PDA

View Full Version : Conference (Title) Consolation Games Should Be Uniform



PKN
03-17-2012, 11:28 AM
I think all the conferences should either have consolation games or not. It can give teams in those conferences that have the consolation game an unfair advantage. For Example, this year if the ECAC did not have a consolation game Cornell would not make the NCAA's, but since they do Cornell gets an"extra" chance to make the tournament and leave another team out. I guess the extra game could hurt teams in certain situations as well, if they lose. However, the fairest way to get rid of these advantages/disadvantages is to have all the conferences have the consolation games or eliminate them. I am in favor of the later.

chripy
03-17-2012, 11:34 AM
if a team is relying on the outcome of consolation games as to whether they get an invite or not, then said team more than likely does not deserve said invite

Fighting Sioux 23
03-17-2012, 11:43 AM
I think all the conferences should either have consolation games or not. It can give teams in those conferences that have the consolation game an unfair advantage. For Example, this year if the ECAC did not have a consolation game Cornell would not make the NCAA's, but since they do Cornell gets an"extra" chance to make the tournament and leave another team out. I guess the extra game could hurt teams in certain situations as well, if they lose. However, the fairest way to get rid of these advantages/disadvantages is to have all the conferences have the consolation games or eliminate them. I am in favor of the later.

Cornell is #13 in the PWR currently. The Consolation game actually does them a disservice. If they lose, they are likely out, whereas if they didn't play the consolation game they would be in already. So, if you are a fan hoping that Cornell falls this evening, thank your lucky stars that they still have a chance to lose another game to finish outside the bubble.

PKN
03-17-2012, 01:47 PM
if a team is relying on the outcome of consolation games as to whether they get an invite or not, then said team more than likely does not deserve said invite


Cornell is #13 in the PWR currently. The Consolation game actually does them a disservice. If they lose, they are likely out, whereas if they didn't play the consolation game they would be in already. So, if you are a fan hoping that Cornell falls this evening, thank your lucky stars that they still have a chance to lose another game to finish outside the bubble.

My main point is that if conferences are going to play an "extra" game, then it should be all or none!

sandiegoblkbr
03-17-2012, 01:50 PM
My main point is that if conferences are going to play an "extra" game, then it should be all or none!

If that's the case....none. They are totally dumb. And another chance for injuries for tourney bound teams.

Fighting Sioux 23
03-17-2012, 01:53 PM
My main point is that if conferences are going to play an "extra" game, then it should be all or none!

While I'm glad my conference doesn't have the 3rd place game, in some conferences it is important to get any extra revenue possible for their teams. Why should other conferences that don't want a 3rd place game deny them that opportunity?

IMO, the decision to have a 3rd place game should be up to the conference. There is no need to take away a game that a conference could use to add to the coffers.

bronconick
03-17-2012, 02:27 PM
Leave it up to the conferences. The conference playoffs already aren't uniform, so a 3rd place game isn't that big of a deal. 3 give byes to top 4 teams and take 3 weeks, one has quarterfinals the last Thursday and the last only allows 8 teams in.

Patman
03-17-2012, 02:31 PM
Here's the thing... Like the rest of the formats it's because the membership wants it... If they feel it is a problem then they will get rid of it... As such, and I personally find them silly, it should be left up to them unless teams start sandbagging the game to help their opponent.

ericredaxe
03-17-2012, 02:55 PM
My main point is that if conferences are going to play an "extra" game, then it should be all or none!

I agree with this.

duper
03-17-2012, 03:01 PM
Absolutely not. How can you say that all conferences have to be uniform about a consolation game (one game) when they don't even use the same format for their conference tournaments. It makes no sense. Some conferences have two rounds of best-of-three, some only have one. Four conferences allow every team in the conference to play in the conference tournament, while one conference allows only the top 8 teams. If there is a belief that every conference should do things exactly the same way, that's one thing, but why insist on one similarity when every other thing is different?

pgb-ohio
03-17-2012, 03:53 PM
I wouldn't make uniformity for its own sake a priority. But over the years my observation has been that the players are almost universally opposed to 3rd Place games. That should count for something, IMHO.

