View Poll Results: do you like the new tournament policy??

**xubrew** · 09-29-2003, 10:10 PM

what do you guys think of the new change??

personally, i love it. for those that don't know, instead of having the west, midwest, east, and south regions, they are now being named after the site of where the regional finals are. for example, this year, the four regions are:

east rutherford, nj
atlanta, ga
st. louis, mo
phoenix, az

before, the four regions rotated every year as to who would match up in the final four, and it was not uncommon for the two highest ranked teams to be on the same side of the bracket and meet before the ncaa championship game. (ie, last year kentucky and arizona). whereas before no one seed was ever taken out of their geographic region simply to avoid a matchup with a certain team before the final, now the regions will just be paired up by the committee and not on a revolving schedule as it was before.

the pod system is still in affect for anyone that is seeded four or better.

**HKF** · 09-29-2003, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by xubrew!
what do you guys think of the new change??

personally, i love it. for those that don't know, instead of having the west, midwest, east, and south regions, they are now being named after the site of where the regional finals are. for example, this year, the four regions are:

east rutherford, nj
atlanta, ga
st. louis, mo
phoenix, az

before, the four regions rotated every year as to who would match up in the final four, and it was not uncommon for the two highest ranked teams to be on the same side of the bracket and meet before the ncaa championship game. (ie, last year kentucky and arizona). whereas before no one seed was ever taken out of their geographic region simply to avoid a matchup with a certain team before the final, now the regions will just be paired up by the committee and not on a revolving schedule as it was before.

the pod system is still in affect for anyone that is seeded four or better.

I wish the pod system didn't exist and they need to stop fooling with the brackets. Those are the breaks sometimes. I hate that the upsets are harder because it's like some teams need to play road games in the NCAA tournament. If you are not a 1 or 2 seed you should get no preference to where to play. NO PODS. I hate them.

**xubrew** · 09-29-2003, 11:09 PM

i don't know what i think of the pod system. it is obviously flawed. maybe we should start another poll.

i sort of like the concept, but if a team is lower in the power 105 than another team in their geographic region, but still earns a seed of four or better, they do not benefit from the pod system. the best example of this was dayton from last year. a four seed from ohio that played in the geographically inconvient place of spoakane washington.

i tend to agree with newmessiah. only the ones and twos should benefit. the pods should consist of eight teams instead of four jusst as they did before.

**HKF** · 09-29-2003, 11:16 PM

Last year Wisconsin Milwaukee got screwed in playing 5th seed Notre Dame in Indianapolis. I mean come on that is a home game for the 5th seed. Not cool.

Last year it should have been.

1. Oklahoma (Oklahoma City)
1. Kentucky (Indianapolis)
1. Texas (Oklahoma City)
1. Arizona (SLC)
2. Kansas (Birmingham)
2. Pittsburgh (Boston)
2. Wake Forest (Nashville, this was much closer than Tampa)
2. Florida (Tampa)

But I think they should just scrap the pods and let the brackets play out. I mean it is bad enough Duke and Carolina/Wake Forest will get to play in Raleigh this year for the first 2 rounds, but if they had a Regional in Charlotte they wouldn't have to leave the state.

The only teams that should be protected is the No. 1 seeds. And then from there it is fair game.

**kansasalumn** · 09-30-2003, 06:11 AM

last year was flawed. In the west It had KU, Arizona, and Duke. I rather see KU/Ariz Final 4 game instead of an Elite 8.

**xubrew** · 09-30-2003, 09:27 AM

i am encyclopedia of useless information!!

the system is flawed. last year when putting together my bracket, i had kansas as the #5 team on the s curve, which would make them the first #2 seed. however, this is why they got stuck in the same bracket as arizona.

No more than one team from the same conference may be seeded in the top four seeds of one region unless a conference has more than four teams seeded 1-4. Same applies for the bottom four seeds of a region.

seeing is that oklahoma was #4 on the s curve, they would be the 4th #1 seed. withouth this regulation, kansas and oklahoma would have been placed in the same region. however, because of this regulation, someone had to be moved. sorry kansasalum, but the one seed is going to win out. no big deal though, you guys had the last laugh.

we're gonna have fun with bracketology this year, aren't we??

