|
Post by trollhunter on Apr 12, 2017 20:27:38 GMT -5
So to keep this stuff out of the Beach Bids thread, I've created this one. *Vomits in mouth*
It appears that the NCAA Committee changed the rules mid-season for Beach. If so, that is pretty silly.
It also appears that they want juggling the lineup to be a part of the game strategy. That seems even more silly to me.
TEAM LINEUPS and PLAYER MOVEMENT REGULATIONS Modified 4/5/17
Team Lineups The team’s completed Dual Match Lineup Form (team lineup) should be submitted to the Head Referee one hour before the start of play, or 15 minutes before the start of the next dual, if playing back-to-back duals, at which time, the lineup is official. Coaches are responsible to position their pairs (positions 1-5) in order of ability for ALL matches from the first match of the season to the last match of the season. Within this guideline:
a. Player movement within the team lineup is restricted to one position up or down from one event to another. Examples: (1) A player currently listed in a 3 position may be moved up one position in the lineup to a 2 position, or may be moved down one position in the lineup to a 4 position. (2) A player currently listed in a 1 position may be moved down one position in the lineup to 2 position. b. Changes to the official lineup must be reported immediately to the Head Referee. The Head Referee will share the lineup changes with the opponent’s head coach as soon as possible. (1) For purposes of lineup changes, a dual, a tournament that includes bracket play, and a bracketed pair’s tournament are different events, even if played on the same day or at the same site on simultaneous days. (2) A coach may make lineup changes from one event to another as long as they stay within the one position parameter for moving players.
Player Movement Regulations: A player may initially enter the team lineup in one of two (2) ways: 1. As an original player.
Furthermore, an original player who is removed from the team lineup: a. Is immediately added to the Removed Players section located on the bottom right of the team’s NCAA Dual Match Lineup Form, and
b. May ONLY re-enter the team lineup into the position which she last played. She may be moved from there in subsequent matches (see a. in Team Lineups section above).
2. From the alternate player list. An alternate may initially enter the lineup in any position, 1-5. Furthermore, an alternate player who is removed from the team lineup:
a. Is returned to the Alternate Players list, thus retaining the status of alternate player.
EXCEPTION: an alternate player who initially enters the team lineup in position 1-5, is then;
(1) moved up one position, in the case of initial entry into positions 2-5, or (2) moved down one position, in the case of initial entry into positions 1-4, and is subsequently removed from the team lineup. In these cases, if/when this player is removed from the team lineup, she loses her alternate player status, is now considered a Removed Player, and is subject to the re-entry guidelines in 1.b immediately above.
b. Is then limited to returning to the team lineup in either of the following two scenarios: (1) She may return to the position into which she last played, and may be moved from there in subsequent matches (see EXCEPTION above); or (2) She may return in the five (5) position, and may be moved from there in subsequent matches (see EXCEPTION above).
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Apr 12, 2017 20:29:36 GMT -5
NCAA Definitions Modified 4/5/17 Definitions
Team (overall): a. All players representing a single institution; and b. Is composed of five pairs (two-players) who represent a single institution in an event.
Event: a. A tournament that includes bracket play is an event in its entirety (i.e., conference tournament, NCAA tournament, etc.). b. A dual in which two teams, represented by five pairs, play each other is an event in its entirety. (1) Officially recognized as an NCAA Beach Volleyball match. (2) An event in which each pairs match result counts toward points to determine the result of the dual (a team win or a team loss).
Pairs: a. A two-player team representing a single institution. b. Identified on the team’s NCAA Dual Match Lineup Form, in order of ability.
NOTE: For regulations governing Pairs, reference section 4.1, Composition and Registration.
Original Player: a. A player whose initial entry to the team lineup is as one of the ten (10) players comprising the official team lineup (pairs 1-5) for the team’s first countable contest of the season.
Alternate Player: a. A player not having entered the team lineup as an original player. (1) Alternate player names must be submitted on the team’s NCAA Dual Match Lineup Form, in the lower left section titled Alternates. (2) May compete at position 6, an exhibition match, which does not count for team’s overall score and without losing their alternate player status.
NOTE: For regulations governing team lineups and player(s) movement(s), reference the Team Lineups and Player Movement Regulations section.
Removed Player: a. An original player who is removed from the team lineup, for any reason; and/or, b. An alternate player who initially enters the team lineup in position 1-5, is then moved up one position or down one position, and is subsequently removed from the team lineup (see Player Movement Regulations section, 2.a. EXCEPTION).
Thus, an alternate player COULD become a removed player, but a removed player WILL NEVER become an alternate player.
