Is it just me or would it make more sense to have a series the first weekend and then play the super regional as a four team double elimantion tournament to make it to CWS? Input welcome *******</p>
Regional Format
- Thread starter TheGodfather
- Start date
As has an option for three consecutive best-of-three weekends that would determine the CWS participants.
It keeps a consistent format for teams and it isn't a massive cluster17 to game-plan like at regionals. You play a full season of best-of-3 series, why have two weekends (at least for SECT) where it is a full on double elimination tournament, then a best-of-3 series, then another double elimination tournament? Add another weekend and have 3 weekends of best-of-3 series. I like consistency, I guess... so that's just me.
Eight team double eliminations tournaments, like the CWS used to be, are great. Yes, it can really stretch your pitching staff, but you get a lot more variety and the winner's bracket is not such an overwhelming advantage. The big thing is that when you lose, you don't just go back and play the same team you beat the day before; typically they swap the brackets so you play someone who lost in the other half of the bracket.
4-team double elimination is stupid. Their is far too high a premium on winning the winner's bracket. Out of the 16 regionals, only 3 teams managed to come back from the winner's bracket and advance. Since ESPN is showing it, they don't need guaranteed game times. Just play 8 double elimination tournaments over the course of 10 or 12 days. The teams will still have time to recover for the CWS.
Oh, and the CWS should go back to straight double elimination as well.
4-team double elimination is stupid. Their is far too high a premium on winning the winner's bracket. Out of the 16 regionals, only 3 teams managed to come back from the winner's bracket and advance. Since ESPN is showing it, they don't need guaranteed game times. Just play 8 double elimination tournaments over the course of 10 or 12 days. The teams will still have time to recover for the CWS.
Oh, and the CWS should go back to straight double elimination as well.
What do you mean by "straight double elimination"? Do you mean that the last 2 teams shouldn't play a 2-of-3 series?<div>Dawgzilla said:
</div><div>
</div><div>Also, as far as 4-team regionals, I have no problem with giving such an advantage to the team who wins its first 2 games. You should benefit from winning your games. 13 teams winning their regional after starting 2-0 is right on average. Since the 4-team regional format started in 1999, 81% have won it after a 2-0 start. I don't think that's a "problem" that needs to be corrected.</div><div>
</div><div>However, as another poster pointed out, you can go a long way with only 2 stud pitchers. Perhaps that's not right...
</div>
It was much more interesting and forced teams to be a complete team instead of having 2 dominant starters dictating the outcomes of regionals. This also carries over to the super regionals. I just don't think it gives a clear sense of how complete a team is when you can rely on 2 pitchers to basically punch your ticket to Omaha.
Right now, the CWS is two seperate 4-team double elimination tournaments, with the winners facing off in a best of 3 series.
I think they should go back to the way it was in the "good ole days", when it was a true 8 team tournament. First you get to play a wider variety of teams, and second I think it removes a little of the "luck" factor associated with winning the first two games.
Surviving the winner's bracket should get you a guaranteed slot in the championship game, but it shouldn't give you an overwhelming advantage in that game.
By way of example only, let's assume the Gainesville and Atlanta
regionals were combined into the two brackets of an 8 team tournament. The first two rounds would have been identical, and you would have had UF and MSU at 2-0, with Miami, G-Tech, Jacksonville and AP at 1-1. instead of playing AP again, GT would play Jacksonville and Miami would play AP in elimination games. UF would play MSU in the winner's bracket finale (let's assume UF wins, 11-1).
Now you have G-Tech, Miami and MSU all at 2-1, and UF at 3-0, and here's where it gets interesting. You avoid rematches, so MSU plays Miami, and UF goes ahead and plays G-Tech. As the winner's bracket winner, UF doesn't just sit around while everyone beats each other up; they go ahead and play someone with a loss. Their prize for surviving the winner's bracket is a guaranteed slot in the championship game.
So, let's assume MSU beats Miami. If UF beats GT, then MSU has to beat UF twice to win the tournament. Pretty much the same result we wound up with. But, if UF loses to GT, then GT and MSU play each other with the winner facing UF in a one-game championship match. Either way, from MSU's perspective, the major difference would be that game against Miami.
I realize this type of tournament stretches a pitching staff pretty thin, but that's why I think they should spread it out over more than week just like the CWS.
Perhaps coaches were complaining about pitching depth, but the main reason the CWS was changed was so that CBS could televise a Sunday afternoon championship game. The major networks always shied away from covering the CWS because it could end on Saturday or Sunday, and they preferred something that could fill a time slot on a slow sports weekend. They wanted a guaranteed championship game time slot....so the CWS became two, 4-team tournaments, with the 2 winners facing off in a single "winner take all" game, even if 1 of the teams was 3-0 and the other team was 3-1, or even 4-1. I don't think anyone ever really liked that format, so when ESPN ponied up more cash, they came up with the 3 game series.
I always liked the full 8 team tournament a lot more.
I think they should go back to the way it was in the "good ole days", when it was a true 8 team tournament. First you get to play a wider variety of teams, and second I think it removes a little of the "luck" factor associated with winning the first two games.
Surviving the winner's bracket should get you a guaranteed slot in the championship game, but it shouldn't give you an overwhelming advantage in that game.
By way of example only, let's assume the Gainesville and Atlanta
regionals were combined into the two brackets of an 8 team tournament. The first two rounds would have been identical, and you would have had UF and MSU at 2-0, with Miami, G-Tech, Jacksonville and AP at 1-1. instead of playing AP again, GT would play Jacksonville and Miami would play AP in elimination games. UF would play MSU in the winner's bracket finale (let's assume UF wins, 11-1).
Now you have G-Tech, Miami and MSU all at 2-1, and UF at 3-0, and here's where it gets interesting. You avoid rematches, so MSU plays Miami, and UF goes ahead and plays G-Tech. As the winner's bracket winner, UF doesn't just sit around while everyone beats each other up; they go ahead and play someone with a loss. Their prize for surviving the winner's bracket is a guaranteed slot in the championship game.
So, let's assume MSU beats Miami. If UF beats GT, then MSU has to beat UF twice to win the tournament. Pretty much the same result we wound up with. But, if UF loses to GT, then GT and MSU play each other with the winner facing UF in a one-game championship match. Either way, from MSU's perspective, the major difference would be that game against Miami.
I realize this type of tournament stretches a pitching staff pretty thin, but that's why I think they should spread it out over more than week just like the CWS.
Perhaps coaches were complaining about pitching depth, but the main reason the CWS was changed was so that CBS could televise a Sunday afternoon championship game. The major networks always shied away from covering the CWS because it could end on Saturday or Sunday, and they preferred something that could fill a time slot on a slow sports weekend. They wanted a guaranteed championship game time slot....so the CWS became two, 4-team tournaments, with the 2 winners facing off in a single "winner take all" game, even if 1 of the teams was 3-0 and the other team was 3-1, or even 4-1. I don't think anyone ever really liked that format, so when ESPN ponied up more cash, they came up with the 3 game series.
I always liked the full 8 team tournament a lot more.