**Cinco de Mayo** · 09-30-2003, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by xubrew!
what do you guys think of the new change??

personally, i love it. for those that don't know, instead of having the west, midwest, east, and south regions, they are now being named after the site of where the regional finals are. for example, this year, the four regions are:

east rutherford, nj
atlanta, ga
st. louis, mo
phoenix, az

before, the four regions rotated every year as to who would match up in the final four, and it was not uncommon for the two highest ranked teams to be on the same side of the bracket and meet before the ncaa championship game. (ie, last year kentucky and arizona). whereas before no one seed was ever taken out of their geographic region simply to avoid a matchup with a certain team before the final, now the regions will just be paired up by the committee and not on a revolving schedule as it was before.

the pod system is still in affect for anyone that is seeded four or better.

The pod system is one of the better ideas the committee has ever had -- however, it has been executed horrendously. I'm almost tempted to call a pod system an absolute failure, as it almost seems to cater to the larger school, instead of the lower seed.

Perfect example:
2002 - #6 Texas vs. #3 Mississippi State.

Now, if this pod system was the slightest bit fair, the game would have been played in Jackson, Mississippi, Birmingham, Alabama, or even Memphis. Mississippi State had a higher RPI, a better record, and won the SEC Championship.

Where was the game played, you ask?

Dallas, Texas. In American Airlines Stadium. I know because I was there. The lone maroon shirt in a sea of burnt orange. That was really fair...it was a home game for the Longhorns, and State lost by about 6 or 7, if I remember correctly.

The pod system can blow me for that alone.

**HKF** · 09-30-2003, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rawse!

The pod system is one of the better ideas the committee has ever had -- however, it has been executed horrendously. I'm almost tempted to call a pod system an absolute failure, as it almost seems to cater to the larger school, instead of the lower seed.

Perfect example:
2002 - #6 Texas vs. #3 Mississippi State.

Now, if this pod system was the slightest bit fair, the game would have been played in Jackson, Mississippi, Birmingham, Alabama, or even Memphis. Mississippi State had a higher RPI, a better record, and won the SEC Championship.

Where was the game played, you ask?

Dallas, Texas. In American Airlines Stadium. I know because I was there. The lone maroon shirt in a sea of burnt orange. That was really fair...it was a home game for the Longhorns, and State lost by about 6 or 7, if I remember correctly.

The pod system can blow me for that alone.

That's exactly why it needs to go. Highly flawed and never consistent to rewarding teams for good play.

**WKU Topper Jeff** · 09-30-2003, 12:03 PM

The Pod had good intentions, but failed, proven by several examples here already.

The thing that makes college basketball so great, especially the tournament, is that ANY team could rise up and win. Why? Partly is because these teams have a chance to play a big team on a nuteral floor. The NCAA is taking that away. It is doing everything it can do to protect the big dogs. Heck, put Duke in Arizona for a game against Murray State. We'll see who's the best. Too many teams get too good of a home floor advantage.

JuniorNoboa · 09-30-2003, 04:45 PM

The POD system had no good intentions. It was all about money, and the inability to sell out some huge venues in the first round.

That being said, SU deserved a #2 seed last year, but I willingly took the 3 seed, and the eastern regional in Albany.

**xubrew** · 09-30-2003, 05:56 PM

well, this was supposed to be a thread about the new policy regarding how the regions are paired up, but since we're on the pod system, i guess we should just go with that.

a couple of things:

the pod system was not the committee's idea. it was the ncaa's idea. i'm not so quick to jump on the fact that it was about money. in most cases, the arenas almost always sold out or nearly sold out AND all the revenue the ncaa makes from the tournament is made before it even starts. the commercial time is already sold to cbs MONTHS before the ncaa tournament is announced. the arenas have already put in their bids to host games. cbs has already paid for the rights to broadcast, etc. in other words, the ncaa makes all their money before the tournament starts and the ratings and attendance have no bearing on it. the only people that would make money off the new system would be the arenas, and they have NOTHING to do with any decisions made by the ncaa.

i think it was introduced for the following reason. at their annual convention, someone introduced it, it was reviewed and passed. thats it. now that they've done it for awhile i'd wish they'd go back to the way it was before. it was a good idea, but if the idea is to protect the higher seeds, i think being seeded that high should be enough protection.

View Poll Results: do you like the new tournament policy??

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes