End Regionalization

[Saint3333]

Watching Delaware and DSU all I can think is end regionalization. xmadx

Teams like Montana, ASU, and Richmond all had better seasons than Delaware, but drew much tougher opponents in the opening round.

What would it take to end this?

[smallcollegefbfan]

Do you think DSU STILL wants to play Delaware after this? We all knew their ranking was a little too high. I wonder if they drop out of the top 20 after this?

[putter]

Even before this game I agreed with eliminating regionalization. Everyone had this game pencilled in before UD got beat by Villanova so that tells you something that the matchup held. :(

[McTailGator]

Watching Delaware and DSU all I can think is end regionalization. xmadx

Teams like Montana, ASU, and Richmond all had better seasons than Delaware, but drew much tougher opponents in the opening round.

What would it take to end this?



I agree that they need to end regionalization.


But DSU might be getting beat just as much (or more) by UNI right now.

[jmufootball2]

UNH would take DSU though

[McNeese72]

Watching Delaware and DSU all I can think is end regionalization. xmadx

Teams like Montana, ASU, and Richmond all had better seasons than Delaware, but drew much tougher opponents in the opening round.

What would it take to end this?

I agree, it is time to end the regionalization crap and go to true seeding of 1 through 16. I'd much rather be playing Delaware St. than Eastern Washington tomorrow.

Doc

[mainejeff]

UNH would take DSU though

Maine would take DSU....as would William & Mary, Towson, Northeastern, and URI.

[GaSouthern]

I remember that one poll had DSU like #2 or #1

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

[smallcollegefbfan]

DSU shouldn't even be ranked the way they are playing. The MEAC sure is down compared to usual.

[RadMann]

Didn't regionalization start as a result of 9/11 to cut down on travel? I can't recall specifically, but I don't see the value of it. The teams should play opponents based on seeding, not location. Then again DSU would have been seeded higher than UD either way.

[UNHWildCats]

We could take all the AGSers over say 45 yrs old and they could take DSU :p

[gophoenix]

Watching Delaware and DSU all I can think is end regionalization. xmadx

Teams like Montana, ASU, and Richmond all had better seasons than Delaware, but drew much tougher opponents in the opening round.

What would it take to end this?

It could be worse. Look at the D-II playoffs. Basically, they take only the top 4 our of each region. So if you are #5 for the region like Carson-Newman this year and you are 10-1, tough luck. But there are worse teams in other regions taken. That is regionalization to the nth degree.

I hated it when Elon was there. 1994 we were ranked 12th but were #5 in the South region so were left out even though weaker teams in the East were taken.

So, in a way, be glad it isn't to that level....

but that doesn't make it right. We need to go back to seeding all 16. End of story.

[AZGrizFan]

Watching Delaware and DSU all I can think is end regionalization. xmadx

Teams like Montana, ASU, and Richmond all had better seasons than Delaware, but drew much tougher opponents in the opening round.

What would it take to end this?

I agree. Ending regionalization would have most likely taken DSU out of the playoffs altogether...

[JohnStOnge]

Regionalization is due to financial realities. They tried the 16 seeds, 1 vs. 16, 2 vs. 15, etc. and it was, I think, just too expensive.

[UDChE89]

I agree. Ending regionalization would have most likely taken DSU out of the playoffs altogether...

Nope.. sorry.. no dice... ending regionalization won't have prevented DSU from getting into the playoffs.. they had an AQ.. it would have meant that the UD/DSU game wouldn't have occurred..

[matfu]

yep...delaware state was an automatic qualifier....BUT the point is well taken, the top 4 seeds would get the "byes" (the delaware states of the world). if you are going to go to the trouble to have the playoffs, why not make it fair and seed the teams 1-16. yes, i know it was started after 9/11 and in part due to $$$$. but now it leaves a lot to be desired.

[McTailGator]

Didn't regionalization start as a result of 9/11 to cut down on travel? I can't recall specifically, but I don't see the value of it. The teams should play opponents based on seeding, not location. Then again DSU would have been seeded higher than UD either way.


911 is the reason they began Regionization and then they realized it saved BIG bucks, so it continued.

It is way past time for this to end.

