|
|
Post by stevetino on Apr 13, 2019 7:49:36 GMT
Not sure it will suit riders either in the league. We are normally (apart from this season with Europe) well prepared for the start of the league having got our players over early Other teams just by going out of one competition can use September and October to gel for starting the league knowing what they are doing Like many have said above - this may change things so that playoffs are deemed more important to win I guess that's good in some ways as it keeps more teams more motivated right til the end of the season This season I just view playoffs as a nice to have and a consolation to not winning the league Only if you win them which is far from guaranteed.. 🤣🏀 |
|
|
|
Post by leamrider2 on Apr 13, 2019 15:02:41 GMT
Just repeating a few points others have already made, but ...
I like the three-game playoffs. About time.
Don't like the rest of it. I'd rather they drop one of the cup competitions completely than reduce the league games.
And will this help or hurt the daft scheduling that we see season after season, of long gaps and then mad periods of back to back games? Hmm.
|
|
|
|
Post by leamrider2 on Apr 13, 2019 15:15:15 GMT
I can't be fussed to work this out but perhaps someone already knows: under the proposed structure, what is the maximum number of times two clubs might face each other on court in the season?
|
|
scotball
Bench Player
Posts: 200 
Favourite Team: Glasgow Rocks
|
Post by scotball on Apr 13, 2019 15:40:16 GMT
People have long debated whether the league or the playoffs should decide the 'National Champions'.
Under the current format, I would definitely say it was the league, and I therefore I never really understood the need for, or was ever excited by, the Playoffs. Growing up in a European / British sports system, to me deciding the Champions by the league felt natural.
The Playoffs felt an unnecessary copy of the American system when the champions (league) had already been decided.
These changes feel like the BBL has decided to place more importance on the Playoffs deciding the Champions, and I'm excited by that because at least now the format has been properly tailored to achieve those ends.
The 'League' is now really just qualification for the Playoffs, and its importance will soon mirror that of the Conference system in the US. Yes, winning the conference / regular season is an achievement, but ultimately the last team standing are the National Champions.
Before, the BBL was a bit of hotpotch of the European and US formats, understandably to suit the needs of the member clubs (and their finances). Now at least they've committed to trying to do one properly and, as the league continues to grow, I think that can only benefit everyone moving forward.
|
|
|
|
Post by blueskies99 on Apr 13, 2019 15:46:58 GMT
I can't be fussed to work this out but perhaps someone already knows: under the proposed structure, what is the maximum number of times two clubs might face each other on court in the season? 2 in the league 4 in the BBL Cup (2 in the league and potentially 2 for a two-leg tie)
2 in the BBL Trophy (for a two leg tie) 3 in the play-offs
11 in total................. I think
|
|
|
|
Post by leamrider2 on Apr 13, 2019 16:37:59 GMT
Thank you. It would be interesting to see what effect that had on attendances, if it ever came to pass. Fancy shelling out for seeing the same opposition for the 9th, 10th, 11th time in half a year?
|
|
|
|
Post by blueskies99 on Apr 13, 2019 16:57:02 GMT
Thank you. It would be interesting to see what effect that had on attendances, if it ever came to pass. Fancy shelling out for seeing the same opposition for the 9th, 10th, 11th time in half a year? Someone much smarter than me could possibly work out the odds of that happening in a season... Under the current regime it could be 9! |
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Apr 13, 2019 17:02:20 GMT
Thank you. It would be interesting to see what effect that had on attendances, if it ever came to pass. Fancy shelling out for seeing the same opposition for the 9th, 10th, 11th time in half a year? Home fans looking at 6 games at the most v same team though? 6 away games at Raiders or Rocks wouldn't be good! |
|
|
|
Post by sussexbantam on Apr 13, 2019 18:42:14 GMT
People have long debated whether the league or the playoffs should decide the 'National Champions'. Under the current format, I would definitely say it was the league, and I therefore I never really understood the need for, or was ever excited by, the Playoffs. Growing up in a European / British sports system, to me deciding the Champions by the league felt natural. The Playoffs felt an unnecessary copy of the American system when the champions (league) had already been decided. These changes feel like the BBL has decided to place more importance on the Playoffs deciding the Champions, and I'm excited by that because at least now the format has been properly tailored to achieve those ends. The 'League' is now really just qualification for the Playoffs, and its importance will soon mirror that of the Conference system in the US. Yes, winning the conference / regular season is an achievement, but ultimately the last team standing are the National Champions. Before, the BBL was a bit of hotpotch of the European and US formats, understandably to suit the needs of the member clubs (and their finances). Now at least they've committed to trying to do one properly and, as the league continues to grow, I think that can only benefit everyone moving forward. This is a good point which I hadn't really considered. I can get behind a system designed to give "one winner" as the overall winner of the playoffs. Don't mind that at all. It |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2019 1:56:53 GMT
I'm a little late to the conversation here so don't have the time to read five pages of comments but the only change I'm in favour of is the playoffs.
