking about this list is how poorly these ten teams fared in the dance. There's only one final four team in the bunch and four of these teams were second round losers. Not counting these castoffs, about 47% of other one seeds have made it to the final four. So I don't think we're talking about a coincidence here.
1985 Michigan. The Wolverines had an awful first round performance against Fairleigh Dickinson before succumbing to eventual national champ Villanova in the second round.
1986 St. John's. Another number 1 seed that had trouble shaking its inferior opponent (Montana State) in the first round. They fell to Auburn in the second round.
1990 Connecticut. Their tournament experience was as unique as any with the wild win over Clemson in the sweet sixteen capped by the Tate George buzzer beater. Then they lost in overtime to Duke in the east regional final when Christian Laettner put the Devils on his back.
1990 Michigan State. The only 1 seed ever to be taken to overtime in their first round game, the Spartans almost fell to a Popeye Jones-led Murray State team. They were knocked off by Georgia Tech in the sweet sixteen.
1994 Missouri. Given previous early exits by the Tigers, they surprised most in the national media by getting to the elite eight before falling to Arizona.
1994 Purdue. Purdue also advanced to the regional finals, losing to Duke.
1996 Purdue. The '96 Boilermakers barely got by Western Carolina in the first round and were eliminated by Georgia in the round 2.
1997 Minnesota. Minnesota is the only final four participant on this list, losing to Kentucky in Indianapolis that year.
1999 Auburn. Auburn came from way off the radar to make it as a #1 seed. They lost to Ohio State in the regional semifinals.
2002 Cincinnati. The Bearcats continued a string of disapointing postseasons by losing in the second round to UCLA.
No Whining
08.26.04
Check it out, it's my 100th post. It only took me 9 months to get here. Pretty impressive if I do say so myself. I have so many memories from the last year. Like remember that time I predicted great things for Portland? Or when I said LSU would get an at-large berth? Good times. Good times, indeed. I look forward to bigger and better things in the next century of posts. At some point I may even select a presentable name for this thing as well. What I can promise is that I will continue to fight the injustices and misconceptions surrounding college hoops. I am super-blogger.
For instance, it's time for mid- and low-major schools to stop whining about how hard it is to schedule quality teams. I don't think there's a better time to be a "have-not" with respect to scheduling.
First, there's the fabulous Bracket Buster developed by ESPN. If you're a quality mid-major come February, you automatically get the opportunity to play a quality non-conference opponent. And then you get that game returned next season.
Second, the so called 2-in-4 rule has benefited the smaller schools. The fat cats can no longer play in exempt tournaments every year, opening the door for the little guys to get a chance. Last year, there were multiple events that had to dip into the non-D1 pool to fill their field. So clearly there is an opportunity for the less fortunate D1 schools to match up with a decent team or two on a neutral court in these events.
Finally, schools should follow the creative lead of Western Kentucky...
[WKU Athletics Director Wood Selig] included a clause in former coach Dennis Felton’s contract that would require any team from a high-major conference that hired him to play a four-game, home-and-home series with the Hilltoppers. That series begins this year at Georgia. (Bowling Green Daily News 8/26/04)
That's one way to get back at the big boys.
Page 156 of 189 pages « First < 154 155 156 157 158 > Last »