Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Not to beat a dead horse but Stanford lost 4 out of its last 5 (all goodteams except ASU-who sucks) and was 4-7 in its last 11 games! Lost 1 st round in its conf tourney. Disgrace. They'll probably go to the elite 8
|
Believe me, I agree 100% on you with Stanford.
http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10751
I just don't think a 20 game minimum is a good idea since you could easily have a 19-11 team be a lot better than a 20-14 team some year. There actually are rules preventing teams from playing so many games. You are only allowed 2 exempt tournaments every 4 years or something like that where the games only count as 2 towards your total even if you play 4. So getting more than 30 games isn't something every team is allowed. It would also create a situation where you had a 10 team league and the 6th and 7th place team both have 19 wins overall. The 7th place team gets to play the 10th place team in the opening round and gets their 20th win before losing to the 2 seed. The 6 seed loses opening round to the 3 seed. Now you are saying the 7 seed has become eligible by finishing lower in the leauge than the 6 seed. Getting a bye in your tournament would become a detriment.