It gives the Northeast schools an unfair advantage with the Patriot, and OVC and even the No. 3 and 4 CAA teams being so close together. It is an easy 1st round for some. And some teams get a home game that would not be an 8 seed or better. Woford would probably be a home team playing a 9th or 10th seed without this regional crap.

[McTailGator]

Regionalization is due to financial realities. They tried the 16 seeds, 1 vs. 16, 2 vs. 15, etc. and it was, I think, just too expensive.

TOO EXPENSIVE FOR WHO????

The NCAA makes BILLION'S with a B from TV and sponsorships in FBS football, Basketball, and even baseball, with Basketball being the real money maker.

THEY CAN FREAKING AFFORD IT.

[Chi Panther]

I have said this before and someone will shoot holes in it....but here goes....

Seed the whole thing. The hosting team should pay 1/3 of the travel costs. IF you can't afford to travel or host....don't participate.....

But seeding needs to be done somehow.....

[89Hen]

I agree, it is time to end the regionalization crap and go to true seeding of 1 through 16. I'd much rather be playing Delaware St. than Eastern Washington tomorrow.

Doc
xcoffeex They would have made the Hens the #8 "seed" and DSU the #9. xnodx

[dungeonjoe]

Regionalization hasn't ended? Quick, call the Wofford AD and get those boys home from Montanaxrolleyesx

[Syntax Error]

DSU shouldn't even be ranked the way they are playing. The MEAC sure is down compared to usual.smack --------------------->

Going 10-2 is "the way they are playing." Another Socon smacker. xrolleyesx

[Syntax Error]

TOO EXPENSIVE FOR WHO????
The NCAA makes BILLION'S with a B from TV and sponsorships in FBS football, Basketball, and even baseball, with Basketball being the real money maker.
THEY CAN FREAKING AFFORD IT.When are you going to realize that basketball money goes to basketball? Not to football? Look at the NCAA sheet and you'll see "makes BILLION'S with a B from TV and sponsorships in FBS football, Basketball, and even baseball, with Basketball being the real money maker" is not a true statement by a long shot.

You say the same thing over and over regardless if it's true or not.

[dgreco]

Regionalization hasn't ended? Quick, call the Wofford AD and get those boys home from Montanaxrolleyesx
laughed out loud!xlolx

[McNeese_beat]

The problem is that it's a competitive advantage or the CAA this year, and in most years. It's clear statistically and just by watching them play that the MEAC, the PL and the OVC are a notch below the other five conferences. The SLC, Gateway, CAA, Southern and Big Sky are like BCS conferences in the bowl subdivision while the MEAC, OVC and the PL are like C-USA, the Mountain West and, to some extent, the WAC in the other division. Clearly a notch below, although on a given day and in a given year, a Colgate could make a run, FAMU could be as good as anyone from a "power" conference and the someday, heck maybe tomorrow, the OVC will break through.

So it is completely an unfair competitive advantage for THREE CAA teams to be playing an OVC, a MEAC and a PL while Wofford is having to go to Montana (which, from their perspective, has to play Wofford) and McNeese has to play Eastern Washington for the right to take on the winner of a game between the last three national champs.

Can the NCAA lob a more hittable softball to the CAA?

[89Hen]

So it is completely an unfair competitive advantage for THREE CAA teams to be playing an OVC, a MEAC and a PL while Wofford is having to go to Montana (which, from their perspective, has to play Wofford) and McNeese has to play Eastern Washington for the right to take on the winner of a game between the last three national champs.

Can the NCAA lob a more hittable softball to the CAA?
xnonox xnonono2x How many times do we have to go through this? xconfusedx xsmhx

Since 2000, FIRST round games...
Richmond 10 - Youngstown State 3
Hofstra 31 - Furman 24
Delaware 49 - Portland State 14
Maine 14 - McNeese State 10
Appalachian State 40 - William & Mary 27
Villanova 45 - Furman 38
Maine 14 - Appalachian State 13
Delaware 48 - Southern Illinois 7
New Hampshire 27 - Georgia Southern 23
Youngstown State 35 - James Madison 31

Hmmm, so it would appear the CAA DOES have to play teams from your "power" conferences and it would also appear the CAA has a pretty darn good record against them too. What do you have to say about that? xeyebrowx

[ERASU2113]

Can the NCAA lob a more hittable softball to the CAA?

