Change in the tiebreaker system in the MVC

[vbird53]

Re: Amazing

I'm sure this new method will somehow screw us.

Now that's a true Shockernet sentiment! If this board had a collective avatar, that would probably be it. Long live Shockanoia!

You betcha! :goshocks:

[1972Shocker]

Sort of like MLB determining home field advantage in the World Series based on which league wins the All-Star game.

One has nothing to do with the other.

Hit 'em in the pocket book is the better way to go to incentivize tougher non-con scheduling.

The only purpose of the tiebreaker system is for seeding in the post-season tournament. The only tiebreaker that means much is the one that would keep you out of or put you into the 1st round play-in games.

If you are a team with NCAA Tournament aspirations then the incentive to schedule tough is to build a resume that can get you an at-large bid just in case you don't win the MVC Tournament.

[martymoose]

Seems like a good change. Really, when it comes down to it, if 2 teams are tied, they are probably pretty close to equally as good. If you don't want to be tied and have it come down to some tie breaker, then you should have won 1 more game. I do think they should also bring back the monetary penalty for not putting together a good RPI non-con schedule.

[tgcshock]

What this really means is, "If you are going to end up tied with someone in the Valley, make sure that it is Illinois State!"

[Rosewood]

So what are the 6-7 shockerneters that actually understood the tie breaking scenarios going to do next winter?

[The Mad Hatter]

So what are the 6-7 shockerneters that actually understood the tie breaking scenarios going to do next winter?

Be whittled down to 2-3 that understand the new tie breaking scenarios is my guess. (Since now games in a bunch of other conferences all season long could shift who has the sos edge).