New bellarmine thread

[KnightStalker]

This is my theory on why the committee selected as they did, again this is a theory and I don't necessarily agree with their decision (although I am thrilled about it!):

Committee had already determined how many teams from each conference going in to the conference tourneys: GLVC was getting five, GLIAC 2 and GMAC 1. From there it was just who got the auto bid for the GLIAC. Now under that theory if Northwood had won, MIT would have been out, although Ferris dropped to 7 from 2 so who knows maybe they would have been out. The rationale of course is that the GLVC was the tougher conference this year.

As for the #1 seed I think Indy had it going in to the tourney. Only way that might have changed is if they had lost first round and UMSL won the tourney.

[Inkblot]

As for the #1 seed I think Indy had it going in to the tourney. Only way that might have changed is if they had lost first round and UMSL won the tourney.

I'm fairly certain UMSL would've gotten it with a win yesterday.

[DUPanther]

I'm fairly certain UMSL would've gotten it with a win yesterday.

I would agree with that - and they would've deserved it. I think Indy deserved it otherwise.

[KnightStalker]

I would agree with that - and they would've deserved it. I think Indy deserved it otherwise.

Oh I think UMSL may have deserved it anyway but my point is the Committee is pretty much set on their main decisions before the conference tourneys. Their main decisions were who is going to host and, in years where one conference seems to be better than the others, how many teams are getting in from each conference. The decision on how many teams from each conference to me had to be decided before the tourney because that is the only rational reason for them dropping GVSU out from 4th. Also, I can not think of a year that the #1 ranked team in the rankings from the week before did not hold on to that position in the final rankings even when they did not win their conference tourney.

[kdubnation]

I wouldn't be surprised if they decide in October how many teams from each conference there will be in the tournament. G-MAC could have two teams end the year 30-1 with their only losses being to each other and only one is getting in. But that's cool, at least BU will get a fair shake getting an at-large bid in D1, right?

[Knightmoves]

Looks like the NCAA is not going to allow spectators at the tournament.https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball...ement-limiting

[BGrad1971]

So I would assume the Elite 8 in Evansville will not have fans in the stands other than family, but how about the 8 regionals? They will be taking place while the D1 schools are playing their conference tournaments. The Big 10, Big 12 and ACC will be playing their conference tournaments without fans in the stands. I assume the same thing will happen with the D2 regionals, has anyone heard anything on that?

[crazznewt]

Guys, should delaying the tournament be considered rather than these games being played in empty arenas?

[BGrad1971]

Looks like the decision has been made. U of Indy website says only a limited number of tickets to each school will be allowed (I assume for family and staff).

https://athletics.uindy.edu/news/202...-regional.aspx

[crazznewt]

Its official here now......wow, this will go down in basketball history with an asterisk beside 2020. Prayers for all.

[BGrad1971]

Kind of sad for seniors of all teams that were excited for an NCAA tourney run. It hit home for me a little bit extra since my granddaughter who is a swimmer on Centre Colleges swim team whose 4X200 freestyle relay team had qualified for the NCAA D3 finals in Greensboro NC. The regular season ended about three weeks ago and my granddaughter and her 3 teammates have been training really hard and were extremely excited about a trip to the Nationals. The worst part about it was that 3 of the young ladies were seniors (my granddaughter is a freshman) and this was the culmination of their swimming careers and the seniors won't get another chance like this. My granddaughter at least has 3 more years to try and make it back to the NCAA finals but she is heart broken for her three senior teammates.

[Knightmoves]

Yes, I feel badly for the senior athletes, I realize that their disappointment (and mine) is secondary to public health issues, but...

I went to Costco yesterday just to get a few things. The place was packed with people. I guarantee you that many more people went through this one Costco yesterday than would have been at a D2 basketball regional that was closed to the general public, probably more than a D2 regional with regular attendance. The decsion to close the tournaments to the general public and just show them on television seemed like a logical and prudent step.

Some real questions that are only partly rhetrocial: Is it really possible to slow the spread of a virus like this? Is it that important to slow the spread if we ultimately can't stop the spread anyway? What good does it do to shut down some public events, but still allow thousands of people to come through a store on the same day, meaning that thousands of people are going through thousands of stores on a daily basis. (Anecdotally, it appeared that many of the people in Costco were in high risk categories).

Most people will say that it is better to err on the side of caution, but that is a bit of a cop out. If it were always better to err on the side of caution, nobody would drive a car on a public road, especially at night in the rain. Of course the problem with Wuhan is that the risk is mostly unknown. But do individuals who are driving really know the risk of driving in a rain storm at night?

I think that so much of what we do collectively is driven by the #1 human desire: To control your environment. We want this so badly that we do things to make us think we are controlling our environment, when we are not. The corrollary of this is that, doing something is always better than doing nothing (or doing more is always better than doing less). By the way, don't think that these human drives don't effect even the most brilliant and sincere doctors and public officials.

Sorry to go off on a tangent, but feeling philosophical this morning.

[BGrad1971]

Knightmoves I agree with most of what you said except there are instances when doing something is not better than doing nothing (like physicians of long ago would use "blood letting" to cure people of many conditions, and I'm sure you can think of other examples like that). BTW were you a Philosophy major???

[Knightmoves]

I was not not clear. I was merely stating that people, especially when acting in the collective, have a prejudice for doing something over nothing or more rather than less. You are correct that many times nothing could be better than something. This is due in large part to the law of unintended consequences.

Not a philosophy major, but have a B.S. and M.S. in Economics and a JD. I have always been interested in the study of risk aversion, which tends to blend economics with philosophy.

[BGrad1971]

Being a retired actuary I spent 30 years dealing with risk in the insurance business. I guess really that's what actuaries do.