Favrefan's Graveyard Blog
  • 11:15 PM ET  04.21
Views
1264
Comments
2

Never has there been more parity between the two conferences than this year.  Every team in the West had 50 wins or more, and two more .500 or better teams that missed the playoffs.  The East, on the other hand, had only three teams with 50+ wins, six teams over .500, and a playoff team that is eight games under .500.  Thus, the talks of reseeding the playoffs have surfaced.  I am a Blazers fan, and were the top 16 teams to make it my beloved team would be in the playoffs.  So, I must like the reseeding idea.  Right?  No.

 

The big rebuttle against reseeding is travel.  For example, Portland would play Boston.  I don't really care about this.  There's always a day for travel budgeted in, and as long as both teams are traveling it should be as equal a playing field as any.  Besides, in the regular season teams make massive road trips with no rest days, so it's not like they aren't used to it.

 

No, the reason that I don't like the reseeding idea is that the conferences more or less play seperately throughout the season (52 of 82 games, or over 60%, of games are played in conference).  They are seperate entities with different rivalries.  If we reseed, many rivalries will never meet in the conference (Cavs-Wizards and Suns-Spurs wouldn't meet in the first round this year).  Boston and Detroit would have no chance of meeting in the conference finals, and the Lakers and Celtics would have no chance of meeting in the Finals this year.

 

There's also the issue of what to do with division and conference winners.  Would the winner of the each conference automatically get the top seeds, and on down?  Because then we would still have the problem of worse teams getting seeded higher. For instance, the 52 win Magic would be ranked at least three spots higher than the 55 win Suns.  Thus the resseding wouldn't solve anything.  On the other hand, if the reseeding completely ignored divisions, it would eliminate the point of having divisions in the first place.

 

Thus, the reason I don't like the idea of reseeding because it doesn't really solve anything.  There would still be issues with the seeding, it would damage the quality of the later rounds, and it's not like Portland or Golden State was really going to challenge for the title anyway.  There is no need to reseed. 

April 22, 2008  12:27 PM ET

You mean disparity, not parity.

 
April 22, 2008  01:49 PM ET

Gimmie a break. I'm trying to do 40 blogs by midnight. Not much time for proofreading.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Coming soon: Log in with your Facebook account, send comments and Throwdowns to Facebook and more.

Start Your Own Blog

Start Now

The Si.com Cover Hub Go to the Cover Hub

Stub Hub

The 2009 schedule has been released. Search for tickets!

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Browns owner chasing Holmgren?
    Views
    19027
    Comments
    1594
  2. 2
    Who will play shortstop for Red Sox?
    Views
    20555
    Comments
    1306
  3. 3
    Ex-Eagle: Cowboys everything wrong about NFL
    Views
    69758
    Comments
    1029
  4. 4
    Navy loss a deal-breaker for Weis?
    Views
    41053
    Comments
    317
  5. 5
    Patriots show up Porter
    Views
    19452
    Comments
    260

Most Active Users

Comments + Blog Posts + Throwdowns

  1. 1
    Porkins: F U to Hell, BCS
  2. 2
    RobertMenn: You stole my rake
  3. 3
    Perfectpats
  4. 4
    sign here
  5. 5
    Oso: Informative Sports. com

Message Boards

  1. NCAAF > General NCAAF

    Sports Illustrated says Pac 10…
    Views
    663
    Replies
    90
  2. NCAAF > General NCAAF

    Iowa's loss was good for the…
    Views
    644
    Replies
    82
  3. NCAAF > General NCAAF

    BCS Standings - Updated:…
    Views
    439
    Replies
    36

Blogs

SI.com

Swimsuit

SI Photos