This stupid bracket!
- Thread starter GOODDAWG
- Start date
you really cannot argue b/c the rebuttal is "you should've played better and you wouldn't be in this position"
I like it except for the fact that the SEC has so many multi team ties that sometimes a crazy tiebreak can give a team an edge. But that didn't happen here. We finished 2 games behind KY.
I like it except for the fact that the SEC has so many multi team ties that sometimes a crazy tiebreak can give a team an edge. But that didn't happen here. We finished 2 games behind KY.
Arkansas or Vandy had gotten this kind of advantage over us due to getting a higher seed over the stupid *** tiebreakers, I don't have a problem with the teams getting an advantage over us that actually finished with a better SEC record like KY did. Hopefully WE will be one of the ones with a high seed next year.
The fact that a team is rewarded for a good regular season is not what sucks here. The design of the bracket sucks. The opening post here almost said it correctly: "It's possibly the worst set-up I've ever seen."
It's not <span style="font-style: italic;">probably </span>the worst set-up I've ever seen. It is with out a doubt the worst bracket I've ever seen drawn out in any sport.
It's not <span style="font-style: italic;">probably </span>the worst set-up I've ever seen. It is with out a doubt the worst bracket I've ever seen drawn out in any sport.
..this current format is nothing but an accolades ceremony for the higher seeded teams.
UK getting 2 byes & then one single-elimination game to reach the championship game while everybody else is forced to grind it out & wear out arms...it is stupid. Very stupid.
UK getting 2 byes & then one single-elimination game to reach the championship game while everybody else is forced to grind it out & wear out arms...it is stupid. Very stupid.
we beat Kentucky Saturday and eliminate them on their first loss, while we also have one.<div>
</div><div>The only real option is to go to take all 14 (soon to be 16?) teams and just do single elimination. It would kinda suck too, but at least it would be exciting and unpredictable.</div>
</div><div>The only real option is to go to take all 14 (soon to be 16?) teams and just do single elimination. It would kinda suck too, but at least it would be exciting and unpredictable.</div>
How hard would that have been. Two top teams in each division gets a 1st round bye game and they play the winner of the each sides play in game 11 vs 12 and 9 versus 10. Works out perfectly in single elimination. <div>QuaoarsKing said:
</div><div>Why didn't the just leave it to 8 teams this year, single elimination until the finals, then best of 3.</div><div>
</div><div>The random lowest seed other than the number 1 like kentucky had a huge advantage this year.</div>
Go back to the 8 team format from the recent past. I don't see the reason to increase the field simply because we added 2 more teams to the Conference. If you're not good enough to finish in the Top 8, you can sit your *** at home.
that format means OM is sitting home from ANY postseason play for the second year in a row don't you? They would have missed the SEC tourney this season, while also missing regionals. Instead, they get to play in both.
The NCAA last took an SEC team that didn't make the conference tourney in 2008, and they made a statement last year when they left home a (VERY deserving) LSU team for missing the SEC tourney.
I hate the format this year as much as anyone, but going back to 8 teams is NOT the answer with 2 more good baseball programs coming in, one of which is a powerhouse. With the 14 teams we'll have, getting 9 should be COMMONPLACE, and 10 should be attainable.
The NCAA last took an SEC team that didn't make the conference tourney in 2008, and they made a statement last year when they left home a (VERY deserving) LSU team for missing the SEC tourney.
I hate the format this year as much as anyone, but going back to 8 teams is NOT the answer with 2 more good baseball programs coming in, one of which is a powerhouse. With the 14 teams we'll have, getting 9 should be COMMONPLACE, and 10 should be attainable.
to approximately match the number of "bubble" teams for the NCAA tournament. It's about maximizing returns. So, you give those that are close a chance to secure a bid, plus removing the NCAA "don't-make-your-conf-tourney" roadblock.
What you do not want to do is bring in teams with NO chance of making the NCAA's, and putting them in a situation to hand "bad losses" to your bubble teams, potential host teams, etc... In that case, you've got NOTHING to gain and alot to lose.
What you do not want to do is bring in teams with NO chance of making the NCAA's, and putting them in a situation to hand "bad losses" to your bubble teams, potential host teams, etc... In that case, you've got NOTHING to gain and alot to lose.
They got their first bye because of their regular season and the second because they're the only undefeated team left in our bracket. I like the new 10-team format. It does a good job of expanding the tournament without putting any more pressure on pitching staffs. If we'd had this format last year, LSU probably would have made the NCAA tournament.
I don't know how you could set up a 10-team bracket any better than the SEC did though. I think it was a pretty genius move. They found a way to add 2 teams to the tournament without increasing the number of games that any team would play. Personally, I'd just as soon take everyone and play a single-elimination tournment, but this is a very good alternative.
I know it's not cut and dry, and we probably have to face Gausman. But still I like our chances with Stratton. The winner of that KY/LSU game would provide us an advantage. KY- uses the pitcher that shut us down. LSU- this tournament means nothing to them. So we win in the semis.
Therefore in a perfect world if Ole Miss beats Kentucky we're in the SEC Championship Game and hosting a regional. 17 Ole Miss!!!
