TennisForum.com - Reply to Topic
Thread: Rule Changes Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.

Registration Image

  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
Aug 31st, 2012 10:17 PM
spartyfan
Re: Rule Changes

Self serving coach from a regular host of the Finals. Hundreds of male and female players have gone to the the finals in singles and doubles that are not part of the elite 8-20 programs in the US. Their programs will never make it.

Some of these people should be made to work at a non Stanford, USC, UCLA, Duke, Georgia, Florida, UNC for a few years and maybe his/her elitist attitude would change to understand that the sport is more than just a few programs.

Just a horrible idea. Thousands of athletes have advanced to the singles and doubles while a very very very very small number of schools have made the 16.

My school will never make the Final 16 but we could advance a top player or pair. That would be great for the kids, the program and our supporters.
Aug 31st, 2012 07:19 PM
fantic
Re: Rule Changes

coach Diaz of UGA men suggests eliminating individual NCAA;

link

Manuel Diaz, head coach, Georgia Men

...

Personally, I think that the main issue here is the length of the NCAA Championship and the student-athlete welfare.

I would suggest that by doing away with the NCAA Singles and Doubles (Individual) portion of the tournament, we would solve these issues. I believe the great majority of coaches don't want that event after the team event. The ITA already holds an individual National Fall tournament (the All-American) and also a National Indoor Championship. The Fall should be the individual portion of our season and the Spring should just be the team portion of the season. Right now the individual event is always anticlimactic to the team tournament. Some players are exhausted because they were in the team portion of the tournament while others just practiced. Yes, they will be more rested if the team event begins with the Final Four, but this would come at great cost to the many student-athletes that lose the greatest experience of the year. We need them to experience that event so they can grow.

If the coaches wanted to add a Spring Individual Championship later they could do that through the ITA or the NCAA.
Aug 28th, 2012 03:48 PM
2nd_serve
Re: Rule Changes

Maybe the rule was in anticipation if teams went to playing frequent doubleheaders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10sE View Post
Well there aren't going to be any highly ranked teams that have to worry about it but there are always a couple of good bubble teams (usually from a tough conference like the SEC or ACC) with losing records that get in because the quality of their wins is so high. Arkansas and LSU got in last year with losing records.

I don't really see the point to the rule. I believe LSU was the last team in last year as an at-large and they had a losing record. On the one hand, we're going to go with this ITA formula that says that they are better than South Florida (the first team out) but then someone is going to step in and say that because LSU played a tougher schedule that they can't go to the dance?

South Florida is a bad example because they actually played a challenging schedule, but some team from a clown conference that goes 25-2 against nobody is going to end up getting in over an SEC or ACC team that goes 12-13 with 12 wins against ranked teams.
Aug 28th, 2012 03:45 PM
2nd_serve
Re: Rule Changes

Also seeing heavy promotion of the PAC 12 network.
Aug 28th, 2012 07:10 AM
fantic
Re: Rule Changes

So I see lots of billboards on Pac 12 network tv by CBS right now. Maybe the attempt had to do with it?

Anyway, dunno why NCAA bothered, since Team semi and final WILL fit the 3 hr slot anyway.

They really should've studied the Stanford lineup this season

Well, I guess Men could be different
Aug 27th, 2012 10:44 PM
2nd_serve
Re: Rule Changes

The rule change was to fit tennis I to an easy television time box but the us open is reminding me that tennis can succeed even with the unpredictably long matches from 3 out of 5 sets.

The match in before Mallory Burdette had a 11 am start time. Its in the 5 the set, had a small rain delay, and at nearly 6 pm new York time its longer the is allowed for 6 singles and 3 doubles matches. And the us open brings in money.
Aug 27th, 2012 03:22 AM
10sE
Re: Rule Changes

Well there aren't going to be any highly ranked teams that have to worry about it but there are always a couple of good bubble teams (usually from a tough conference like the SEC or ACC) with losing records that get in because the quality of their wins is so high. Arkansas and LSU got in last year with losing records.

I don't really see the point to the rule. I believe LSU was the last team in last year as an at-large and they had a losing record. On the one hand, we're going to go with this ITA formula that says that they are better than South Florida (the first team out) but then someone is going to step in and say that because LSU played a tougher schedule that they can't go to the dance?

South Florida is a bad example because they actually played a challenging schedule, but some team from a clown conference that goes 25-2 against nobody is going to end up getting in over an SEC or ACC team that goes 12-13 with 12 wins against ranked teams.
Aug 25th, 2012 04:17 AM
3gtennis
Re: Rule Changes

How is the 500 rule going to affect some highly ranked teams that play very tough schedules?
Aug 22nd, 2012 09:26 PM
Embittered
Re: Rule Changes

Victory!

Well, sorta: http://tenniskalamazoo.blogspot.co.u...e-removes.html

The very cynical might suggest that the NCAA used the age old strategy of asking for something utterly outrageous and then compromising on what they really wanted. (I'm not being serious here.)
Aug 17th, 2012 05:41 PM
2nd_serve
Re: Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10sE View Post
ITA is in bed with USTA. I don't really understand the exact relationship between the ITA and the NCAA.
This is a power and money grab by the NCAA away from the ITA. But if it loses money, then the loses will fall on the ITA.
Aug 17th, 2012 05:26 PM
10sE
Re: Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_masterton View Post
USTA formally oppose the changes and will make making submissions to that effect apparently.

Good news
ITA is in bed with USTA. I don't really understand the exact relationship between the ITA and the NCAA.
Aug 17th, 2012 05:06 PM
GBTG_Fan
Re: Rule Changes

USTA formally oppose the changes and will make making submissions to that effect apparently.

Good news
Aug 17th, 2012 12:06 AM
fantic
Re: Rule Changes

from the facebook group page
*OFFICIAL* Against the changes to NCAA tennis
------------

Roland Thornqvist
Changing the format is one thing. Let's make sure we don't change the sport! Tennis IS the third set...
42 minutes ago near Gainesville, FL

Coach Augustus also joined the group.
Aug 16th, 2012 10:20 PM
fantic
Re: Rule Changes

I'm also wondering about the effect the change will have on the recruiting process; say, if it will be televised from the Final 4, that means TOP 4 schools will get all the attention..thus, elite players will be all the more concentrated on those top schools(Bar the pro prospects, maybe, they might just turn pro)..?
Aug 16th, 2012 10:15 PM
fantic
Re: Rule Changes

Quote:
Originally Posted by cowsonice View Post
Well, why don't we play supertiebreakers at WTA tournaments then? The same logic applies there.

Supertiebreakers should be reserved to the utter n00bs (like me) who like to play tournaments here and there. I feel bad for NCAA players who have to face the same rules that satellite-level players have.
I'm not lauding the change of format(of course it's terrible, I already complained from a venue-visiting fan's point of view), just wanted to comment on the change of rule's actual effect on the match outcomes.

Regardless of format, the better player will prevail(it's not like they're only playing 1 set ) , as it should be.
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome