The article outlines an interesting perspective on the new OUA Final Four format. In one aspect, however, it is somewhat incorrect. For the last three years, the road to the nationals for OUA East teams did not exactly go through Carleton. With Carleton as host university, for the past three seasons, OUA East teams had a very good chance to get to the nationals by winning the "host" spot that Carleton gifted to them by playing their way into the tournament. In 2008, the GGs were nationally ranked much of the year but faltered against Brock in the "play in" game. The Badgers made good use of their second chance fortune and went on to win the nationals. In 2009, the GGs took advantage of the situation and got to the nationals by beating the Lancers. In 2010, the GGs again failed to take advantage of an opportunity to play in the tournament by losing at home to Lakehead.
This same scenario, one presumes, will be again played out in two years time when the nationals return to Ottawa with Carleton again as hosts. In those years, should Carleton prevail in the playoffs, the OUA may have to again add a "bronze medal" game to determine the third OUA representative.
Teams in OUA East can't beat Carleton so they run away and trick OUA West into putting up its CIS berth. Heard this was pushed by Toronto so glad they are out.
I agree with the first poster.. The OUA East has benefited by being in the same division as Carleton for the past 3 years simply by having Carleton as the "host" team for nationals.. Its ridiculous for this to change now. Does this mean every time there is a dominant team, conferences should change their rules?
Anon 10:38.... Uh, in case you haven't noticed, the OUA West teams can't beat Carleton, either. Carleton has won six of the last seven Wilson Cup games it's been in. Fortunately for the West team, their berth at nationals has already been assured by then. That was the problem with the Wilson Cup in its old format...it was for the OUA championship, sure, but essentially it was a "nothing" game because only pride was on the line. This new Final 4 format provides an opportunity for basketball fans to see the Ontario championship televised nationally, which wasn't the case before.
Quite honestly Adam, I cannot fathom the logic of your last post. How has the OUA East benefited by having Carleton as the host team the past three years? The OUA West has had a second team at the nationals two of the past three years. The extra berth was up for grabs because Carleton went into the tournament through the front door as Wilson Cup champs the past three years....both conferences benefited from this.
my mistake.. i thought that by Carleton being in as host the second place finisher in the OUA East got a bid.. i forgot they played the bronze medal game.
I think the bigger question is why do Carleton get in automatically? I can understand an OUA bid, or even an OUA East bid, but no individual team should be allowed in as a host.. If the CIS continues to allow that we could end up with an 8-14 team as an automatic entry.. I think the AUS format of top 2 teams is a fair one, not juts allowing Dal or SMU to be in because they are from Halifax
The reason why Carleton got the automatic host berth is because of their track record. Obviously, the CIS would not award the Final 8 championships and an automatic host berth to a university if it was uncertain whether the school would be competitive. But with Carleton, it was well worth the risk. Remember Carleton had already won 5 straight national championships in Halifax when it was awarded the tournament for three years. And even though Carleton won only one title the past three years in Ottawa, the Ravens won three OUA championships and posted an astonishing win-loss record of 98-5, with two of those losses coming in the national semi finals. Perhaps that is why Carleton's admin bid for the tournament....they knew they would be there
Still I agree it shouldn't be guaranteedat the beginning of 3 straight years because that can also have an unfair recruiting advantage like they don't already have one by playing in the weaker OUA east. Now this year if they fail to beat Laurier they will have to use the Wildcard provision to get in. I prefer the womens playoffs with the removal of the wildcard.
I think Carleton University also paid some money to the CIS to host the Nationals. Not taking anything away from their basketball performance previously or since but it was more than Carleton having a record of winning.
To anon 1:14.... Well of course CU paid the CIS money to host it! You don't think Halifax paid the CIS money for all these years? ANY bid, no matter where it comes from, pays the CIS money to host the event....that's why it's called a bid. The Final 8 is possibly the biggest cash cow the CIS has. The Halifax tournament made the CIS a lot of money over the years. Most years Halifax were awarded the host without a competing bid. And in those rare instances when someone actually attempted to bid, they found they couldn't match the financial guarantees the CIS were getting from Halifax...that is, until Carleton, with their corporate partners, put in a bid. resinnin.... Carleton does have an unfair recruiting advantage....he's called Dave Smart. Playing in the "weaker" OUA East is irrelevant. Check their record against the "stronger" OUA West over the years.... over 90%, like anywhere else. The recruiting advantage Smart has is that if you come to Carleton, you have got a pretty good chance of playing for and winning a national championship every year...that was true long before Carleton hosted the tournament. Success breeds success and that's why he now can now recruit across the country, getting players like the Scrubb Bros. and Elliot Thompson who come from opposite ends of the country.
