Video: Should Division II Overhaul the Playoff System? - with Mike Racy

[EastStroud13]

You're conflating the desires here. The goal is to get more competitive match ups later in the tournament, reduce regular season rematches in R1 while also reducing flights in the first two rounds. This method is used in FCS, and wouldn't call it re inventing the wheel, but stealing something that has a higher probability of producing the best teams in the country to meet in the semi-finals or finals, not R1 or R2. Doing this I think would also make a better product for the spectator. Playoffs aren't there to get peculiar match ups, but it is an un-intended feature of this method.

I think we can all agree that as a product, watching the two semi finals and Champ game was really not very entertaining, and Ferris basically coasted to a Championship after their GV game.

• Get more competitive matchups later in the tournament - Do you mean quarterfinals or semifinals? Either way, what is the need to mess with the second round?
• Reduce regular season rematches in R1 - I have no problem with this goal. It does not need to significantly impact the second round.
• Reducing flights in the first two rounds - Does the system introducing cross-country flights do this to a significant degree? Or does it simply change where the flights happen? If it's the latter, then what's the need?

I am fundamentally against applying the FCS system in D2, I think there are fundamental flaws in trying to apply a national-scale bracket format to a division that is predominantly regionalized. I also don't think it actually provides a significant improvement over what smaller changes would provide. Again: as long as each quadrant has a top-4 team, you have to be that team or beat that team (transitively, at least) in order to reach the semi-finals. It should filter out all the pretenders from the final four. Everything else is musical chairs.

[Brandon]

I'll be honest, one of my biggest worries is losing some of those playoff rivalries. Some are friendly, and some aren't, but there are some teams in the region that I look forward to seeing in the playoffs. Obviously, that shouldn't be a reason not to change things, but it would be nice to at least keep a little of that.

This is a good post.

[GorillaTeacher]

My argument is that it really isn't a major improvement for either. Only the most diehard of D2 fans want to see their team play a random team from across the country in the second round. The subset of fans that are on this board are not representative.

The second round is not currently the main problem. The problem is the semifinals and finals. So, relax the regional rigidity, allow some weaker teams to make runs to the quarterfinals, but to get to the finals you have to either beat a top-4 team, or beat a team that managed to defeat them. There's no need to reinvent the wheel here.

You're conflating the desires here. The goal is to get more competitive match ups later in the tournament, reduce regular season rematches in R1 while also reducing flights in the first two rounds. This method is used in FCS, and wouldn't call it re inventing the wheel, but stealing something that has a higher probability of producing the best teams in the country to meet in the semi-finals or finals, not R1 or R2. Doing this I think would also make a better product for the spectator. Playoffs aren't there to get peculiar match ups, but it is an un-intended feature of this method.

I think we can all agree that as a product, watching the two semi finals and Champ game was really not very entertaining, and Ferris basically coasted to a Championship after their GV game.

[KleShreen]

I only care about one school.

Do you not say you don’t trust everything and like to question. Well I don’t trust any fix that I know is going to slant towards a few schools and I’m questioning those who want this to prove me wrong.

How is it "slanted towards a few schools" when your school could be doing the exact same thing? Schedule good non-conference opponents. It's really straightforward. That's literally all the "few schools" are doing. Schedule good opponents, win all your games.

[EastStroud13]

The flights aren't punished. The NCAA covers travel expenses for the teams in the tournament. It makes no difference where the flights happen. We need to expect they will happen, and reduce the number in the first two rounds. We are advocating this can be done while getting a bracket that is better for the athletes and the spectators.

My argument is that it really isn't a major improvement for either. Only the most diehard of D2 fans want to see their team play a random team from across the country in the second round. The subset of fans that are on this board are not representative.

The second round is not currently the main problem. The problem is the semifinals and finals. So, relax the regional rigidity, allow some weaker teams to make runs to the quarterfinals, but to get to the finals you have to either beat a top-4 team, or beat a team that managed to defeat them. There's no need to reinvent the wheel here.

[Ram Tough]

I'll be honest, one of my biggest worries is losing some of those playoff rivalries. Some are friendly, and some aren't, but there are some teams in the region that I look forward to seeing in the playoffs. Obviously, that shouldn't be a reason not to change things, but it would be nice to at least keep a little of that.

[GorillaTeacher]

I guess it doesn't really make a difference who's making the flights, but if cross country flights are already guaranteed in one region, why spread that out to other regions? Flights are part of the equation when you exist as a program in a spread-out area. Why "punish" other programs just because they have multiple options that do not require a flight? This isn't D1.

The flights aren't punishment. The NCAA covers travel expenses for the teams in the tournament. It makes no difference where the flights happen. We need to expect they will happen, and reduce the number in the first two rounds. We are advocating this can be done while getting a bracket that is better for the athletes and the spectators.

[IUPNation]

There is a difference between advocating for your conference members in good faith, and shouting the loudest and asinine solutions that are clearly one-sided in their benefit. Most commissioners are representing organizations that are competitive in nature, and usually have the idea that they want a fair shot, not an advantage.

Wel none of you have proven that any fix will not slant the field more…

[IUPNation]

It's not good practice. It's boring. They won't go on nonsensical tangents and focus only on one school.

I only care about one school.

Do you not say you don’t trust everything and like to question. Well I don’t trust any fix that I know is going to slant towards a few schools and I’m questioning those who want this to prove me wrong.

[EastStroud13]

Cross country flights are darn near guaranteed already in R2, what difference does it make who is making the flights? Why should it be any different for SR1?

I guess it doesn't really make a difference who's making the flights, but if cross country flights are already guaranteed in one region, why spread that out to other regions? Flights are part of the equation when you exist as a program in a spread-out area. Why "punish" other programs just because they have multiple options that do not require a flight? This isn't D1.

[GorillaTeacher]

Yes I am biased as is everyone in the world. The difference is who admits to it. I own my hypocrisy too.

Imagine what commissioners from the conferences who are going to get the short end of the stick if regions go away and their members barely see a home playoff game past round one…

Consider me good practice to deal with that…

There is a difference between advocating for your conference members in good faith, and shouting the loudest and asinine solutions that are clearly one-sided in their benefit. Most commissioners are representing organizations that are competitive in nature, and usually have the idea that they want a fair shot, not an advantage.

[Brandon]

Yes I am biased as is everyone in the world. The difference is who admits to it. I own my hypocrisy too.

Imagine what commissioners from the conferences who are going to get the short end of the stick if regions go away and their members barely see a home playoff game past round one…

Consider me good practice to deal with that…

It's not good practice. It's boring. They won't go on nonsensical tangents and focus only on one school.

[IUPNation]

Then you're biased. Everyone else appears to be trying to find solutions in good faith.

Yes I am biased as is everyone in the world. The difference is who admits to it. I own my hypocrisy too.

Imagine what commissioners from the conferences who are going to get the short end of the stick if regions go away and their members barely see a home playoff game past round one…

Consider me good practice to deal with that…

[IUPNation]

They lost to West Florida.

..and beat North Dakota.

7 Semi Final appearances and only got to host twice.

[Brandon]

I can’t wait until it happens again and read the whiny posts how it is so unfair to whatever team has to travel to Region 1 because they really didn’t deserve to host.

Then you're biased. Everyone else appears to be trying to find solutions in good faith.