The regular season taking a cut of 33% of it's games makes it seem like the league is losing significance. The cup group stage has ten games and that's almost as long as half of the regular season! You can also expect to see teams decide to not bring in their expensive import players for two months until the league starts. Yes they might not qualify for the next stage of the cup but so what? They'd save thousands on not fulfilling that competition and just competing for the league and trophy instead.
This makes the league look silly.
|
|
|
|
Post by davef on Apr 14, 2019 16:05:53 GMT
Just a couple of more points as the thread has moved on :
1. Dead rubber argument re cup games : not really sure where that comes from. I think we would all prefer 6 qualifying games instead of 10 but thats where financial realities bite. BUT given that the top 2 in each group get a home q-f and the next two get to the qfs I really can't see their being many 'dead games'. It takes a lot of early losses to be out of the top 4 of a 6 game qualifying pool much before the end. Similarly you would think at least 7/8 wins would be required to guarantee top 2.
2. The league at the moment is far too random re fixture scheduling and creates regular competitive imbalances between teams who are playing and also places players at increased risk of injury, which helps no-one. I anticipate that when the new league kicks in in November scheduling will be far more consistent : weeks will be built in for cup and trophy quarter finals : two legged semis will be played midweek. The way the available weeks fit in the only doubleheader should be one on the last weekend of the season.
3. If teams want to save until November and ignore the cup they can. But it doesn't really make much sense coming into the league with a new team and playing against groups that have been there for weeks already building cohesion.
4. Europe : the league determines European qualification. If a team wants to prioritize Europe over domestic comp then they shouldn't be impacted in the league for it. This format (one game per week in championship play) allows for that. We should be doing everything we can to allow teams to compete in Europe. Leicester's schedule in November of this year simply didn't. Any team who is equipped to play in Europe should have a solid shot at winning enough qualifying games in the cup to finish in the top 4 of a group (given the talent they would need for Europe) and won't be affected in the league.
|
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Apr 14, 2019 16:13:45 GMT
Just thinking could the above be aimed to allow BBL clubs to compete in Europe by sacrificing playing in the cup
Apologies if that's already been suggested above
edit yes sorry point 4 above
And could teams who play in Europe name a different younger squad for the cup before announcing their squad for the league and even play in both?
|
|
|
|
Post by blueskies99 on Apr 14, 2019 19:49:46 GMT
Just thinking could the above be aimed to allow BBL clubs to compete in Europe by sacrificing playing in the cup Apologies if that's already been suggested above edit yes sorry point 4 above And could teams who play in Europe name a different younger squad for the cup before announcing their squad for the league and even play in both? Apology accepted  I mentioned it earlier in the thread. |
|
|
|
Post by sussexbantam on Apr 14, 2019 19:50:02 GMT
Just a couple of more points as the thread has moved on : 1. Dead rubber argument re cup games : not really sure where that comes from. I think we would all prefer 6 qualifying games instead of 10 but thats where financial realities bite. BUT given that the top 2 in each group get a home q-f and the next two get to the qfs I really can't see their being many 'dead games'. It takes a lot of early losses to be out of the top 4 of a 6 game qualifying pool much before the end. Similarly you would think at least 7/8 wins would be required to guarantee top 2. Mathematically you are correct of course - I guess it depends on how much you think playing for home advantage in the next round is worth - particularly given the subsequent round is two legged. I suspect most teams will be happy to guarantee a top 4 and then "take their foot off the gas". I may be wrong of course - I guess we will find out in October ! |
|
therock
Rookie
It doesn’t matter
Posts: 99
|
Post by therock on Apr 16, 2019 18:58:53 GMT
Overall cant say I’m too keen on the changes.
One point I don’t think has been made: what’s the logic behind 3 game play-off series for QF and SF but then a one-off final? Either do series or don’t.
The season looks very disjointed, currently the league holds everything together, going forward I’m not sure what will keep your focus.
|
|
therock
Rookie
It doesn’t matter
Posts: 99
|
Post by therock on Apr 16, 2019 19:09:45 GMT
Also, would be interesting to know how many QF and SF ties saw one game won by each team in recent years - an indication of how much difference this may actually make.
Don’t have time currently to look into this but will try if no-one else knows.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 19:40:46 GMT
Overall cant say I’m too keen on the changes. One point I don’t think has been made: what’s the logic behind 3 game play-off series for QF and SF but then a one-off final? Either do series or don’t. The season looks very disjointed, currently the league holds everything together, going forward I’m not sure what will keep your focus. It gives the BBL opportunity to coin it in from the final. I'd be surprised if that isn't the rationale. |
|
2NFR
Global Moderator 
Posts: 6,297
Favourite Team: Newcastle Eagles
|
Post by 2NFR on Apr 16, 2019 19:55:03 GMT
Fair play to the BBL for mixing things up a bit ... Personally, I like change...
...as long as its not for the sake of change, it should be OK (they can always change it back)
God knows, people on here have been bleating on here about it for over a decade now.
I look forward to seeing how it all plays out, particularly come Mar/Apr next year (teams still playing catch up?)
In essence ... if you don't evolve ... you become extinct, I suppose !! ... we shall see !!
|
|
|
|
Post by stevetino on Apr 16, 2019 19:56:18 GMT
Fair play to the BBL for mixing things up a bit ... Personally, I like change... ...as long as its not for the sake of change, it should be OK (they can always change it back) God knows, people on here have been bleating on here about it for over a decade now. I look forward to seeing how it all plays out, particularly come Mar/Apr next year (teams still playing catch up?) In essence ... if you don't evolve ... you become extinct, I suppose !! ... we shall see !! Anything that reduces dead rubbers is good with me |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 20:08:07 GMT
Fair play to the BBL for mixing things up a bit ... Personally, I like change... ...as long as its not for the sake of change, it should be OK (they can always change it back) God knows, people on here have been bleating on here about it for over a decade now. I look forward to seeing how it all plays out, particularly come Mar/Apr next year (teams still playing catch up?) In essence ... if you don't evolve ... you become extinct, I suppose !! ... we shall see !! Change isn't always evolution. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2019 7:01:26 GMT
Also, would be interesting to know how many QF and SF ties saw one game won by each team in recent years - an indication of how much difference this may actually make. Don’t have time currently to look into this but will try if no-one else knows. Its a good question but doesn't take into account that there's a psychological element that changes between aggregate and "best of" series. Currently if you win the first leg by enough then there's little point in the other team bothering in the second leg. It'll be interesting to see how that changes when a blowout doesn't kill the tie. Pity it doesn't come into effect this season. I think a lot of ties would go the three games. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2019 7:03:36 GMT
Fair play to the BBL for mixing things up a bit ... Personally, I like change... ...as long as its not for the sake of change, it should be OK (they can always change it back) God knows, people on here have been bleating on here about it for over a decade now. I look forward to seeing how it all plays out, particularly come Mar/Apr next year (teams still playing catch up?) In essence ... if you don't evolve ... you become extinct, I suppose !! ... we shall see !! Change isn't always evolution. Agreed, but neither is doing nothing. That said, doing nothing should always be an option until there's a better one. |
|
|
|
Post by interestedridersfan on Apr 17, 2019 7:24:13 GMT
Overall cant say I’m too keen on the changes. One point I don’t think has been made: what’s the logic behind 3 game play-off series for QF and SF but then a one-off final? Either do series or don’t. The season looks very disjointed, currently the league holds everything together, going forward I’m not sure what will keep your focus. It gives the BBL opportunity to coin it in from the final. I'd be surprised if that isn't the rationale. Yep no doubt they can't afford to lose the revenue from the final |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2019 21:56:17 GMT
Change isn't always evolution. Agreed, but neither is doing nothing. That said, doing nothing should always be an option until there's a better one. Do you believe this is a better one? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2019 4:18:16 GMT
Best of 3 playoffs seems like a positive step. The rest I'm largely ambivalent on.
|
|
