Playoffs

[cglue]

Well start the offseason with this. Consider travel and the region that the teams are apart of. What is your setup for a good playoff system and plaese try to be brief.

cglue

[bdaly]

After seeing the chaos, maybe the "Great Eight" is ideal. And, I believe it's planned for Quebec City. The danger in that format is crowds will be ghostly if the home team loses. But, maybe you pick the top seed of the remaining eight, assuming their venue meetings requirements. But, clearly, a team shouldn't play one round one day and then play the next round less than 24 hours later, regardless of if it extends the playoffs a bit.

[preeths]

It's tough to tell the best playoff format without knowing how many teams and divisions the league plans on having. One thing I think the league should consider is having the second and third-best teams in each division play in the first round with the winners going on to face the division champs in the next round. Playing within the division in the first two rounds ensures regional matchups and eliminates any controversy about playoff seeding (at least through two rounds). The division champs are then not only rewarded with a home game against a regional opponent, but some extra time in which to sell tickets to it. At that point, one team will come out of each division, and maybe then all of them can meet at a central, predetermined location (or at the home of the highest remaining seed) for a championship tournament, a week or so later. Thoughts?

[DaveHolmes]

Consolidate some teams from the 9 divisions so that only 8 divisions remain. Each of the 8 division winners hosts the second-place team in their respective divisions in a first-round playoff game.

The 8 winnning teams from that first round then travel to a host city for the Great 8, which takes place over the course of one weekend (Thur. - Quarterfinals, Fri. - Semifinals, Sat. - Finals., Sun. - ABA Championship).

[ABARedWhiteBlue]

Larry-
There is a huge disconnect in the ABA's logic when it comes time for the post-season.

One of the league's costant mantras is that the regional set-up allows teams to save money on reduced travel costs, by playing, essentially, a bus-trip schedule.

Why, after (many) teams squeak by the regular season, does the ABA then force its teams to scramble to come up with thousands of dollars on short notice to travel thousands of miles awa for a game, when they have made every effort to avoid just that scenario all year?

(For the purposes of this discussion, I will refrain from commenting on the convoluted sysem in place to determine the post-season match-ups)

Have a play-off in each of four regions, down to two teams in each - to reduce travel, and get that region's top two representative teams. Go back to a Great 8-type format at one location, seeding each team before they even arrive - as the NCAA does (East vs. Midwest in one game, South vs. West in another, for example). Set up the seeding so that the two teams in the same region (example, the East) would not meet until the final game, so if, as it appears this year, to most talented teams were in the same region they would be able to decide it on the court in the final:

Bracket A East 1 vs Midwest 1 / South 1 vs West 1
Bracket B East 2 vs Midwest 2 / South 2 vs West 2

semis - A Bracket winners play each other / B Bracket winners play each other

final - A bracket winner vs. B bracket winner

[Jones235]

If I were the CEO, here's what I'd do.
Announce a formula for Power Rankings before the season starts. Update the Power Rankings every week.
Divide the teams into four geographic regions.
After the first half of the season, the team with the highest ranking for each region is awarded the privilege of hosting the regional tournament. If that team cannot secure a venue for two consecutive days, the team with the next highest ranking may host.
Every divisional winner advances to the playoffs. After that, spots are awarded to teams with the highest power rankings. A team that qualifies for the playoffs but would have to play outside its own regional may decline to participate in the playoffs without penalty.
Each region hosts a two-day tournament that features six teams. On the first day, #3 seed plays #6 seed and #4 seed plays #5 seed. On the second day, the #1 seed plays the winner of the 4-5 game and the #2 seed plays the winner of the 3-6 game. The two teams left standing after the second day advance to the Great 8.
If the league wants to further minimize travel costs, the regional could be a three-day tourney, leaving only four teams to play in a Final Four to determine the Champion.

[cglue]

I think we all so far came to an agreement on regional, north, south, east and west. Lets find a system that makes sense to everyone besides the power ranking to get figure out who would play in these regions and try to slim to 8 divisions like stated before.

cglue

[preeths]

Joes235 makes a good point in that the formula for the power rankings should be known before the season starts and should not change at any point during the year. No one can feel jobbed if they know what to expect in advance and the same criteria are applied to everyone.

[jamesaba]

The national power rankings belie the regional philosophy.

You make teams in weaker regions believe they are a top ranked team due to their record. When in fact the rankings do not reflect an actual scouting and watching of the actual teams.

Then when the playoffs come, you're trying to send teams all over the county to make the higher ranked teams happy with who their playing in the early rounds.

Forget all that!

You have to keep regionalization as the key. Make 8 divisions and have 4 teams from each division go to the playoffs. The first round will be 1-4 and 2-3 and the 2nd round will determine the division representative for the Great 8.

Once the 8 teams have survived, their own division, then everyone gets 5 days off to prepare and gets sent to a central location for the Great 8. Then the Great 8 teams are ranked according to their division....ie; hardest division is ranked 1,2,3 and so on. This is not hard to do mathematically.

That way the first two rounds are just like division games with regards to travel. And you don't have Buffalo flying to Jacksonville, for example.

[Fells]

Yes, I am alive, just taking a couple of days off from writing to actually see my wife and do some radio station remotes.

Here is what I would like to see:

1) Top three teams in each division play in a best of three playoff series with the first place team getting a bye. Winner plays at the division winner. That winner advances to play against the region that is closest geographically. This would have to be determined before the start of the season. "X" division plays "Y" in the second round, etc.

2) When it gets to the division winners, (Ideally eight teams) you have a single elimination round at the home of the team with the best record. There would be a minimum of seven days in between the end of the regional round and the final tournament. This gives teams plenty of time to prepare and to plan travel.

I think this would cut down on some of the uncertainty, and the high cost of traveling on just a couple of days notice. It also rewards the team with the best record the chance to host the tournament.

If a team decides to withdraw from the tournament, they are banned from the league for one year; no exceptions.