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Apr 12, 2017 20:34:29 GMT -5
So many ways to abuse these rules, and it appears several have already been used.
Wonder whose brainchild this was.
|
|
|
Post by rainmaker on Apr 13, 2017 6:18:20 GMT -5
"Coaches are responsible to position their pairs (positions 1-5) in order of ability for ALL matches from the first match of the season to the last match of the season." That's the part everyone seems to forget about. Few coaches actually do this..
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 13, 2017 9:56:44 GMT -5
I don't see what the big deal
teams can move up or down 1 position only for a match - how is that sandbagging?
teams have to be able to adjust as the season goes on - forcing teams to be fixed in a slot is silly
there really is one sure scheme that eliminates any debate
have all five teams play one 15 point set against every opposing team, and tally up the total set wins - you simply can't sandbag against that system
will the 1's tend to clobber the 5's? sure, but then coaches can mix-up teammates as a strategy as well
|
|
|
Post by slackerdad on Apr 13, 2017 10:10:44 GMT -5
What do you think about expandeding a dual from 5 matches to 6 matches and then have the 1s match weighted such that the result would settle the tie-breaker? You can then let coaches set their teams and sandbag however they want.
Play the 4, 5 & 6 matches in the first flight (for facilities with 3 courts) and always have the 1s match start last and be in the last flight. This would allow for more dramatic finishes for fans/TV. Perhaps the NCAA doesn't want to place more emphasis on the 1s teams but it'd similar to the drama created with an "anchor leg" of a relay race or selecting your best scores in a soccer shootout.
I believe collegiate table tennis allows you to "sandbag" and set up your 5 teams how you choose and I believe they accept the "lineup-luck" as part of the competition.
Determining if sandbagging is occurring requires too much judgment. If participation in the sport continues to grow, there will be much more parity among players and less-need to try to create competitive match-ups.
|
|
|
Post by vboldschool on Apr 13, 2017 10:12:13 GMT -5
The fact that a coach can sandbag his lineup to his advantage is an indication that the format is wrong. It is inevitable that coaches will sandbag, and other coaches will get accused of sandbagging even when they aren't, and eventually, coaches who hate sandbaggers will start sandbagging, because "eveyone else is doing it". The format has to change. There are a lot of ways to fix the problem. One simple way would be to award winning the higher matches. For example:
Match 1 winner 10 points Match 2 winner 9 points Match 3 winner 7 points Match 4 winner 6 points Match 5 winner 5 points
With that scenario, whoever wins 3 out of 5 wins the match EXCEPT if they lose the top two, which would be a good indication of sandbagging.
|
|
|
Post by rainmaker on Apr 13, 2017 10:57:16 GMT -5
vboldschool: Love it!! I really like the idea of weighting the seeds
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Apr 13, 2017 12:33:06 GMT -5
I don't see what the big deal teams can move up or down 1 position only for a match - how is that sandbagging? teams have to be able to adjust as the season goes on - forcing teams to be fixed in a slot is silly there really is one sure scheme that eliminates any debate have all five teams play one 15 point set against every opposing team, and tally up the total set wins - you simply can't sandbag against that system will the 1's tend to clobber the 5's? sure, but then coaches can mix-up teammates as a strategy as well Teams can now do what Stetson did a few times early in the season, repeatedly. Put in your #6 pair at #2 (or #1) and move everyone down a spot. Then remove the #6 pair and repeat again with #7 pair. Repeat as much as you want. Or put back in top lineup if you prefer. Give up the top seed point and have an advantage at the lower 4 pairs.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Apr 13, 2017 13:54:55 GMT -5
The fact that a coach can sandbag his lineup to his advantage is an indication that the format is wrong. It is inevitable that coaches will sandbag, and other coaches will get accused of sandbagging even when they aren't, and eventually, coaches who hate sandbaggers will start sandbagging, because "eveyone else is doing it". The format has to change. There are a lot of ways to fix the problem. One simple way would be to award winning the higher matches. For example: Match 1 winner 10 points Match 2 winner 9 points Match 3 winner 7 points Match 4 winner 6 points Match 5 winner 5 points With that scenario, whoever wins 3 out of 5 wins the match EXCEPT if they lose the top two, which would be a good indication of sandbagging. Still have the problem of teams sliding everyone down a slot. No weighting will ever remove that option because there will always be cases where one of your 1 or 2 teams doesn't have a chance. Why any coach would ever let their top team play Claes/Hughes for example makes no sense from a winning perspective. Maybe some version of, if a team plays no. 1 and then moves down to 2, they must stay in that spot for a certain number of matches events etc. Really highlights how dumb it is to shoehorn bvb into a swim meet kind of format
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 13, 2017 21:41:29 GMT -5
The fact that a coach can sandbag his lineup to his advantage is an indication that the format is wrong. It is inevitable that coaches will sandbag, and other coaches will get accused of sandbagging even when they aren't, and eventually, coaches who hate sandbaggers will start sandbagging, because "eveyone else is doing it". The format has to change. There are a lot of ways to fix the problem. One simple way would be to award winning the higher matches. For example: Match 1 winner 10 points Match 2 winner 9 points Match 3 winner 7 points Match 4 winner 6 points Match 5 winner 5 points With that scenario, whoever wins 3 out of 5 wins the match EXCEPT if they lose the top two, which would be a good indication of sandbagging. no, no, no, no, no simply have all teams play all teams - then there is NO sandbagging.
