by Matt Groom
This is the third year of my baseball NIT bracket. If I was King of Sports, there would be a NIT for NCAA baseball. The idea started two years ago when 30-29 Florida was invited to play in the NCAA baseball tournament and 43-10 Campbell was not. Maybe Campbell was not one of the best 64 teams, but I do believe that 43-10 deserves some extra baseball. I created a bracket that would invite all teams that had a better record than the at-large with the worst record in the tournament. I would also invite Division II teams that did not make it to its College World Series if there were not enough teams to fill in the bracket. In this tournament, the only teams invited would be those who had a better record than the worst at-large team, no more, no less. The NCAA tournament is meant to invite the best teams. My tournament's purpose is to reward the teams with great seasons who did not get an NCAA tournament invite. Because of that, the teams invited, hosts, and seeds are decided solely by record. If two teams tie, then strength of schedule would break the tie.
In case you are interested, here is the link to the actual NCAA tournament bracket:
http://www.ncaa.com/interactive-bracket/baseball/d1
Here would be the field for the 2015 season if I Was King of Sports
Team in question: Mississippi Rebels (30-26 .536). This year, 61 schools had better records. Two have had an equal record. If this tournament happened my way, there would be 64 teams in it (the 63 plus one division II school). The playing style would be the same as the NCAA tournament.
Region I- @ Jacksonville, FL (Host: North Florida Ospreys) (Division II school in italics)
(4) Nova Southeastern (39-13) vs. (1) North Florida (45-16)
(3) McNeese St. (32-25) vs. (2) Duke (31-22)
Region XVI- @ St. Louis, MO (Host: St. Louis Bilikins)
(4) Rider (28-22) vs. (1) St. Louis (35-21)
(3) Illinois-Chicago (29-22) vs. (2) Southeast Missouri St. (36-23)
Region VIII- @ Annapolis, MD (Host: Navy Midshipmen)
(4) Wagner (29-23) vs. (1) Navy (37-20)
(3) Connecticut (35-25) vs. (2) George Washington (32-22)
Region IX- @ Thibodaux, LA (Host: Nicholls St. Colonels)
(4) Troy (30-25) vs. (1) Nicholls St. (34-19)
(3) UAB (33-25) vs. (2) Arkansas-Pine Bluff (25-16)
Region V- @ Hattiesburg, MS (Host: Southern Mississippi Golden Eagles)
(4) New Mexico (32-27) vs. (1) Southern Mississippi (36-18)
(3) Northwestern St. (31-23) vs. (2) UC-Irvine (33-23)
Region XII- @ Columbus, OH (Host: Ohio St. Buckeyes)
(4) Evansville (29-24) vs. (1) Ohio St. (35-20)
(3) Texas Tech (31-24) vs. (2) Central Michigan (35-22)
Region IV- @ Rock Hill, SC (Host: Winthrop Eagles)
(4) Bryant (29-25) vs. (1) Winthrop (40-19)
(3) South Carolina (32-25) @ (2) North Carolina (34-24)
Region XIII- @ Baltimore, MD (Host: Maryland-Baltimore County Retrievers)
(4) Sacramento St. (32-27) vs. (1) Maryland-Baltimore County (34-20)
(3) Campbell (32-25) vs. (2) Penn (22-15)
Region VI- @ Milwaukee, WI (Host: Milwaukee Panthers)
(4) Washington (29-25) vs. (1) Milwaukee (39-20)
(3) Kent St. (31-22) vs. (2) Michigan St. (34-23)
Region XI- @ Memphis, TN (Host: Memphis Tigers)
(4) Central Arkansas (29-24) vs. (1) Memphis (37-21)
(3) Ball St. (33-25) vs. (2) San Diego (33-22)
Region III- @ Hammond, LA (Host: Southeastern Louisiana Lions)
(4) Florida Gulf Coast (30-26) vs. (1) Southeast Louisiana (42-17)
(3) UTSA (33-25) vs. (2) Grand Canyon (32-22)
Region XIV- @ Norfolk, VA (Host: Norfolk St. Spartans)
(4) Samford (32-26) vs. (1) Norfolk St. (27-16)
(3) Davidson (28-22) vs. (2) Liberty (33-23)
Region VII- @ Mobile, AL (Host: South Alabama Jaguars)
(4) Middle Tennessee St. (32-27) vs. (1) South Alabama (37-20)
(3) Georgia Tech (32-23) vs. (2) Alabama St. (31-19)
Region X- @ Spartanburg, SC (Host: Wofford Terriers)
(4) Kentucky (30-25) vs. (1) Wofford (39-22)
(3) Jackson St. (32-25) vs. (2) South Dakota St. (33-23)
Region XV- @ Omaha, NE (Host: Creighton Blue Jays)
(4) Oklahoma (34-27) vs. (1) Creighton (32-19)
(3) Northridge St. (33-24) vs. (2) Nebraska (34-23)
Region II- @ Reno, NV (Host: Nevada Wolfpack)
(4) UC-Davis (30-26) vs. (1) Nevada (41-15)
(3) Arizona (31-24) vs. (2) Loyola Marymount (33-21)
I understand that if this tournament were to actually happen, there would have to be a set number of teams invited so that people behind the scenes can plan to
make it the best tournament possible for players, coaches, and fans. The way I have designed it does not call for that. It only calls for those who have great seasons.