Not only was it a softball....but they knew the pitch that was coming xwhistlex

[proasu89]

smack --------------------->

Going 10-2 is "the way they are playing." Another Socon smacker. xrolleyesx

How is that smack? xeyebrowx That's a legitimate comment that could be debated. Maybe they had an extremely bad day, or they just don't deserved to be ranked. It can be discussed without being smack.

[Eagle22]

xnonox xnonono2x How many times do we have to go through this? xconfusedx xsmhx

Since 2000, FIRST round games...
Richmond 10 - Youngstown State 3
Hofstra 31 - Furman 24
Delaware 49 - Portland State 14
Maine 14 - McNeese State 10
Appalachian State 40 - William & Mary 27
Villanova 45 - Furman 38
Maine 14 - Appalachian State 13
Delaware 48 - Southern Illinois 7
New Hampshire 27 - Georgia Southern 23
Youngstown State 35 - James Madison 31

Hmmm, so it would appear the CAA DOES have to play teams from your "power" conferences and it would also appear the CAA has a pretty darn good record against them too. What do you have to say about that? xeyebrowx


I'd say those teams on your list that won from the A-10, benefitted in part from having the home game in the opening round. That's a nice advantage to have in your corner.

All three teams on your list that won in hostile territory @ a 'power conference' team (Hofstra@Furman in 2000, Maine@McNeese in 2001, New Hampshire@GSU in 2004), followed up those upsets with pretty severe beatings the following week, all losing by 28 points or more ... at the hands of a team from a 'power conference'.

Nothing to poke the chest out about, IMO. Once you get into the playoffs, you should be able to defend the home turf.

[Tim James]

I would take this thread seriously if there were no biased involved instead of what it really is. A bunch of whiney SoCon fans complaining and bitching.

Oh and as someone said earlier, D II reagionalization is much worse. They have teams from the same conference playing each other in the 1st round !

[Eagle22]

I would take this thread seriously if there were no biased involved instead of what it really is. A bunch of whiney SoCon fans complaining and bitching.

Oh and as someone said earlier, D II reagionalization is much worse. They have teams from the same conference playing each other in the 1st round !

Once the playoffs are expanded, it won't be long IMO until you see a similar regionalization format. If that's the case, then you'll not see a situation where five teams from a conference make the playoffs. Maybe not even four. Then there will be some serious whining.

[UNHWildCats]

I'd say those teams on your list that won from the A-10, benefitted in part from having the home game in the opening round. That's a nice advantage to have in your corner.

All three teams on your list that won in hostile territory @ a 'power conference' team (Hofstra@Furman in 2000, Maine@McNeese in 2001, New Hampshire@GSU in 2004), followed up those upsets with pretty severe beatings the following week, all losing by 28 points or more ... at the hands of a team from a 'power conference'.

Nothing to poke the chest out about, IMO. Once you get into the playoffs, you should be able to defend the home turf.
David Ball was injured and missed the Montana game, the outcome would have atleast been closer if Ball had played

[Tim James]

If Hampton had won the MEAC this year again like they have for 3 years in a row I think they would have played at Wofford and Delaware would have been sent to Monanta. It was just a freak coincidence this year that Delaware and Delaware state were both playoff eligible.

[blukeys]

If Hampton had won the MEAC this year again like they have for 3 years in a row I think they would have played at Wofford and Delaware would have been sent to Monanta. It was just a freak coincidence this year that Delaware and Delaware state were both playoff eligible.

If Hampton wins the MEAC it would have been more likely for them to play Richmond or JMU than Wofford.

[Eyes of Old Main]

End regionalization and go back to seeding all 16 teams. If Wofford gets sent to Montana then, no one complains. As it is now, questions exist even though it doesn't really matter.

[AZGrizFan]

Nope.. sorry.. no dice... ending regionalization won't have prevented DSU from getting into the playoffs.. they had an AQ.. it would have meant that the UD/DSU game wouldn't have occurred..

