View Single Post
12-31-2012, 05:28 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Sweden
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 371
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by jedimyrmidon View Post
My argument was that a tournament with a bye takes into account teams that have demonstrated, over the course of the preliminary round, that they are probably better teams and so are deserving of a place in the semis (i.e. if something goes wrong, it's not in the QFs where you can't play for a medal if you lose).


a tournament without a bye means that the preliminary round doesn't actually mean much since you can be the best, but still not make it to the semis because of a bad QF game against a team that did much worse during the prelim round, which doesn't make sense; conversely, a team could be pretty horrible and lose most of its games, but still pull off a win when the result actually 'counts'. Doesn't mean that this team is more 'deserving'/better at all.

Hence, the winner of a tournament with a bye is more likely a team that 'should have' won if the point of the tournament is that the best team wins.
How is a team that couldn't beat a 4th seed the team that "should have" won? If you lose a quarter-final against those lower seeds you are definitely not the team that "should have" won.

Its a good change in my opinion, why would you give the advantage of so many resting days to the highest seeds? It just makes no sense.

In the new format they do take into account that the first seeds did a good job. They get to play against the worst team making the quarters from the other group, that is the extend of the advantage you deserve.

Do you think the first seeds from each conference in the NHL should get a pass for the first round?

wwvdw is offline   Reply With Quote