This year, I have also designed one for softball. The same rules apply. This year, I allowed for a play-in game since there were a few extra teams. Fifty-one teams had better records than the worst at-large team to be invited to the NCAA tournament. This year, if this tournament was real, and I had everything my way, there would be 8 brackets with 6 teams each (plus 3 play-in games). The winners would advance to the championship series. Like the tournament, it would be double-elimination (except for the play-in games).
Team invited to NCAA tournament with the worst record: Kentucky (29-24, .547)
Region I- Kent, OH (Kent St.)
(6) Purdue (31-25)/Florida International (30-24) winner vs. (1) Kent St. (41-13)
(5) Canisius (26-19) vs. (2) IUPUI (33-18)
(4) Drake (32-21) vs. (3) Kennesaw St. (32-19)
Region VIII- Natchitoches, LA (Northwestern St.)
(6) Delaware (30-23) vs. (1) Northwestern St. (36-18)
(5) Hawai'i (32-22) vs. (2) Idaho St. (34-18)
(4) Louisiana Tech (31-19) vs. (3) Mercer (37-22)
Region IV- Riverside, CA (UC-Riverside)
(6) St. Joseph's (23-18) vs. (1) UC-Riverside (39-17)
(5) Ohio St. (30-22) vs. (2) San Jose St. (37-19)
(4) Texas St. (32-21) vs. (3) St. Francis (PA) (31-19)
Region V- Jacksonville, AL (Jacksonville St.)
(6) Savannah St. (22-17) vs. (1) Jacksonville St. (38-17)
(5) Elon (31-22) vs. (2) South Florida (36-20)
(4) Samford (32-22) vs. (3) Georgia St. (38-22)
Region III- Huntington, WV (Marshall)
(6) Lipscomb (31-25)/Grand Canyon (28-22) winner vs. (1) Marshall (35-15)
(5) Coastal Carolina (31-24) vs. (2) Harvard (28-15-1)
(4) Towson (31-22) vs. (3) Bucknell (35-20)
Region VI- Murray, KY (Murray St.)
(6) Miami (OH) (32-24) vs. (1) Murray St. (38-19)
(5) Troy (32-23) vs. (2) St. Louis (36-18)
(4) Stetson (30-20) vs. (3) Albany (30-18)
Region II- Dayton, OH (Dayton)
(6) Furman (31-25)/San Diego (29-23) winner vs. (1) Dayton (39-14)
(5) Rutgers (29-20) vs. (2) Stony Brook (30-16)
(4) Wichita St. (34-23) vs. (3) UAB (32-19)
Region VII- San Antonio, TX (UTSA)
(6) Manhattan (26-20) vs. (1) UTSA (36-18)
(5) Louisiana-Monroe (30-22) vs. (2) Tulsa (36-18)
(4) Fullerton St. (34-22) vs. (3) McNeese St. (36-20)
Tuesday, May 26, 2015
Monday, April 27, 2015
If I Was King of Sports: Rules NFL should adopt from other football leagues
There are some NFL football rules I would like changed, but I am not going to focus on those, including the "Calvin Johnson rule" about the "complete process of a catch". I will say it was a stupid rule when it happened to Calvin Johnson, and it was stupid when it happened to Dez Bryant of the Dallas Cowboys. This blog will focus on the rules that are in place in other football leagues, that I think should be in place in the NFL. By the way, adapting rules from other leagues would not be unprecedented. The NBA adopted the 3-point line when it merged with the ABA in 1976. Before that, the NBA did not have a 3-point line, but the ABA did to generate more offense.