Perhaps. But only if they had seeded all 16 teams. The game scoreboard showed #10 @ #13. WTF is that? #13 gets a HOME game against the #10 seed (supposedly), meanwhile Wofford gets screwed and has to come to Montana? THAT is a joke. xeyebrowx xeyebrowx

[McNeese_beat]

xnonox xnonono2x How many times do we have to go through this? xconfusedx xsmhx

Since 2000, FIRST round games...
Richmond 10 - Youngstown State 3
Hofstra 31 - Furman 24
Delaware 49 - Portland State 14
Maine 14 - McNeese State 10
Appalachian State 40 - William & Mary 27
Villanova 45 - Furman 38
Maine 14 - Appalachian State 13
Delaware 48 - Southern Illinois 7
New Hampshire 27 - Georgia Southern 23
Youngstown State 35 - James Madison 31

Hmmm, so it would appear the CAA DOES have to play teams from your "power" conferences and it would also appear the CAA has a pretty darn good record against them too. What do you have to say about that? xeyebrowx

Hmmmm, it would seem you left out:
Lehigh 27, Hofstra 24
Fordham 29, Northeastern 24
Colgate 19, UMass 7
James Madison 14, Lehigh 13
Delaware 28, Lafayette 14
William and Mary 42, Hampton 35
New Hampshire 55, Colgate 21
Richmond 38, Hampton 10
UMass 35, Lafayette 14
New Hampshire 41, Hampton 38
Delaware 44, Delaware State 7
Fordham at UMass
Eastern Kentucky at Richmond

Throw in the two games against "power conference opponents" you excluded this year and we can count it up — 13 first-round games against the bottom three conferences since 2000 vs. 12 from power conferences. More than half your first-round games are against the non-power conferences.

Compare that to the Big Sky, which has played teams from those three conferences in ONE of 17 playoff games in the 2000s (the one was Montana over Eastern Illinois in 2000). There was also a playoff game against non "Big Five" team Cal Poly, but I'd argue that the Great West is as strong as any league in the country, bar none. They just haven't been playoff eligible for the most part.

And, let's compare it to the Southland. McNeese's game tomorrow will be the SLC's 13th first-round playoff game of the decade and ZERO have been against the bottom three conferences. NOT ONE.

So between the SLC and the Big Sky have a combined ONE game out of 30 against the bottom three leagues this decade while the CAA has played MORE THAN HALF against the bottom three leagues.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?????

xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx

By the way, you opened up the can of worms. I never suggested that your league NEVER plays teams aside from the bottom three autobid conferences. I never claimed yours was not an elite conference. I simply pointed out that you play MORE of those gimmes than any other league and it's an unfair competitive advantage. This year, it's three out of five. All you have to do is win one of the other two (tall order I know) and you'll have four teams in the quarterfinals and your fans will be saying its proof of their league's superiority.

[UNHWildCats]

Hmmmm, it would seem you left out:
Lehigh 27, Hofstra 24
Fordham 29, Northeastern 24
Colgate 19, UMass 7
James Madison 14, Lehigh 13
Delaware 28, Lafayette 14
William and Mary 42, Hampton 35
New Hampshire 55, Colgate 21
Richmond 38, Hampton 10
UMass 35, Lafayette 14
New Hampshire 41, Hampton 38
Delaware 44, Delaware State 7
Fordham at UMass
Eastern Kentucky at Richmond

Throw in the two games against "power conference opponents" you excluded this year and we can count it up — 13 first-round games against the bottom three conferences since 2000 vs. 12 from power conferences. More than half your first-round games are against the non-power conferences.

Compare that to the Big Sky, which has played teams from those three conferences in ONE of 17 playoff games in the 2000s (the one was Montana over Eastern Illinois in 2000). There was also a playoff game against non "Big Five" team Cal Poly, but I'd argue that the Great West is as strong as any league in the country, bar none. They just haven't been playoff eligible for the most part.

And, let's compare it to the Southland. McNeese's game tomorrow will be the SLC's 13th first-round playoff game of the decade and ZERO have been against the bottom three conferences. NOT ONE.