15 comments:
The article outlines an interesting perspective on the new OUA Final Four format. In one aspect, however, it is somewhat incorrect. For the last three years, the road to the nationals for OUA East teams did not exactly go through Carleton. With Carleton as host university, for the past three seasons, OUA East teams had a very good chance to get to the nationals by winning the "host" spot that Carleton gifted to them by playing their way into the tournament. In 2008, the GGs were nationally ranked much of the year but faltered against Brock in the "play in" game. The Badgers made good use of their second chance fortune and went on to win the nationals. In 2009, the GGs took advantage of the situation and got to the nationals by beating the Lancers. In 2010, the GGs again failed to take advantage of an opportunity to play in the tournament by losing at home to Lakehead.
This same scenario, one presumes, will be again played out in two years time when the nationals return to Ottawa with Carleton again as hosts. In those years, should Carleton prevail in the playoffs, the OUA may have to again add a "bronze medal" game to determine the third OUA representative.
Teams in OUA East can't beat Carleton so they run away and trick OUA West into putting up its CIS berth. Heard this was pushed by Toronto so glad they are out.
I agree with the first poster.. The OUA East has benefited by being in the same division as Carleton for the past 3 years simply by having Carleton as the "host" team for nationals.. Its ridiculous for this to change now. Does this mean every time there is a dominant team, conferences should change their rules?
Are the Nationals only back in Halifax for 2 years then really back to Ottawa again?
Anon 10:38....
Uh, in case you haven't noticed, the OUA West teams can't beat Carleton, either.
Carleton has won six of the last seven Wilson Cup games it's been in.
Fortunately for the West team, their berth at nationals has already been assured by then.
That was the problem with the Wilson Cup in its old format...it was for the OUA championship, sure, but essentially it was a "nothing" game because only pride was on the line.
This new Final 4 format provides an opportunity for basketball fans to see the Ontario championship televised nationally, which wasn't the case before.
while its great to have the Wilson Cup televised, it is still a meaningless game under this new format..
Quite honestly Adam, I cannot fathom the logic of your last post.
How has the OUA East benefited by having Carleton as the host team the past three years?
The OUA West has had a second team at the nationals two of the past three years.
The extra berth was up for grabs because Carleton went into the tournament through the front door as Wilson Cup champs the past three years....both conferences benefited from this.
my mistake.. i thought that by Carleton being in as host the second place finisher in the OUA East got a bid.. i forgot they played the bronze medal game.
I think the bigger question is why do Carleton get in automatically? I can understand an OUA bid, or even an OUA East bid, but no individual team should be allowed in as a host..
If the CIS continues to allow that we could end up with an 8-14 team as an automatic entry..
I think the AUS format of top 2 teams is a fair one, not juts allowing Dal or SMU to be in because they are from Halifax
The reason why Carleton got the automatic host berth is because of their track record.
Obviously, the CIS would not award the Final 8 championships and an automatic host berth to a university if it was uncertain whether the school would be competitive.
But with Carleton, it was well worth the risk.
Remember Carleton had already won 5 straight national championships in Halifax when it was awarded the tournament for three years.
And even though Carleton won only one title the past three years in Ottawa, the Ravens won three OUA championships and posted an astonishing win-loss record of 98-5, with two of those losses coming in the national semi finals.
Perhaps that is why Carleton's admin bid for the tournament....they knew they would be there
Obviously in this case, Carleton was likely to make it regardless, however I still don't think any particular team should earn an automatic bid.
I can only assume this will be the case again in 2 years time when the tournament returns to Ottawa
Still I agree it shouldn't be guaranteedat the beginning of 3 straight years because that can also have an unfair recruiting advantage like they don't already have one by playing in the weaker OUA east. Now this year if they fail to beat Laurier they will have to use the Wildcard provision to get in. I prefer the womens playoffs with the removal of the wildcard.
I think Carleton University also paid some money to the CIS to host the Nationals. Not taking anything away from their basketball performance previously or since but it was more than Carleton having a record of winning.
To anon 1:14....
Well of course CU paid the CIS money to host it!
You don't think Halifax paid the CIS money for all these years?
ANY bid, no matter where it comes from, pays the CIS money to host the event....that's why it's called a bid.
The Final 8 is possibly the biggest cash cow the CIS has.
The Halifax tournament made the CIS a lot of money over the years.
Most years Halifax were awarded the host without a competing bid.
And in those rare instances when someone actually attempted to bid, they found they couldn't match the financial guarantees the CIS were getting from Halifax...that is, until Carleton, with their corporate partners, put in a bid.
resinnin....
Carleton does have an unfair recruiting advantage....he's called Dave Smart.
Playing in the "weaker" OUA East is irrelevant.
Check their record against the "stronger" OUA West over the years....
over 90%, like anywhere else.
The recruiting advantage Smart has is that if you come to Carleton, you have got a pretty good chance of playing for and winning a national championship every year...that was true long before Carleton hosted the tournament.
Success breeds success and that's why he now can now recruit across the country, getting players like the Scrubb Bros. and Elliot Thompson who come from opposite ends of the country.
no question this is a huge boost for recruiting..
The decision to move to the new OUA format was passed unanimously by all OUA Athletic Directors at their AGM last year.
For anyone to suggest any one institution (Toronto was mentioned) led the charge in this is incorrect and is asinine.
Post a Comment