Rule 1: Pass interference calls can be challenged by the coach. Where it is found: CFL
In the Canadian Football League (CFL), coaches are allowed to use one of their challenges on a pass interference call. The NFL needs to do the same. There are times the flow of games can be changed on a bad pass interference call. Plus, a 15-yard penalty can make a big impact on the game. There needs to be some accountability.
Rule 2: Have a player from each team run for the ball to determine who starts the game with the ball. Where it was found: XFL
As ridiculous as the XFL was in the one year of its existence, this rule was one of the few things it got right. It pitted two people in a contest to see who wants the ball more. It is more entertaining than just tossing a coin. These days, there is more of a focus towards safety issues, so there would have to be adjustments. Maybe the two athletes can run side-by-side, or run at a diangel. Whatever they decide, I want to see something more than a coin toss.
Rule 3: Make field goals and extra points harder. Where it is found: Arena football
"Goalposts" in the Arena Football League are 15 feet high and 9 and a half feet wide (as opposed to 10 feet high and 18 feet wide in the NFL). Field goals and extra points are not automatic in the AFL, because of the height and narrowness of the goalposts. The NFL experimented with having 14-foot wide goalposts at the Pro Bowl. The percentage of the field goals made was reduced from kickers who are normally "automatic".
Rule 4: Review helmet-to-helmet calls. Where it is found: NCAA
Like pass interference, the helmet-to-helmet calls can impact a game if they are mistakenly called. I understand that in live action, it can be difficult for officials to tell whether or not a player hit another one with his helmet or not. The referees are to rule on the side of safety in this case. There was a dispute on whether (I think it was) Ahmed Brooks of the San Francisco 49ers hit Seattle Seahawks quarterback, Russell Wilson, with his helmet. The referees called the penalty, and it cost the 49ers 15 yards, and Seattle eventually scored on that drive. Later in the week, the NFL reviewed it, and ruled that it should not have been a penalty on the 49ers. If I was King of Sports, those plays would be automatically reviewed like it is in the NCAA. Of course, the reason why it is reviewed in the NCAA is because those plays are grounds for ejection if the player was considered to be "targeting", and no one wants to see a player ejected for making a hard, legal hit. Those plays should be reviewed, because they can impact a game for one team if the call was ruled to be incorrect.
Rule 1: Pass interference calls can be challenged by the coach. Where it is found: CFL
In the Canadian Football League (CFL), coaches are allowed to use one of their challenges on a pass interference call. The NFL needs to do the same. There are times the flow of games can be changed on a bad pass interference call. Plus, a 15-yard penalty can make a big impact on the game. There needs to be some accountability.
Rule 2: Have a player from each team run for the ball to determine who starts the game with the ball. Where it was found: XFL
As ridiculous as the XFL was in the one year of its existence, this rule was one of the few things it got right. It pitted two people in a contest to see who wants the ball more. It is more entertaining than just tossing a coin. These days, there is more of a focus towards safety issues, so there would have to be adjustments. Maybe the two athletes can run side-by-side, or run at a diangel. Whatever they decide, I want to see something more than a coin toss.
Rule 3: Make field goals and extra points harder. Where it is found: Arena football
"Goalposts" in the Arena Football League are 15 feet high and 9 and a half feet wide (as opposed to 10 feet high and 18 feet wide in the NFL). Field goals and extra points are not automatic in the AFL, because of the height and narrowness of the goalposts. The NFL experimented with having 14-foot wide goalposts at the Pro Bowl. The percentage of the field goals made was reduced from kickers who are normally "automatic".
Rule 4: Review helmet-to-helmet calls. Where it is found: NCAA
Like pass interference, the helmet-to-helmet calls can impact a game if they are mistakenly called. I understand that in live action, it can be difficult for officials to tell whether or not a player hit another one with his helmet or not. The referees are to rule on the side of safety in this case. There was a dispute on whether (I think it was) Ahmed Brooks of the San Francisco 49ers hit Seattle Seahawks quarterback, Russell Wilson, with his helmet. The referees called the penalty, and it cost the 49ers 15 yards, and Seattle eventually scored on that drive. Later in the week, the NFL reviewed it, and ruled that it should not have been a penalty on the 49ers. If I was King of Sports, those plays would be automatically reviewed like it is in the NCAA. Of course, the reason why it is reviewed in the NCAA is because those plays are grounds for ejection if the player was considered to be "targeting", and no one wants to see a player ejected for making a hard, legal hit. Those plays should be reviewed, because they can impact a game for one team if the call was ruled to be incorrect.