So between the SLC and the Big Sky have a combined ONE game out of 30 against the bottom three leagues this decade while the CAA has played MORE THAN HALF against the bottom three leagues.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?????

xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx xeekx

By the way, you opened up the can of worms. I never suggested that your league NEVER plays teams aside from the bottom three autobid conferences. I never claimed yours was not an elite conference. I simply pointed out that you play MORE of those gimmes than any other league and it's an unfair competitive advantage. This year, it's three out of five. All you have to do is win one of the other two (tall order I know) and you'll have four teams in the quarterfinals and your fans will be saying its proof of their league's superiority.

When you normally get in atleast 3 teams every year, your gonna get some games against non power conference teams.

[McNeese_beat]

When you normally get in atleast 3 teams every year, your gonna get some games against non power conference teams.

Very weak argument. You are playing more than half your first-round playoff games against the bottom three leagues. The Big Sky and the Southland almost never play the bottom three leagues. If every team in your conference made the playoffs, that would still be an unfair competitive advantage.

There have been years since 2000 where the SLC or the Big Sky got three teams in (three out of seven or eight teams) and that still didn't earn a game with an OVC or a MEAC...

[Syntax Error]

Very weak argument. You are playing more than half your first-round playoff games against the bottom three leagues. The Big Sky and the Southland almost never play the bottom three leagues. If every team in your conference made the playoffs, that would still be an unfair competitive advantage.

There have been years since 2000 where the SLC or the Big Sky got three teams in (three out of seven or eight teams) and that still didn't earn a game with an OVC or a MEAC...
Weak, BSC and SLC are hardly ever three bid leagues.
2000 - nope
2001 - SLC had 3
2002 - nope
2003 - BSC had 3
2004 - nope
2005 - nope
2006 - nope

So twice this decade the SLC and BSC have had more than two teams

[AZGrizFan]

Weak, BSC and SLC are hardly ever three bid leagues.
2000 - nope
2001 - SLC had 3
2002 - nope
2003 - BSC had 3
2004 - nope
2005 - nope
2006 - nope

So twice this decade the SLC and BSC have had more than two teams

Well, this would have been a good year then....the 3rd place BSC of SLC team would have put up 35 on DSU today. xlolx xlolx xlolx

[pitpen]

Well, this would have been a good year then....the 3rd place BSC of SLC team would have put up 35 on DSU today. xlolx xlolx xlolx

I doubt the Hornets would have won by that much.xthumbsupx

[McNeese_beat]

Weak, BSC and SLC are hardly ever three bid leagues.
2000 - nope
2001 - SLC had 3
2002 - nope
2003 - BSC had 3
2004 - nope
2005 - nope
2006 - nope

So twice this decade the SLC and BSC have had more than two teams

You're missing the point. If the CAA gets 4 teams in the field, that means there are 12 possible opponents. Of the potential opponents, about a third (I'm guessing that one of the three "lower" conferences would get two bids, like the OVC this year) would be from the OVC, MEAC or PL. That's a four out of about 12 teams. So the CAA is getting more than half of its first-round playoff opponents from about a third of the potential opponents.

That's out of proportion, no matter how you want to spin it.

[Brad82]

No way,too expensive for teams to travel.
Look at how big some of the confences are getting-CAA in FB,A-10 in BB for Rhody.
While Rhody in FB playoffs is futuristic,it applies to all schools. Couple with the fact all athletic teams play D-1 and have to travel to places like St.Louis, Richmond,Charlotte,Ga. State (in future)-it is a waste of money. Play the closest D-1 teams first. Spend the $$ on facilities and recruiting.I would bet coaches would agree.

[ChickenMan]

You're missing the point. If the CAA gets 4 teams in the field, that means there are 12 possible opponents. Of the potential opponents, about a third (I'm guessing that one of the three "lower" conferences would get two bids, like the OVC this year) would be from the OVC, MEAC or PL. That's a four out of about 12 teams. So the CAA is getting more than half of its first-round playoff opponents from about a third of the potential opponents.

That's out of proportion, no matter how you want to spin it.


I don't think you should include the Patriot League in with the MEAC and Ohio Valley.. they have been a far stronger playoff performer than either of those two leagues.

the records since regionalization started back in '02..


MEAC - 0-5

Ohio Valley - 0-5

Patriot - 4-6

time to reconsider???

