alslammerz
Harvard Hockey Broadcaster '09-'12
Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?
We're arguing the same side of the coin here. I'm saying I think that if the NCAA makes the moves I'm talking about because they are worried about travel distances (a concern they've at times shown) then there's no point, in my eyes, to make the change. If they are willing to commit to keeping bracket integrity for everything but no intraconference games, then I'm on board with the best of 3.
The #1 seeds would host the first round, yes. So in my hypothetical, what if the NCAA took travel concerns into things, the first round game would be at Miami.
But the second round game would be at one of two super-regional sites (IIRC) which I said would most likely be split with an eastern site and a western site, and for the purposes of this example, I said that these would be Albany and St. Paul. Albany and St. Paul would then host two games each- Albany would host the winners of East 1/4 vs. East 2/3 and the winners of Northeast 1/4 vs. Northeast 2/3. St. Paul would host the winners of Midwest 1/4 vs. Midwest 2/3, and West 1/4 vs. West 2/3, and I stated that the NCAA might, using 2010 as an example, move teams to keep them near where the super-regional is going to be played. So I figured the NCAA might flip Miami and Denver- ie., Miami would play the second round in Albany instead of St. Paul and vice versa. My overall point was that if the NCAA decides to take travel into account when switching to this format (a not unreasonable concern money wise I guess), that there would be a lot of mixing and matching, moving teams around in the 1 band, 2 band, etc. And the whole point of my post was that this would be a bad thing.
Or to put it another way, I'm in favor of the best of three series, as long as the NCAA doesn't shuffle the deck for travel concerns (or attendance concerns for that matter.)
Not to beat this point home too much or anything, but USCHO's story on this lists the exact same concern as me...and made some of the same changes, plus extra changes as well.
We're arguing the same side of the coin here. I'm saying I think that if the NCAA makes the moves I'm talking about because they are worried about travel distances (a concern they've at times shown) then there's no point, in my eyes, to make the change. If they are willing to commit to keeping bracket integrity for everything but no intraconference games, then I'm on board with the best of 3.
The #1 seeds would host the first round, yes. So in my hypothetical, what if the NCAA took travel concerns into things, the first round game would be at Miami.
But the second round game would be at one of two super-regional sites (IIRC) which I said would most likely be split with an eastern site and a western site, and for the purposes of this example, I said that these would be Albany and St. Paul. Albany and St. Paul would then host two games each- Albany would host the winners of East 1/4 vs. East 2/3 and the winners of Northeast 1/4 vs. Northeast 2/3. St. Paul would host the winners of Midwest 1/4 vs. Midwest 2/3, and West 1/4 vs. West 2/3, and I stated that the NCAA might, using 2010 as an example, move teams to keep them near where the super-regional is going to be played. So I figured the NCAA might flip Miami and Denver- ie., Miami would play the second round in Albany instead of St. Paul and vice versa. My overall point was that if the NCAA decides to take travel into account when switching to this format (a not unreasonable concern money wise I guess), that there would be a lot of mixing and matching, moving teams around in the 1 band, 2 band, etc. And the whole point of my post was that this would be a bad thing.
Or to put it another way, I'm in favor of the best of three series, as long as the NCAA doesn't shuffle the deck for travel concerns (or attendance concerns for that matter.)
Not to beat this point home too much or anything, but USCHO's story on this lists the exact same concern as me...and made some of the same changes, plus extra changes as well.
Last edited:
