This year the Sun Belt is using the Pool format, pitting the 8 tournament-eligible teams into two pools of four. The two teams that have the best records against the other three teams in their pool advance to the championship. Tiebreakers here can be an issue if three teams are tied. This is a change from the double-elimination format that we are all familiar with. Which is your preference?

I do like the 2 pools better, but don't care for the tie rule where the highest seeded team moves ahead, this is the sunbelt and anyone can beat anyone which can leave many ties to be decided this way.

But I'll take it for now.

GO OWLS- BEAT TROY!

It's too early to make an assessment. The two pool format was implemented to try to keep our teams fresh as they move on to regionals. Too many times our teams have limped out of the Sun Belt tournament only to be pounded by the likes of Dartmouth.

I voted for the two pool only for the fact that something needed to be done.

I like the pools. Everyone plays 3, and if you win out you're only playing 4 games. And it rewards the regular season performance in case of ties, since baseball is a weird game and you could have an odd loss to a worse team and be out of it otherwise.

(05-26-2011 09:45 AM)RDA Trojan Wrote:  I like the pools. Everyone plays 3, and if you win out you're only playing 4 games. And it rewards the regular season performance in case of ties, since baseball is a weird game and you could have an odd loss to a worse team and be out of it otherwise.

I still hate it

Fact is that alot of leagues are GOING AWAY from this format now. Big12 tried it for a few years and gave up when fans stopped coming to the games. the SEC which probably has the biggest reason to use such a format absolutely refuses to even consider it.

In fact only the ACC and CUSA still use the format now.

I think it definitely takes a lot of the excitement out of the tourney.

(05-26-2011 12:03 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-26-2011 09:45 AM)RDA Trojan Wrote:  I like the pools. Everyone plays 3, and if you win out you're only playing 4 games. And it rewards the regular season performance in case of ties, since baseball is a weird game and you could have an odd loss to a worse team and be out of it otherwise.

I still hate it
Fact is that alot of leagues are GOING AWAY from this format now. Big12 tried it for a few years and gave up when fans stopped coming to the games. the SEC which probably has the biggest reason to use such a format absolutely refuses to even consider it.
In fact only the ACC and CUSA still use the format now.

How is the CWS formatted? I know for a long time it was pool play with a one game championship; not sure if they've changed it or* not. I know regionals are double-elimination where the most games you can play is 4, however, with 8 teams, you can play as many as 6 to win the title. That's a lot of games to play over a long week-end.

(05-26-2011 04:50 PM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(05-26-2011 12:03 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-26-2011 09:45 AM)RDA Trojan Wrote:  I like the pools. Everyone plays 3, and if you win out you're only playing 4 games. And it rewards the regular season performance in case of ties, since baseball is a weird game and you could have an odd loss to a worse team and be out of it otherwise.

I still hate it
Fact is that alot of leagues are GOING AWAY from this format now. Big12 tried it for a few years and gave up when fans stopped coming to the games. the SEC which probably has the biggest reason to use such a format absolutely refuses to even consider it.
In fact only the ACC and CUSA still use the format now.

How is the CWS formatted? I know for a long time it was pool play with a one game championship; not sure if they've changed it or* not. I know regionals are double-elimination where the most games you can play is 4, however, with 8 teams, you can play as many as 6 to win the title. That's a lot of games to play over a long week-end.

CWS is 2 4 team double elimination Pools. (Regional Format) With the winners playing a Best of 3 Series for the national title

Heck Even Little Leage abandoned Pool Play

I like how the $EC does it. Don't they do a flip and move some teams around. What exactly do they do (if anyone knows) ?

(05-26-2011 09:24 PM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  I like how the $EC does it. Don't they do a flip and move some teams around. What exactly do they do (if anyone knows) ?

Double Elimination. After 2 days the two teams that are 2-0 Flip brackets to avoid teams playing each other 3 times in 4 days

Those 2-0 teams would play the losers bracket winner of the opposite pool, and would need to lose to that team twice to be eliminated. Winners play in the winner take all Final .

Considering almost every year all 8 SEC Tourney teams will make the NCAA tourney (This year is an exception) One would think it would make sense to go to Pool play. But coaches players and especially fans in the league hate it, and as long as 11,000 people go out to watch its not changing

We are staring straight at UALR clinching a Title game berth on Flippin Thursday...The halfway point of the tournament. It kills the drama

(05-26-2011 10:37 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-26-2011 09:24 PM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  I like how the $EC does it. Don't they do a flip and move some teams around. What exactly do they do (if anyone knows) ?

Double Elimination. After 2 days the two teams that are 2-0 Flip brackets to avoid teams playing each other 3 times in 4 days

Those 2-0 teams would play the losers bracket winner of the opposite pool, and would need to lose to that team twice to be eliminated. Winners play in the winner take all Final .