Thursday, April 23, 2015
Continuation of If I Was King of Sports #3-209 Basketball Tournament
This is what the 2015 bracket would look like of my 209 tournament. The seeding procedure can be found in the original blog.
Pod A (@ Sierra-Manteca)
(8) Gregori-Modesto (MMC) vs. (1) Sierra-Manteca (VOL)
(5) Linden (MLL) vs. (4) Ceres (WAC)
(6) Atwater (CCC) vs. Millennium-Tracy (CCAA)
(7) Lincoln-Stockton (TCAL) vs. Mariposa (SL)
Pod B (@ Modesto Christian)
(8) Denair-SL vs. (1) Modesto Christian (MMC)
(5) Pitman-Turlock (CCC) vs. (4) Central Catholic-Modesto (VOL)
(6) Escalon-TVL vs. (3) Patterson (WAC)
(7) West-Tracy vs. (2) Bear Creek-Stockton (SJAA)
Pod C (@ Brookside Christian-Stockton)
(8) McNair-Stockton (SJAA) vs. (1) Brookside Christian-Stockton (CCAA)
(5) Delhi (SL) vs. (4) Summerville-Tuolumne City (MLL)
(6) El Capitan-Merced (WAC) vs. (3) Manteca (VOL)
(7) Hughes Academy-Stockton (MVL) vs. (2) Beyer-Modesto (MMC)
Pod D (@ Liberty Ranch-Galt)
(8) Oakdale (VOL) vs. (1) Liberty Ranch-Galt (SVC)
(5) Stockton Christian (MVL) vs. (4) Argonaut-Jackson (MLL)
(6) Pacheco-Los Banos (WAC) vs. (3) Tracy (TCAL)
(7) Riverbank (TVL) vs. (2) Turlock (CCC)
Pod E (@ Jim Elliot Christian-Lodi)
(8) Modesto (MMC) vs. (1) Jim Elliot Christian-Lodi (CCAA)
(5) Tokay-Lodi (TCAL) vs. (4) Hughson (TVL)
(6) Kimball-Tracy (VOL) vs. (3) Lodi Academy (MVL)
(7) Le Grand (SL) vs. (2) Chavez-Stockton (SJAA)
Pod F (@ Weston Ranch-Stockton)
(8) Gustine (SL) vs. (1) Weston Ranch-Stockton (VOL)
(5) Big Valley-Modesto (CCAA) vs. (4) Ripon (TVL)
(6) Davis-Modesto (MMC) vs. (3) Sonora (MLL)
(7) Los Banos (WAC) vs. (2) Delta Charter-Tracy (MVL)
Pod G (@ Central Valley-Ceres)
(8) Edison-Stockton (SJAA) vs. (1) Central Valley-Ceres (WAC)
(5) Bret Harte-Angels Camp (MLL) vs. (4) Enochs-Modesto (MMC)
(6) Hilmar (TVL) vs. (3) Merced (CCC)
(7) Turlock Christian (CCAA) vs. St. Mary's-Stockton (TCAL)
Pod H (@ Calaveras-San Andreas)
(8) Livingston (WAC) vs. (1) Calaveras-San Andreas (MLL)
(5) Golden Valley-Merced (CCC) vs. (4) Lodi (TCAL)
(6) Johansen-Modesto (MMC) vs. (3) Central Valley Christian Academy-Ceres (IND)
(7) Sierra Ridge/Rite of Passage-San Andreas (CCAA) vs. (2) Ripon Chirstian (TVL)
Like last year, if I was King of Sports, pod champions would meet at the Stockton Arena,
Runners up would meet at the University of Pacific in Stockton
3rd place- Stanislaus State in Turlock
4th place- UC-Merced
5th place- Delta College (Stockton)
6th place- Modesto Junior College
7th place- Merced College
8th place- Columbia College (Sonora)
Non-advancing pods
These would be optional if the teams wanted an opportunity to play more basketball
Pod I (@ Downey-Modesto)
(8) Galt (SVC) vs. (1) Downey-Modesto (MMC)
(5) Lathrop (VOL) vs. (4) Stagg-Stockton (SJAA)
