Announcers are hung up on regular season title. Meaningless.

[upstater]

When all these teams are 1 loss apart, it doesn't matter who finishes in first. The AAC has an unbalanced schedule. UConn for instance only plays the 2 worst teams once. It's meaningless. Conference champ will be the tourney champ.

 

[mauconnfan]

When all these teams are 1 loss apart, it doesn't matter who finishes in first. The AAC has an unbalanced schedule. UConn for instance only plays the 2 worst teams once. It's meaningless. Conference champ will be the tourney champ.

And 2 teams in front of them have beaten them twice so the tie-breaker isn't in their favor.

 

[upstater]

And 2 teams in front of them have beaten them twice so the tie-breaker isn't in their favor.

Yep, but is there a tie-breaker?

Temple i think has some bad losses in conference.

 

[dpross]

When all these teams are 1 loss apart, it doesn't matter who finishes in first. The AAC has an unbalanced schedule. UConn for instance only plays the 2 worst teams once. It's meaningless. Conference champ will be the tourney champ.

As a fan it'd be nice to win the regular season title of this abysmal conference. In fact, I think a lot of us have complained about this very concept.

 

[microfich]

When all these teams are 1 loss apart, it doesn't matter who finishes in first. The AAC has an unbalanced schedule. UConn for instance only plays the 2 worst teams once. It's meaningless. Conference champ will be the tourney champ.

You're kind of losing me but no player on any team I've ever been has thought any kind of championship was meaningless. I think the announcers understand that.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

You're kind of losing me but no player on any team I've ever been has thought any kind of championship was meaningless. I think the announcers understand that.

Let's be honest, it's only "meaningless" because UConn's not going to win it. If UConn was sitting at 15-0 in conference there would be zero threads about how meaningless the regular season title is.

 

[Ts5034]

When all these teams are 1 loss apart, it doesn't matter who finishes in first. The AAC has an unbalanced schedule. UConn for instance only plays the 2 worst teams once. It's meaningless. Conference champ will be the tourney champ.

The Big East never had a balanced schedule when it had 16 teams. The reason I bring this up is because so many people point out the fact that we have not dominated too many regular seasons over the last decade. Thats a big reason why.

 

[upstater]

What in the world are you guys talking about? The Big East champ was always the tourney champ.

When it's a 1 loss difference in the standings, between several different teams, it means a lot less.

In fact, I remember UConn's championships from the tourneys. I don't remember the 2003 regular season championship when UConn went 10-6. Meant nothing to me. Or the 13-3 from the previous year. I do remember the 2002 tourney victory though. I was there.

 

[Waquoit]

Anything that adds another year to the display at Gampel is not meaningless.

 

[FartMan69]

It should be meaningless to us because with the program we have and the pedigree we boast it's embarrassing us winning the title isn't a given every year in this pile of goo disguised as a conference

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

When it's a 1 loss difference in the standings, between several different teams, it means a lot less.

I would retire this line of argument. You wouldn't be making it if UConn was at the top of the standings.

By the way, share the above theory with an EPL team.

 

[huskyharry]

As a fan it'd be nice to win the regular season title of this abysmal conference. In fact, I think a lot of us have complained about this very concept.

I agree. ..next year perhaps?

 

[upstater]

I would retire this line of argument. You wouldn't be making it if UConn was at the top of the standings.

By the way, share the above theory with an EPL team.

I've always made this argument.

The EPL? They have a balanced schedule. Do you follow Premier League?

Look, Temple plays ECU twice, USF twice, SMU only once.

That gives Temple an extra two wins relative to UConn and likely one more loss (on the road @SMU).

So when comparing the two schools, you keep that in mind. In the EPL, every team plays each other twice.

 

[prankster]

I don't remember the 2003 regular season championship when UConn went 10-6. Meant nothing to me. Or the 13-3 from the previous year. I do remember the 2002 tourney victory though. I was there.

(Insert Obligatory Syracuse T-Shirt Reference Here)

 

[methodology]

Regular season champs has some importance. Almost every conference nowadays doesn't play a balanced schedule.

The ncaa committee also puts weight into regular season champs. They just started that in the past few years to protect teams in mid-smaller conferences who dominate their leagues in the regular season then get upset in the conference tournament.

Calhoun cared about winning the regular season championship and so do I

 

[ktuck911]

I'm only responding to the thread title.

This might've already been mentioned in this thread, but me thinks the announcers realize that the best team in this conference isn't going anywhere after the tourney (SMU), which is probably why they talk about it so much..