Therefore in a perfect world if Ole Miss beats Kentucky we're in the SEC Championship Game and hosting a regional. 17 Ole Miss!!!
except that those bottom 4 teams are the ones with the most to gain by being there in the first place. You don't want to diminish their chances of increasing their stock while in Hoover, so IMO you want them getting two chances.
The preferential way to treat it for me, is as a true double elimination tournament... Without breaking it down into "regional" format as we have in the past. I simply HATE the way this tournament ends, with one-loss teams knocking out undefeated teams. If we're going to do the tournament at all, I would like it to be "fair" throughout. And it really hasn't been under the current format...
I'm going to play with some brackets and see what I like...
The preferential way to treat it for me, is as a true double elimination tournament... Without breaking it down into "regional" format as we have in the past. I simply HATE the way this tournament ends, with one-loss teams knocking out undefeated teams. If we're going to do the tournament at all, I would like it to be "fair" throughout. And it really hasn't been under the current format...
I'm going to play with some brackets and see what I like...
In that is starts as double elimination and becomes single elimination on Saturday.<div>
</div><div>If we beat LSU today and beat Kentucky tomorrow, Kentucky's out with only 1 loss. That's not fair. Yes, it's been like that in the finals for a while now, but it's still not fair.</div><div>
</div><div>The only ways to fix this are:</div><div>- Go back to 8 teams and keep it double elimination (but that will probably eliminate deserving teams from Regional consideration)</div><div>- Take everyone and do single elimination (kinda lame because baseball isn't built that way, but it is fair)</div><div>- Some kind of pool play like the ACC and Big 12 do (not very interesting, but fair)</div>
</div><div>If we beat LSU today and beat Kentucky tomorrow, Kentucky's out with only 1 loss. That's not fair. Yes, it's been like that in the finals for a while now, but it's still not fair.</div><div>
</div><div>The only ways to fix this are:</div><div>- Go back to 8 teams and keep it double elimination (but that will probably eliminate deserving teams from Regional consideration)</div><div>- Take everyone and do single elimination (kinda lame because baseball isn't built that way, but it is fair)</div><div>- Some kind of pool play like the ACC and Big 12 do (not very interesting, but fair)</div>
The only teams who were given byes were LSU and South Carolina.
Kentucky's regular season finish put them in a position to have a better chance to get their first bye. But they still had to win their first game. And people complaining about it being unfair for us aren't mentioning the fact that we had our chance to beat Kentucky to get a bye. But they won, so they took it. Once we reached that game, both teams had a chance to earn the Friday bye.
That said, I wouldn't have done it this way. I would have had two brackets that look like this. You could still play it Tuesday thru Sunday. You could still have true double elimination until the final. There would potentially only be 2 more games than the current format. Teams would only potentially play twice in one day in the "if necessary" games (in the Saturday semis, if a team that lost previously beat the team that hasn't lost). Not to mention it's not as confusing.
Kentucky's regular season finish put them in a position to have a better chance to get their first bye. But they still had to win their first game. And people complaining about it being unfair for us aren't mentioning the fact that we had our chance to beat Kentucky to get a bye. But they won, so they took it. Once we reached that game, both teams had a chance to earn the Friday bye.
That said, I wouldn't have done it this way. I would have had two brackets that look like this. You could still play it Tuesday thru Sunday. You could still have true double elimination until the final. There would potentially only be 2 more games than the current format. Teams would only potentially play twice in one day in the "if necessary" games (in the Saturday semis, if a team that lost previously beat the team that hasn't lost). Not to mention it's not as confusing.
While I wouldn't have any problems with your suggestion...
Doing it your way (win or go home first game for 7-10 followed by the usual format for 8 teams) would be at least 15 games and at most 17 games.
Playing it out with 2 brackets of 5 teams in "true" double-elimination followed by a single championship game would be at least 17 games and at most 19 games.
The current format has a guaranteed 17 games and it switches to single elimination for the semis and it has some odd "byes" thrown in.
Any of the above would still take 6 days to play. The only one that avoids the possibility of teams playing 2 games in a day is the current format. I bet that's why they did it.
Doing it your way (win or go home first game for 7-10 followed by the usual format for 8 teams) would be at least 15 games and at most 17 games.
Playing it out with 2 brackets of 5 teams in "true" double-elimination followed by a single championship game would be at least 17 games and at most 19 games.
The current format has a guaranteed 17 games and it switches to single elimination for the semis and it has some odd "byes" thrown in.
Any of the above would still take 6 days to play. The only one that avoids the possibility of teams playing 2 games in a day is the current format. I bet that's why they did it.
In fact, it's a little better. Under the old format you could play a max of 6 games in 5 days. With this format you can play a max of 6 games in 6 days. I didn't say it wasn't tough on a pitching staff. It is. It's just that it's not any tougher than the old format was. Which again brings me back to my real preference which is to make the baseball tournament just like the basketball tournament is. Everyone qualifies for a single-elimination tournament. No one would have to play more than 4 games.
Your format may be fewer games overall, but it wouldn't be any fewer games for any 1 team. The top 6 seeds could play a max of 6 games under your format, but the bottom 4 could play 7. I like the current format where the top 2 seed can play a max of 5 games and everyone else can play a max of 6.</p>