[eaglesrthe1]

Not to throw any flies in the ointment, but you have to remember that the money savings from seeding the top four as compared to all sixteen goes directly to enhancing the television exposure that the playoffs get.

Used to be that the only game that appeared was the NC. Now you get to see the semis, and most if not all of the quarters. If it were not for regionalization, the DSU-UD 1st rounder definitely would not have been on ESPN. Even though it wasn't competitive, that's the chance you take. Last years later round games were fantastic to watch, I'm glad I got to see them. I would hate to give them up, but that would be the cost.

The real money doesn't come from travel savings (see Wofford going to UM), but from increased revenue by ensuring that schools like UD, ASU, and UM get to host multiple money making games even if they haven't earned it on the field. It's a trade off... you just have to take the good with the bad.

There are times that I wish it were one way, and then there are times that I think that t would be better if it were the other. You just have to keep in mind that it can't be both.

[McNeese_beat]

I don't think you should include the Patriot League in with the MEAC and Ohio Valley.. they have been a far stronger playoff performer than either of those two leagues.

the records since regionalization started back in '02..


MEAC - 0-5

Ohio Valley - 0-5

Patriot - 4-6

time to reconsider???

well, most of that was one big run by Colgate in 03, which can be considered an anomaly. The MEAC had a run in the last 10 years as well, with FAMU making the semis in 1999. FAMU was sustaining some success when it made the ill-fated decision to try to go to I-A. That set FAMU AND the MEAC back.

My point is that when the decade (and cetury) turned, both FAMU and Hampton were turning out respectably competitive teams at a national level. Has something changed where that's no longer possible? I don't know the answer to that.

So I wouldn't separate the PL from the MEAC all that much...but certainly the OVC is at the bottom of the list. It's been so long since it even won a game and it's been since 1991 since they've had a team in the final four.

[CollegeSportsInfo]

Watching Delaware and DSU all I can think is end regionalization. xmadx

Teams like Montana, ASU, and Richmond all had better seasons than Delaware, but drew much tougher opponents in the opening round.

What would it take to end this?

Or at least regionalism with creativity. While there are only 4 seeds, it's a safe assumption that UMass would be considered a higher seed than Delaware. Why not have Delaware St. travel to Amherst and Fordham travel to Delaware. Neither is an expensive trip and at least it gives some bonus to the conference champion by playing a weaker team than the Patriot champion.

[89Hen]

Hmmmm, it would seem you left out:
Lehigh 27, Hofstra 24
Fordham 29, Northeastern 24
Colgate 19, UMass 7
James Madison 14, Lehigh 13
Delaware 28, Lafayette 14
William and Mary 42, Hampton 35
New Hampshire 55, Colgate 21
Richmond 38, Hampton 10
UMass 35, Lafayette 14
New Hampshire 41, Hampton 38
Delaware 44, Delaware State 7
Fordham at UMass
Eastern Kentucky at Richmond

Throw in the two games against "power conference opponents" you excluded this year and we can count it up — 13 first-round games against the bottom three conferences since 2000 vs. 12 from power conferences. More than half your first-round games are against the non-power conferences.
YOU MISSED THE ENTIRE POINT! The CAA beats teams from EVERY conference. If the CAA were 12-1 vs "non-power" and 1-11 against "power" you'd have a point. I'll have to do the math, but I think the "non-power" ones are BETTER than your "power" ones against the CAA. Perhaps the CAA would RATHER play your "power" ones. xlolx

[McNeese_beat]

YOU MISSED THE ENTIRE POINT! The CAA beats teams from EVERY conference. If the CAA were 12-1 vs "non-power" and 1-11 against "power" you'd have a point. I'll have to do the math, but I think the "non-power" ones are BETTER than your "power" ones against the CAA. Perhaps the CAA would RATHER play your "power" ones. xlolx

xbowx xbowx xbowx
You're a good conference. Horray for the CAA.

But your record in the games where you aren't playing the bottom three conferences has nothing to do with the fact that you play more than half your first-round games against the bottom three conferences.

The logic you are using is that because New Hampshire beat Georgia Southern, then an 8-3 Delaware is more deserving of a chance to play Delaware State than are the four seeded teams...

That's not what one would call an intelligent argument, but hey, embrace it. It's all yours.