Re: CBI Region 9 Results

• From: the_uf_engineer <no_reply_at_yahoogroups.com>
• Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 19:45:49 -0000
• Message-ID: <b3dspd+5vgc_at_...>

I'm going to agree with Kevin here.  It's not as if the tournament 
director arbitrarily decided to create the given playoff scenario in 
the middle of the tournament or even in the beginning- the four team 
playoff was announced by CBI some time ago.

Also, I didnt see anyone complain at Penn Bowl when Berkley went 
undefeated and 7 other teams with lesser records were in the playoffs 
(including yourself Matt).  There is the double elimination factor- 
Depauw had to lost twice to be eliminated from the playoffs, which 
they should have been able to avoid if they swept through the round 
robin.  

At UTC tournaments, Charlie Steinhice uses a nice solution to the 
problem of the higher seed losing in playoffs, in that they must also 
lose a shoot-out to be eliminated, something that I thought worked 
quite fairly at ACF (though I will admit I might be biased on that).  
Of course some in this forum criticized that method as well, but 
beyond whats already done, I don't see people proposing solutions, so 
I'm happy to go with whats currently done.

M. Napier
U of Florida

--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, kactigger <no_reply_at_y...> wrote:
> Actually, I think that analogy is absolutely accurate- a few years 
> ago, the Vikings went 15-1 and scored a huge number of points, but 
> couldnt get it done in the playoffs. And does anybody care that the 
> first year the Broncos won the Super Bowl they were the wild card? 
> This year, Pittsburgh had to play Cleveland for the 3rd time in the 
> playoffs, even though they had beaten them twice in the regular 
> season. Why the sports analogies? You have to win in the playoffs, 
> and everyone knew there was going to be a double-elimination
playoff 
> in advance. If DePaul had beaten Notre Dame twice before they
should 
> have been able to beat them again, odd ruling notwithstanding.
> 
> Kevin Comer, U of Florida.
> 
> P.S. Matt- Jesus loves you.
> 
> 
> --- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, Matt Weiner 
> <darwins_bulldog1138_at_y...> wrote:
> > <<I'm a bit more bothered by the premise to begin with
> > -- the very existence of a final... as far as I'm
> > concerned, if DePauw is two games ahead of ND in the
> > overall standings, and they're 2-0 against them, THEY
> > WIN.  That's it.  Simple, no?  (I may be a bit biased 
> > here, as BU was stuck having to play a third game
> > against Brandeis despite being in a similar situation.
> >  We won, but I remember being well prepared to
> > complain mightily and verbosely in the event that 
> > they managed the comeback.) >>
> > 
> > Ah, but "the NFL doesn't cancel the Super Bowl if the
> > Giants are ahead in the standings." (CBI Nationals,
> > 2001). Remember, there is no such thing as "fairness"
> > or "concern for the players"--all decisions must be
> > made based on irrelevant sports analogies and concern
> > for a non-existent television audience. Such is
> > College Bowl.
> > 
> > --M.W.
> > 
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> > http://taxes.yahoo.com/