|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Downtime Topic: NCAA Regions
Jeff Streu added to this discussion on March 28, 2022
|
After all the forfeits at the Big Ten tournament the Flowrestling Radio Live crew commented that it was being treated as a "qualifier tournament" rather than a conference tournament, and they suggested that moving to a regional format might eliminate some of the strategical forfeits and gamesmanship and hopefully create a better experience for fans watching.
Since the Wikipedia list of DI programs has a map it made it pretty easy to visualize what hypothetical regions might look like. Once new or transitioning programs Morgan State, Cal Baptist, Bellarmine, and Lindenwood are fully on board there should be exactly 80 programs, which would allow 4 regions of 20 teams, qualifying top 7 or 8 from each with potential for some at large spots.
Below is my proposal of what it could look like. The talent level in some regions is a little lopsided, but each region would have at least two top ten teams, plus every conference except the SoCon would be split into at least two regions. As an added bonus some rivalries would remain intact.
NE: Binghampton, Bloomsburg, Brown, Bucknell, Columbia, Cornell, Drexel, Franklin & Marshall, Harvard, Hofstra, Lehigh, LIU, Lock Haven, Penn, PSU, Princeton, Rider, Rutgers, Sacred Heart, Army
SE: American, Appalachian State, Campbell, Citadel, Davidson, Duke, Gardner-Webb, George Mason, Little Rock, Maryland, NC State, UNC, Presbyterian, Chattanooga, Navy, Virginia, VMI, VTech, WVU, Morgan State
Central: Buffalo, CMU, Clarion, CSU, Edinboro, Illinois, Indiana, KSU, Michigan, MSU, NIU, Northwestern, OU, tOSU, Pitt, Purdue, SIUE, Wisconsin, Bellarmine, Lindenwood
West: ASU, Cal Poly, Cal Bakersfield, Iowa, ISU, Minnesota, Mizzou, Nebraska, NDSU, Northern Colorado, UNI, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Oregon State, SDSU, Stanford, Air Force, Utah Valley, Wyoming, Cal Baptist
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Downtime Topic: NCAA Regions
Brian Mathews added to this discussion on March 28, 2022
|
Would it not be a better solution to just count MFFs as losses for seeding purposes?
Going to a regional setup doesn't fix the classic semis-to-6th MFF, or all of the MFFs we saw at Big 10's this year in medal matches. If you remove the history from the tournament, there's even less incentive for guys to continue competing once they've qualified.
As far as four regionals go, I think your proposed split is pretty solid. If we're truly trying to be equitable though, it should probably be based on team ranking rather than geography.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Downtime Topic: NCAA Regions
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on March 28, 2022
|
Good stab at it Jeff. But if you do it regionally, too many power schools compete against each other. You'd have to seed and split up the top 15-20 programs.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Downtime Topic: NCAA Regions
William Danforth added to this discussion on March 28, 2022
|
Nice attempt to even out the top teams. SE looks just a little weaker at present.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Downtime Topic: NCAA Regions
Jeff Streu added to this discussion on March 28, 2022
|
I agree with each of your responses. The talent just isn't even close to evenly distributed geographically no matter how you slice it, and wholesale changes are needed to how MFF's are treated for seeding (and ducking a dual for that matter).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