Considering almost every year all 8 SEC Tourney teams will make the NCAA tourney (This year is an exception) One would think it would make sense to go to Pool play. But coaches players and especially fans in the league hate it, and as long as 11,000 people go out to watch its not changing

We are staring straight at UALR clinching a Title game berth on Flippin Thursday...The halfway point of the tournament. It kills the drama

Yep. Pretty sh*tty. Hopefully the SBC will change it back next year.

agreed. There are better ways of saving pitching. Its not fair to any of the fans that they are going to watch meaningless baseball for 2 days, and its really not fair to UALR that they have to play a game on Saturday against FAU, knowing win or lose, they still play for the title Sunday

Well, i understand some of your views, but being a regular visitor to SBC Conf. Tourneys for 25 years,
I kind of like the new format. First, it guarantees each team 3 games, which is good for Fans, but if there are no fans there, i guess it doesn't make much difference. Second, I've seen teams spend an awfully lot of energy in the past working their way through loser brackets. Not a good time of year
to have to do that if you plan on making a NCAA Regional.
Third, by keeping teams around longer, host teams can help pay the bills, we all know that $$
is important ..
Now there always have been those who think that the teams who have the best regular season
record, should have a little edge, so that tie -breaker system is just fine.
What it boils down to is , on any given year, one format would work better than the other ,depending
on where your team stands. So, we have to look at the overall advantages.
I think it is Fair, so i do support the new format..

If there aren't at least four NCAA Tournament wins the fresher for the tournament argument is totally blown up. Last year we had three wins and six losses.

(05-31-2011 10:04 AM)CajunFan8301 Wrote:  Well, i understand some of your views, but being a regular visitor to SBC Conf. Tourneys for 25 years,
I kind of like the new format. First, it guarantees each team 3 games, which is good for Fans, but if there are no fans there, i guess it doesn't make much difference. Second, I've seen teams spend an awfully lot of energy in the past working their way through loser brackets. Not a good time of year
to have to do that if you plan on making a NCAA Regional.
Third, by keeping teams around longer, host teams can help pay the bills, we all know that $$
is important ..
Now there always have been those who think that the teams who have the best regular season
record, should have a little edge, so that tie -breaker system is just fine.
What it boils down to is , on any given year, one format would work better than the other ,depending
on where your team stands. So, we have to look at the overall advantages.
I think it is Fair, so i do support the new format..

I agree with you. This is the first year the format has been tried and we have three teams in NCAA Regionals. The format is set up just like a series, coaches know the times they are going to play and can set their rotations.

(05-31-2011 10:16 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  If there aren't at least four NCAA Tournament wins the fresher for the tournament argument is totally blown up. Last year we had three wins and six losses.

I disagree with that statement. First, how many blown arms did you have in this years tournament? I don't expect to see any during the regionals as well because kids weren't pushed to high pitch counts in a double elimination tournament. Second, how many 9:00am games were played in this years tournament?

I find both to be ridicules extremes in a double elimination format. If someone can find a way to address those concerns and play the old format, I might be willing to listen. I haven't seen it yet.

The argument was that we come into the NCAA tournament ragged and limiting to four games was to prevent that. If there is no demonstrable benefit from the change then the argument has an obvious problem.

It would be helpful to see how many innings pitched per pitcher last year's championship game participants had in the Sun Belt Tournament vs. this year.

There is no question that we got a lot less wear and tear on our staff this year. Last year our #1 pitched in 3 different games (2 starts and a relief appearance during the championship game) during the tournament, that wasn't a problem this year. I agree that it's a better format to keep your staff fresh.

As FIU Panther Fan stated, there is no comparison in terms of how many innings our top pitcher(s) threw this time around as compared to last season. Scott Rembisz, our #1 pitcher last season, pitched in 3 games last tournament. This year, no starting pitcher had to pitch more than 7 innings in the whole tournament. There's a huge difference there. Now, will that transfer into wins in Regionals? Of course nobody knows, and it's impossible to compare one year to the other in that context.

(05-31-2011 11:44 AM)FIUFanatic Wrote:  As FIU Panther Fan stated, there is no comparison in terms of how many innings our top pitcher(s) threw this time around as compared to last season. Scott Rembisz, our #1 pitcher last season, pitched in 3 games last tournament. This year, no starting pitcher had to pitch more than 7 innings in the whole tournament. There's a huge difference there. Now, will that transfer into wins in Regionals? Of course nobody knows, and it's impossible to compare one year to the other in that context.

the thing is, alot of the overwork problems we have in the tourney are because coaches choose to do that to their pitchers.

Ive always wondered why our teams every year that have already clinched at large bids are overworking pitchers, when in reality for them the tournament is meaningless

Ive watched both the SEC and Big 12 tourneys for years and never onc eseen a team overwork a staff. The only ones who even tried to were the ones who had to win the tourney to make the NCAA"s. And if you are in that situation, you deserve to overwork your staff.