g-diddy
Years ago

Is it time to look at the C-ABL Finals process?

with what apperas to be 2 divisions for the upcoming ABA minor season is it time to re-evaluate our finals process?

Example (I believe these divisions are correct):
Division 1
Forestville
South
Norwood
Sturt
Woodville

Division 2
Centrals
North
Southern
Eastern
West

Lets assume that 1 team is the weakest in the competition by far. For Argument sake we will say west is the weakest (although they are actually one of the strongest overall - men's and women's and I am not starting this to bag any specific club)

The 4 teams in west's conference get an easy 3 wins where the other conference gets only an easy 2 wins. Advantage to the conference with West in it as the premiership table is all a mass of all teams. 4 of these teams get the advantage in the overall competition and have an easier time making finals.

In my opinion (and i know opinions are like buttholes everyone has one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks) if we are playing in conferences then lets record in conferences.

Top team in each conference gets a first round finals bye (thus the advantage of winning your conference) then set up a finals tournament where D2 second place plays D1 third place the winner goes onto play D1 winner on the other side D1 second place plays D2 third place and the winner plays D2 Winner. The winners from those semifianls meet in a best of 3 finals in a Wednesday/Friday/Sunday championship series.

Please give your thoughts.
Remember I wasn't bagging west.

Topic #6255 | Report this topic

Anonymous
Years ago

huh?

Reply #70638 | Report this post

Chuck Norris
Years ago

or how about this. we leave it exactly the way it is, and see if that works, i dunno just a suggestion. thoughts?

Reply #70639 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

g-diddy is correct. example is in the womens program, the teams that get to play centrals 3 times, get 3 easy wins where as the southern teams dont really have an 'give-me' game.. so the southern conference is at a disadvantage.
with the teams fluctuating quite significantly in quality, it seems unfair to split it into two conferences..

Reply #70641 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

not conferences way i look at it but a premier division and a lower division.

top teams only play top teams and lower teams only play lower teams.

has merit but i only see it as lower teams stay lower because they don't improve only playing other lower teams. whether people realise it or not teams do learn something being beaten by lots the added pressure etc does improve their game.

Reply #70645 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

All possible literatue on the subject say's that neither team learns from games in which 1 team is over matched.

Looking at the competition in our state over the last 10 years shows that the weaker are not getting better from the thrashings. Actually it only shows the families that the grass is greener some where else. So the better players leave making the competition more distorted.

Reply #70647 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

I think that g-diddy is on to something....especially with the 3 game final series. I think only 2 of the last 7 minor premiers in the men have actually gone on to win the whole thing, which suggests that the system does not favour the first ranked team(usually they have a week off, then a final, then another week off before the grand final. its a good system to get them to the grand final, but by the time the grand final comes around, it is only the no 1 ranked sides' 2nd game in a month....what sort of preparation is that?)

The only problem with g-diddy's plan is that the winner of each division can be knocked out straight away in a knock out semi final and no second chance. The top 2 teams should always get a second chance, so i think to avoid that is make the semi finals best of 3 as well. This allows the top ranked teams to lose a game and still win that series. Now i know that the league will never go for this system, because more work is never accepted very well, but I think it is the way to go. I think most players would prefer to play 3 game final series instead of knock out.

I'm not sure if we have to have divisions tho, we could just have a final six, with 1 and 2 getting bye first round, 3vs6, and 4vs5 in knock out quarter finals, then the winner of 3vs6 plays 2nd and winner of 4vs5 plays 1st in 3 game semi final series, and the winners play off in a 3 game finals series.

Reply #70650 | Report this post

Hoops

Is it time to look at the C-ABL Finals process?

Recent Posts