|
|
Post by ned3vball on Jun 6, 2019 8:26:52 GMT -5
The Championship committee is working on this for as soon as 20-21.
Has a volleyball specific committee been setup to review the likely change
from 8 to 10 regions? Any rumors or preliminary designs floating around out there?
Going from 8 to 10 regions will not solve the problems in volleyball, in fact it will
make them worse. But, in a way that is a good thing, as it should force a review of the
current selection process.
|
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Jun 6, 2019 8:53:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Jun 6, 2019 9:37:52 GMT -5
Thanks. I need to get past the headline of the news articles  . A region redesign will be a good time to rework the selection criteria, so that will probably have to wait till they figure this out. |
|
|
|
Post by cardinalvolleyball on Jun 6, 2019 9:39:21 GMT -5
The Championship committee is working on this for as soon as 20-21. Has a volleyball specific committee been setup to review the likely change from 8 to 10 regions? Any rumors or preliminary designs floating around out there? Going from 8 to 10 regions will not solve the problems in volleyball, in fact it will make them worse. But, in a way that is a good thing, as it should force a review of the current selection process. honest question. How would it make the problems worse and what are the biggest problems you see right now with the regionalization of DIII? |
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Jun 6, 2019 10:32:41 GMT -5
The Championship committee is working on this for as soon as 20-21. Has a volleyball specific committee been setup to review the likely change from 8 to 10 regions? Any rumors or preliminary designs floating around out there? Going from 8 to 10 regions will not solve the problems in volleyball, in fact it will make them worse. But, in a way that is a good thing, as it should force a review of the current selection process. honest question. How would it make the problems worse and what are the biggest problems you see right now with the regionalization of DIII? The current 8 regions. CE, GL, MA, MW, NE, NY, SO, WE range in size from 30 something to 70 something. It is also understood in volleyball that the 3 largest regions MA, NE, NY do not have as many quality teams as the regions in other parts of the country. You rank by region. The D3 across the board recommendation is 15% of teams. There is a minimum of 8 for vball. This means CE, GL, MW, SO, and WE rank 8 teams. MA and NY rank 11. NE ranks 12. One of the selection criteria is record against ranked opponents. There is no distinction between a team ranked 1st versus 12th. The last few years some NEWMAC schools have created a strong looking "record against ranked opponents" by beating teams ranked 9 - 12 in NE and/or 9 - 11 in NY. This is a luxury the WE region for example does not have. The general idea of the redesign was to first, solve the problem of different region sizes. I am guessing by the way that this was primarily driven by other sports. BUT, the problem with this idea is that to get from 8 to 10 regions, using geography as the basis, you take MA, NE, and NY and divide them into 5 regions instead of 3. The other regions are basically unchanged. So you go from 3 regions ranking 34 teams, to 5 regions ranking 40, assuming the 8 minimum stays. So you have an extra 6 weaker teams to pump up the regionally ranked record even more! |
|
|
|
Post by reader on Jun 6, 2019 10:36:09 GMT -5
In short, the best VB regions have the lowest density of schools, so to create more regions they'll have to break up the weaker eastern regions and spread out their mediocrity even thinner.
EDIT: NED3 is very fast.
|
|
|
|
Post by coahc21 on Jun 6, 2019 11:01:10 GMT -5
honest question. How would it make the problems worse and what are the biggest problems you see right now with the regionalization of DIII? The current 8 regions. CE, GL, MA, MW, NE, NY, SO, WE range in size from 30 something to 70 something. It is also understood in volleyball that the 3 largest regions MA, NE, NY do not have as many quality teams as the regions in other parts of the country. You rank by region. The D3 across the board recommendation is 15% of teams. There is a minimum of 8 for vball. This means CE, GL, MW, SO, and WE rank 8 teams. MA and NY rank 11. NE ranks 12. One of the selection criteria is record against ranked opponents. There is no distinction between a team ranked 1st versus 12th. The last few years some NEWMAC schools have created a strong looking "record against ranked opponents" by beating teams ranked 9 - 12 in NE and/or 9 - 11 in NY. This is a luxury the WE region for example does not have. The general idea of the redesign was to first, solve the problem of different region sizes. I am guessing by the way that this was primarily driven by other sports. BUT, the problem with this idea is that to get from 8 to 10 regions, using geography as the basis, you take MA, NE, and NY and divide them into 5 regions instead of 3. The other regions are basically unchanged. So you go from 3 regions ranking 34 teams, to 5 regions ranking 40, assuming the 8 minimum stays. So you have an extra 6 weaker teams to pump up the regionally ranked record even more! Well said! I couldn't figure out how to put it into words......D3 budgets are not the same as D1 obviously, if teams were able to fly all over the country more frequently, it wouldn't be as great of a problem Not sure what a reasonable solution is...unless they expand the 64 team tournament.... |
|
|
|
Post by Brutus Buckeye on Jun 6, 2019 20:02:57 GMT -5
Who are my Ohio teams gonna get lumped in with?
|
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Jun 6, 2019 20:52:54 GMT -5
So you have an extra 6 weaker teams to pump up the regionally ranked record even more! SCIAC still gets screwed over either way. |
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Jun 6, 2019 21:11:13 GMT -5
Who are my Ohio teams gonna get lumped in with? You would think Heartland, Michigan IAA, North coast AC, and Ohio AC. With Case Western from UAA. President's AC probably moves to new Mid Atlantic region. |
|
|
|
Post by reader on Jun 7, 2019 9:21:46 GMT -5
Hint to frustrated central and western regional teams: travel to the hothouses of the northeast and feast on the ranked teams. Pablo might turn up his nose, but the NCAA eats that stuff up.
I honestly don't think the NCAA cares about this. Most D3 kids are attending schools near home, and because the sport itself does not have an even distribution of talent the regions are going top vary in quality pretty wildly. It's similar to lacrosse or ice hockey in that respect. You can't fix it any more than you can make things fair with baseball and spring weather in the north. I'd like to have them at least try to make the playoffs a bit more fair, just as I'd like to have them try anything at all in D2, but they just don't seem to be interested. I guess I'm not sure why they couldn't have different regions for different sports to reflect the reality of each sport's demographics. It's not like the basketball coach is complaining that he can't keep up with the changes in the gymnastics playoff picture. The only person who might care about mismatched regions is the AD's office, and they let the coaches handle the details of their individual sports anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Jun 7, 2019 11:03:49 GMT -5
Hint to frustrated central and western regional teams: travel to the hothouses of the northeast and feast on the ranked teams. Pablo might turn up his nose, but the NCAA eats that stuff up. SCIAC Athletic Departments are not wealthy. Remember all play for free. |
|
|
|
Post by saywhatnow on Jun 7, 2019 11:21:45 GMT -5
Hint to frustrated central and western regional teams: travel to the hothouses of the northeast and feast on the ranked teams. Pablo might turn up his nose, but the NCAA eats that stuff up. SCIAC Athletic Departments are not wealthy. Remember all play for free. exactly! With tight budgets and limited open schedule dates, let’s build in travel to the northeast to pounce on ranked schools that may not have a positive impact on the conference or getting into the tournament. No that does NOT make it better for the West region. |
|
|
|
Post by coahc21 on Jun 7, 2019 12:43:04 GMT -5
SCIAC Athletic Departments are not wealthy. Remember all play for free. exactly! With tight budgets and limited open schedule dates, let’s build in travel to the northeast to pounce on ranked schools that may not have a positive impact on the conference or getting into the tournament. No that does NOT make it better for the West region. Many of the SCIAC coaches look to host east coast schools in invitationals....southern cali is a more attractive destination than upstate NY....they could do a better job of being selective with who they invite and limit it to regionally ranked opponents... Couple that with a trip of their own and they may have something... |
|
|
|
Post by saywhatnow on Jun 7, 2019 17:20:12 GMT -5
The budget thing is not being addressed. While SoCal is more appealing than upstate NY, the costs will possibly be higher by coming West. Hosting tournaments cost money as well as for schools. Basically you are saying that SCIAC teams have to spend money to have a stronger position at the table come tournament time.
|
|
. 
