|
Post by murphy7 on Feb 1, 2011 14:13:05 GMT -6
Bascially this is my thought for regionals...
Sometime in late February, or March each region hosts a regional tournament. The winner receives an automatic bid to the National tournament.
That makes four teams automatic qualifiers to nationals. Then to get the next four (if you want an 8 team nationals) you take the next four highest teams based on our current points system format.
With 8 teams you have an easy tournament to run, and you don't have to worry about teams dropping out at the last minute and ruining a tournament directors schedule the week of the tournament.
This gives everyone a fair chance to make nationals. And it makes nationals a much more balanced tournament, instead of having a few good teams beat up on a few bad teams. A team like Northwestern State, who has been unable to play any games this year, knows they have to win regionals to make it, but at least they have a chance. And if they don't win that regional, then they wouldn't be able to win nationals anyway.
If I missed any schools, they can just be put into whatever region makes sense. But I think I got most "active" schools. The North regional is by far the most difficult, but we basically already have a regional tournament (the Michigan Dodgeball Cup). If anyone can think of a better way to do regionals, lets hear your thoughts.
North Regional Saginaw Valley State University Central Michigan State University Eastern Michigan University Michigan State University Grand Valley State University
Midwest Region Depaul University Moody Bible Western Illinois Wisconsin Platteville Nebraska-Ohmaha Kansas State
South Regional Ohio State Miami-Ohio Kent State Bowling Green
Appellation Region University of Kentucky Louisville Western Kentucky Northwestern State
|
|
|
Post by murphy7 on Feb 1, 2011 15:03:21 GMT -6
Lol outvoted 3-1 already and I've been smitted twice. The truth hurts I guess.
|
|
|
Post by WKU-Perrone-76 on Feb 1, 2011 15:22:43 GMT -6
I don't think we are big enough to support the whole regional idea yet, maybe in a few years. I think right now the whole point of Nationals is to just give everyone a chance to play against teams they wouldn't usually get the chance to play. This is more about the whole league coming together to play the game we love rather than to crown a champion. Just my thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Zigmister on Feb 1, 2011 16:17:45 GMT -6
Keep nationals as many teams as possible: the next year school with eyes on nationals should be able to hold more than 16 teams. And if the host is looking for an easy tournament to run, Nationals as a tournament and legacy will degrade with that mindset.
Or you could lower the amount of players on a team to lower total costs.
The Object of Nationals is to win? How many teams going this year want to bag the thing? I'd gather just a quarter are going for the win, others are going to celebrate the greatness that is dodgeball and play well with others.
If teams are forced to have their biggest and most anticipated event be a regional event, both the regional and national experiences will suffer. More dodgeball whenever possible.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Feb 1, 2011 16:24:20 GMT -6
I agree that we need Regionals, however, I don't agree with the way Nationals would be run then.
I think you do Regionals and that determines day 2 of Nationals. Day 1 of Nationals would be strictly for fun and playing other teams. So, for those who want to just go there to play and have fun can do that. Then on day 2 the teams can compete for top dog.
|
|
|
Post by Dugans-20-EMU-C on Feb 1, 2011 21:05:08 GMT -6
^^^^^^ not to fond of that idea either Mike. While i understand what your saying it really defeats the point of driving all that way for "Nationals". Maybe if a regional thing happened it could be the top 4 teams receive a 1st round bye while the other 12 fight to try and earn their way along or something, but based on the regions somebody in the michigan region will be completely screwed if we only took 2 teams from each region. I know EMU is not the best team in the region, but a team like MSU would be left out just based on the fact we play the top teams over and over again...
I understand most college sports run this way, however they see each other a max of 2 times a year unlike us. We can play the same team 5+ times and if it is GVSU, or SVSU, or CMU then it could be 0-5 just to that one team alone. In my head it makes sense, but i don't know if i'm typing it out correctly.
|
|
|
Post by KFitz on Feb 1, 2011 22:44:39 GMT -6
Although I understand the clarity that regional’s would bring, as far as competitiveness and scheduling fairness goes, I personally think it's an awful idea. Maybe someday, long after I'm gone, when the league is larger and more unified on its purpose.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Feb 2, 2011 2:40:19 GMT -6
Dugans, I was saying everyone goes to Nationals. I don't want to leave anyone out, that's why I didn't like the Nationals idea Murphy had. I was just saying that we could have regionals and the would determine Day 2 seedings of Nationals. However, Day 1 would go based on your record in the regular season. That way we all still got to play teams we don't normally get to play and teams can still have fun, and Day 2 still has it's competitive edge for the Nationals Championship.
|
|
|
Post by willhack on Feb 2, 2011 13:50:35 GMT -6
Regionals are a good idea. But the league isn't big enough for them yet.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Feb 3, 2011 0:38:47 GMT -6
Can anyone give a reason as to why the league isn't big enough? What are we considering "big?" I mean people say the league isn't big enough yet no one has given a reason as to why.
|
|
|
Post by hiller 87 on Feb 3, 2011 8:46:43 GMT -6
I think the argument "we're not big enough" is going against murphy's plan for regionals, because we're probably going to have only 16 or 17 teams that turn in the dues for nationals this year, so we might as well keep it the way it is.
I'd say when we hit the 24 or 30 mark, then we can think about regionals.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Feb 3, 2011 8:53:05 GMT -6
I understand it's against Murphy's Regionals, but why are we not big enough now? He provided a great example of what Regionals could be. I don't agree with his Nationals plan, but at least the Regionals idea would make everyone have set games they need to play. It also would give us a good way to rank teams for Nationals.
|
|
|
Post by hiller 87 on Feb 3, 2011 9:01:52 GMT -6
I agree that we should have the regional-type matches (like the MDC, ODC, etc.) but I don't think that at this point they should affect Nationals. As long as we can bring nearly everyone to Nationals, we shouldn't be excluding teams at all, even if they get a chance at regionals to make it to Nationals. When we get to the point where we'd need 8 courts to play all of our games, or when it'd take us 3 or 4 days to determine a winner, then I'd say regionals need to happen. But at this point, I don't think we should have them. More dodgeball is always better. That's why I think we should have the regionals (just turn the KDC to the Southern Dodgeball Cup or something, make a Midwest Dodgeball Cup for that "region") but there shouldn't be a factor on excluding teams for Nationals unless we really need to exclude teams.
Your plan I like, but I'd be fine with the way it is now too. Either way could work for me.
|
|
|
Post by murphy7 on Feb 3, 2011 10:34:41 GMT -6
I understand that not everyone agrees with this, I wouldn't expect that. I can see how you think we are too small for regionals right now, but at the same time you have to be prepared for the future once it gets here.
|
|
|
Post by mccarthy55cmu on Feb 3, 2011 12:26:30 GMT -6
Yeah Hiller, I totally agree, I want to include everyone at Nationals. All i was saying was that Regionals would deteremine the seeding at Nationals. Every team would still be going to Nationals, Regionals would just determine the seeding. Personally I think we need to add another day, but no one agrees with me on that. lol
|
|