|
|
|
Post by gobruins on Apr 14, 2017 4:20:16 GMT -5
I don't see what the big deal teams can move up or down 1 position only for a match - how is that sandbagging? teams have to be able to adjust as the season goes on - forcing teams to be fixed in a slot is silly there really is one sure scheme that eliminates any debate have all five teams play one 15 point set against every opposing team, and tally up the total set wins - you simply can't sandbag against that system will the 1's tend to clobber the 5's? sure, but then coaches can mix-up teammates as a strategy as well The problem with this is that, unless you have 5 courts, it will take 4-5 hours to play the match (assuming you have 3 courts). If you only have 2 courts, then, 6-7 hours.
|
|
|
Post by VolleyChick on Apr 14, 2017 4:53:56 GMT -5
Not a fan of sandbagging...
|
|
|
Post by beachbum96 on Apr 14, 2017 5:24:02 GMT -5
This sport is undergoing many growing pains and it’s only going to get worse. You have 70ish current programs with 50 more considering adding in the next couple years. Where is the talent going to come from? Where are the coaches going to come from? The junior ranks are growing too but not at this clip. Do you think if the NBA or MLB doubled in size through expansion, the quality of the play would remain? I think not. So how is the NCAA going to keep parity in the league through this growth spurt? There are enough 5-0; 4-1 matches now. Spread the talent out over another 50 schools….yikes! You can make the argument that the best players will still go to the best programs but I suspect there will be a few who will opt for a free education at one of the new schools knowing they will hop right into a top playing spot as a freshman rather than wait a year or two at a top 10 program. Going to add an interesting twist to recruiting.
So how does this relate to the “sandbagging” issue? As a spectator, I’m tired of watching these blow outs. I want close, down to the wire team matches. I just think it’s best for the sport, the players and the schools. Every match should be 3-2 no matter who is competing…..idealistic?? I think if the coaches have more leeway in moving teams around, this might happen. There might be more lopsided individual matches but I think the overall team matches would be closer. So how do you accomplish this?
How about taking a cue from the Ryder Cup Golf matches? We get rid of the term “seed” and replace it with “match.” Matches are set before play by the visiting coach putting their first match team (any team) on the board and the Home coach then getting to pick from any of his 5 teams to set Match 1. Then the Home team puts up a team for Match 2 and the Visiting coach gets to set their pair. This process alternates back and forth until all the matches are set adding a level of strategy to the game. The pool of teams can come from any combination of players on the team. Coaches will have to watch more film and know their competition better. If a match is a dual, then the order of picks is reversed for the second match.
I think the players would get better because they will be forced to play “up” probably a 3rd of the time. Top level players may not get as much competition, but it’s a team sport and the team matches will be better. It may help down the road with the dilution factor in the sport. It would get rid of all this petty bickering about team movement, add a new level of strategy and make the sport more exciting to watch when every meet comes down to that last match or two.
Just an idea……I could be wrong 😊
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Apr 14, 2017 9:21:22 GMT -5
I don't see what the big deal teams can move up or down 1 position only for a match - how is that sandbagging? teams have to be able to adjust as the season goes on - forcing teams to be fixed in a slot is silly there really is one sure scheme that eliminates any debate have all five teams play one 15 point set against every opposing team, and tally up the total set wins - you simply can't sandbag against that system will the 1's tend to clobber the 5's? sure, but then coaches can mix-up teammates as a strategy as well The problem with this is that, unless you have 5 courts, it will take 4-5 hours to play the match (assuming you have 3 courts). If you only have 2 courts, then, 6-7 hours. no, no, no each match is to 15 - 1 set everybody plays 5 sets - it won't take 4-5 hours
|
|