Stage a game that none of the players want to be part of? There have to be better ways to raise revenue.

Ralph Baer
03-17-2012, 04:01 PM
FWIW, there used to be a 3rd place game in the the NCAA tourney. As to making things uniform for all leagues, I am against that. Also, it is quite difficult to do sinve not all of the leagues have the same number of teams.

mnpokecheck
03-17-2012, 05:38 PM
I think all the conferences should either have consolation games or not. It can give teams in those conferences that have the consolation game an unfair advantage.
Teams differ in the # of games, # of home games, # of Out of Conference games, Strength of Schedule, etc.......... What do you want to change next so you team will get in? If your team will get knocked out because of a consolation game in another conference, then they aren't good enough to make the tournament -- next year win your league tournament or play well enough to get invited.

PKN
03-17-2012, 06:16 PM
g
Absolutely not. How can you say that all conferences have to be uniform about a consolation game (one game) when they don't even use the same format for their conference tournaments. It makes no sense. Some conferences have two rounds of best-of-three, some only have one. Four conferences allow every team in the conference to play in the conference tournament, while one conference allows only the top 8 teams. If there is a belief that every conference should do things exactly the same way, that's one thing, but why insist on one similarity when every other thing is different?

The consolation game is happening when you are down to the last four teams in the conference championships. That is when you are getting down to the nitty-gritty for bubble teams of who is in and who is out of the NCAA's. If your conference has the consolation game, that game could have a significant effect for bubble teams. For Example, you are a bubble team that loses to a surpise team in the semi's. If you have the consolation game you could wind up not only having another chance to make the tournament, but could potentially improve your PWR if you beat say the #1 seed in the consolation game. I don't think that is right, unless all conferences have that same possibility.

FlagDUDE08
03-17-2012, 09:11 PM
I think all the conferences should either have consolation games or not. It can give teams in those conferences that have the consolation game an unfair advantage. For Example, this year if the ECAC did not have a consolation game Cornell would not make the NCAA's, but since they do Cornell gets an"extra" chance to make the tournament and leave another team out. I guess the extra game could hurt teams in certain situations as well, if they lose. However, the fairest way to get rid of these advantages/disadvantages is to have all the conferences have the consolation games or eliminate them. I am in favor of the later.

I believe the appropriate title for this thread is "My Team Got Screwed".

pgb-ohio
03-17-2012, 10:32 PM
FWIW, there used to be a 3rd place game in the the NCAA tourney...Yup, and it was actually somewhat attractive for fans of the participating teams -- meaning those who travel only if their team qualifies. When planning a trip, the fan could be guaranteed that his team would have two games, win or lose in the semis. Unfortunately the players were simply not on board with the concept. The last in a sad string of 3rd Place games was a Minnesota/Maine Penalty Fest. That was the tilt that featured the two goalies playing catch during a lengthy delay, while the officials sorted out penalties.

Maybe if you go back far enough in history, the third place trophy was a coveted prize; I dunno. But even if so, that hasn't been the case in college hockey for decades. Gradually the conferences have been dropping their 3rd Place games as they each absorb the lesson the NCAA learned years ago.

bronconick
03-17-2012, 10:45 PM
It'd be worse now, because if I'm a player with any kind of a shot at a pro contract, no way am I playing a 3rd place game. I'm signing that contract and on a plane to whatever AHL city before that Saturday game starts.

Hammer
03-17-2012, 11:00 PM
Or if you're a player who's still bent about losing in the semis, you board someone or take a 5-CFB penalty or start a brawl in the opening minutes and you're done that way. Don't tell me there's not players with that mentality. There's nothing to lose...

PKN
03-18-2012, 09:12 AM
I believe the appropriate title for this thread is "My Team Got Screwed".

Nope. I'm a UNH fan and they would have had to win Hockey East to make the tournament.