SDSULAX wrote:The current system creates the possibility that good teams get knocked out early.
You must be describing how the NCAA National Championship is run, it doesn't really make a difference, you need to win your games to get to the top, the current system for conducting the WCLL playoffs was not concocted in a "smoke filled room", it works, it is considered fair. We have a process in the WCLL to change things and it does not involve taking input from the message boards by anonymous posters.
I have to respectfully disagree. But before I do, I caution anyone, especially league officials against categorically dismissing the input from message board posters. I'll be the first to admit that the posters are not always "right", not to mention "sober." But, lets not forget who these posters are. They are players, former players, coaches, parents and fans. They are the reason the MCLA is where it is, and they are the reason it will be where it will be in the future. And after all aren't they what all this hullabaloo is all about? Who knows, sometimes the are even right.
Which brings me to my disagreement (respectfully). Saying the current WCLL playoff system works is like shaving with a piece of broken glass. Sure it'll probably get the job done, but I think we can all agree there is a better way to do it. Taking the money concern out of the equation, I defy someone to come up with a logical explanation of why the seeding system wouldn't work better. It's impossible. Can't be done.
Why? Because IT'S A BETTER SYSTEM! I think the problem is that everyone is looking at it in the context of this season. They are saying, "no one in their right mind would give a National Tournament bid to Chico State over Santa Barbara despite them making the final four and the Gauchos bowing out in the quarters." Well that's all fine and dandy in a year where you have four elite teams that are just a cut above the rest.
What happens when there are 5 or 6 elite teams that are evenly matched? And we know this is coming...the parity gets greater every year. The WCLL is a strong conference, and historically speaking, making the final four gives you a significant shot at the National Tournament. Outside of the final four? All bets are off. Now with 5 or 6 top teams, you could have two teams who would have been seeded #1 and #3, playing in the first round. One team is going to lose and that loser is likely not making the national tournament. The two teams could be playing the #8 and #6 seeded teams respectfully. You're telling me that these two teams don't greatly prefer the seeded system?
Furthermore...I would love to meet someone who considers this current system "fair." And once that person has made my acquaintance, I would love to hear their explanation as to why it is so. Because, unless I am missing something, the only justification for the current system that has been employed is the issue of money. The current system saves a hypothetical team from having to make two costly and possibly unexpected trips in the same number of weeks. Really? That's our definition of fair for the entire league? Saving 'hypothetical team's' money? Hogwash, I say.
The money issue is a substantial one. And should be considered by every team, every season, INDIVIDUALLY. BUT, to use it as justification for fairness in keeping an inherently unfair and ultimately broken system is silly. Fairness is found in rewarding a team for their season long performance, which the seeding system does. So let's make it fair ladies and gentlemen!
Respectfully
