What does this have to do with player improvement? That was what the link in my coach's corner said this was all about.

And it will be very obvious if you are adjusting in an attempt to make your team better, as opposed to benching all of your starters for obviously worse players or walk-ons, giving all of your distribution to walk-ons, doubling the other guy's worst players, etc..

This isn't rocket science people.

homrbush, I'm guessing they just copied the text of the last link they used to send a message like this (which was about player improvement), and then forgot to change the text. Or they wanted to trick everyone into reading it because they knew that would get our attention :-)

Quote: Originally posted by kimball on 2/23/2009Why are so many people defending themselves over this?  Are there that many of you that feel like this is aimed at you?  Is this more rampid than I thought?

By no means are people openly admitting guilt, I just think that this raises fear and scrutiny by players to alter their game plans in a way that makes them suspect by someone on a witch hunt.

Resting top players to avoid injury/recover from injury or to give younger players more PT in advance of a tournament run shouldn't be scrutinized. This happens often in pro and college sports. Look at the NFL. Teams that are locked for the post-season early often rest their top players in weeks 16 and 17. When the Colts a few years ago lost to an obviously inferior team in week 17 due to this they weren't throwing the game, just ensuring they had a better chance at the ultimate prize at the end of the post-season.
If a team is locked for a NT berth and has a lot of young guys who have never played more than about 5 mins a game in a season why not let them play more minutes considering this may be a way to test out lineups for next season when top players graduate. They would be risking a higher NT seed possibly if they lose but this is by no means illegal. I actually think it's a good move for a coach who doesn't care about stats and is controlling his team for long term success.
Last, not advocating throwing games for the benefit of others, but there is strategy in throwing in-conference games prior to the CT. Say you are a #2 or #3 seed in your division. You are pretty well matched with the #1 seed of your division but you can never beat the #1 team in the other side of the conference who always has your number. Come the 16th game of conference if you win you solidify the #2 seed and are forced into the same half bracket as the team you can never beat. You lose the 16th game and you get seeded #3 and are in the same side of the bracket as the #1 seed from your side of the conference who you know you can beat. With this latter scenario there is greater chance that the team on the other side of the bracket loses before you would have to play them considering they would be playing more games prior to you playing them- possibly facing a team that they typically don't play well against. A strategy such as this would give your team a better shot at winning the CT and making the NT.

Quote: Originally posted by goosegoslin on 2/23/2009And if you are benching a guy out of fear of injury in a CT game, you are also an idiot, players don't get hurt very often in this game, the cost/benefit to benching a starter, on the off chance he gets hurt is way in favor of playing him.

At worst, I'll lower the starters minutes at the end of regular season games. Never bench them, and never do anything but try to win post season games. It's pretty simple.

THIS is the "important announcement about player improvement?"

Just when you think things can't get any worse.....

Quote: Originally posted by aidiamo on 2/23/2009Resting top players to avoid injury/recover from injury or to give younger players more PT in advance of a tournament run shouldn't be scrutinized. This happens often in pro and college sports. Look at the NFL. Teams that are locked for the post-season early often rest their top players in weeks 16 and 17. When the Colts a few years ago lost to an obviously inferior team in week 17 due to this they weren't throwing the game, just ensuring they had a better chance at the ultimate prize at the end of the post-season.
If a team is locked for a NT berth and has a lot of young guys who have never played more than about 5 mins a game in a season why not let them play more minutes considering this may be a way to test out lineups for next season when top players graduate. They would be risking a higher NT seed possibly if they lose but this is by no means illegal. I actually think it's a good move for a coach who doesn't care about stats and is controlling his team for long term success.
Last, not advocating throwing games for the benefit of others, but there is strategy in throwing in-conference games prior to the CT. Say you are a #2 or #3 seed in your division. You are pretty well matched with the #1 seed of your division but you can never beat the #1 team in the other side of the conference who always has your number. Come the 16th game of conference if you win you solidify the #2 seed and are forced into the same half bracket as the team you can never beat. You lose the 16th game and you get seeded #3 and are in the same side of the bracket as the #1 seed from your side of the conference who you know you can beat. With this latter scenario there is greater chance that the team on the other side of the bracket loses before you would have to play them considering they would be playing more games prior to you playing them- possibly facing a team that they typically don't play well against. A strategy such as this would give your team a better shot at winning the CT and making the NT.

No college team ever rests it's starters in the CT. The CT is generally a prestigious thing, and teams want to win it even if they are already locks for the NT.

You scenario, where you lose the last game of the regular season also makes no sense.

First you are taking a loss, to a team you should normally beat in Game 16. Then you have to play the #6 seed from the other half, which in most leagues is RPI poison, further hurting your chances of making the dance (1-1 including a game vs. an awful team, vs. 1-0 heading into the CT quarterfinal).

Now in the CT quarterfinal you are getting the #2 from the other half of the bracket, as opposed to the #3, which gives you lesser chance of advancing (generally).

If you win the quarterfinal, you are now getting the number one from your own half, which is a better team than you as well. Sure you would end up playing #1 from the other half, but if this team is so good, you are going to have to play them anyway to get to the dance anyway.

You are most definitely hurting your chances of winning the CT by lowering your seed, and significantly hurting your chances of getting an at large bid as well.

the actual impact of this will be much like "collusion" - if folks try to agree to do this, they will be subject to sanctions

if someone just makes some stupid but not grossly blatant adjustments in hopes of losing there wont be sanctions

enforcement can deter only the most eggregious behavior - so folks should not discuss in the coaches corner "hey, ya know if we let XYZ win the CT we'll get an extra bid.....yeah, I'll let them win the semis and you let them win the finale, ok?"

The way my HD luck works if I ever even tried to throw a game randomness would bite me on the a$$ and I would win.

IIRC, support can see every setting you used for your game, it will be pretty easy for them to tell if a guy tanked on purpose, especially when comparing the game plan to all other game plans on the season. I think they'll be able to catch more than just the most egregious behavior, provided someone notices and brings the game to their attention.

The bottom line is if you're doing something that isn't in the best interest of YOUR team then it's obvious to everyone. The notion of "resting" your players is just stupid, sorry but injuries are infrequent and very rarely serious. There should be no concern for this. Like goose said the benefits are greater to win that game then to lose it.

just another crap *** rule.. someone must of cried.. if a person decides to lose a game on purpose that is there decision

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.