(6) Benjamin Holt Academy-Stockton (MVL) vs. (3) Excel Academy-Stockton (CCAA)
(7) Waterford (SL) vs. (2) Amador-Sutter Creek (MLL)
Pod J (@ Orestimba-Newman)
(8) Tioga-Groveland (MVL) @ (1) Orestimba-Newman (SL)
(5) Franklin-Stockton (SJAA) vs. (4) Humphreys-Stockton (MVL)
(6) Dos Palos (WSL) vs. (3) Stone Ridge Christian-Merced (CCAA)
(7) Buhach Colony-Atwater (CCC) vs. (2) East Union-Manteca (VOL)
Pod A (@ Sierra-Manteca)
(8) Gregori-Modesto (MMC) vs. (1) Sierra-Manteca (VOL)
(5) Linden (MLL) vs. (4) Ceres (WAC)
(6) Atwater (CCC) vs. Millennium-Tracy (CCAA)
(7) Lincoln-Stockton (TCAL) vs. Mariposa (SL)
Pod B (@ Modesto Christian)
(8) Denair-SL vs. (1) Modesto Christian (MMC)
(5) Pitman-Turlock (CCC) vs. (4) Central Catholic-Modesto (VOL)
(6) Escalon-TVL vs. (3) Patterson (WAC)
(7) West-Tracy vs. (2) Bear Creek-Stockton (SJAA)
Pod C (@ Brookside Christian-Stockton)
(8) McNair-Stockton (SJAA) vs. (1) Brookside Christian-Stockton (CCAA)
(5) Delhi (SL) vs. (4) Summerville-Tuolumne City (MLL)
(6) El Capitan-Merced (WAC) vs. (3) Manteca (VOL)
(7) Hughes Academy-Stockton (MVL) vs. (2) Beyer-Modesto (MMC)
Pod D (@ Liberty Ranch-Galt)
(8) Oakdale (VOL) vs. (1) Liberty Ranch-Galt (SVC)
(5) Stockton Christian (MVL) vs. (4) Argonaut-Jackson (MLL)
(6) Pacheco-Los Banos (WAC) vs. (3) Tracy (TCAL)
(7) Riverbank (TVL) vs. (2) Turlock (CCC)
Pod E (@ Jim Elliot Christian-Lodi)
(8) Modesto (MMC) vs. (1) Jim Elliot Christian-Lodi (CCAA)
(5) Tokay-Lodi (TCAL) vs. (4) Hughson (TVL)
(6) Kimball-Tracy (VOL) vs. (3) Lodi Academy (MVL)
(7) Le Grand (SL) vs. (2) Chavez-Stockton (SJAA)
Pod F (@ Weston Ranch-Stockton)
(8) Gustine (SL) vs. (1) Weston Ranch-Stockton (VOL)
(5) Big Valley-Modesto (CCAA) vs. (4) Ripon (TVL)
(6) Davis-Modesto (MMC) vs. (3) Sonora (MLL)
(7) Los Banos (WAC) vs. (2) Delta Charter-Tracy (MVL)
Pod G (@ Central Valley-Ceres)
(8) Edison-Stockton (SJAA) vs. (1) Central Valley-Ceres (WAC)
(5) Bret Harte-Angels Camp (MLL) vs. (4) Enochs-Modesto (MMC)
(6) Hilmar (TVL) vs. (3) Merced (CCC)
(7) Turlock Christian (CCAA) vs. St. Mary's-Stockton (TCAL)
Pod H (@ Calaveras-San Andreas)
(8) Livingston (WAC) vs. (1) Calaveras-San Andreas (MLL)
(5) Golden Valley-Merced (CCC) vs. (4) Lodi (TCAL)
(6) Johansen-Modesto (MMC) vs. (3) Central Valley Christian Academy-Ceres (IND)
(7) Sierra Ridge/Rite of Passage-San Andreas (CCAA) vs. (2) Ripon Chirstian (TVL)
Like last year, if I was King of Sports, pod champions would meet at the Stockton Arena,
Runners up would meet at the University of Pacific in Stockton
3rd place- Stanislaus State in Turlock
4th place- UC-Merced
5th place- Delta College (Stockton)
6th place- Modesto Junior College
7th place- Merced College
8th place- Columbia College (Sonora)
Non-advancing pods
These would be optional if the teams wanted an opportunity to play more basketball
Pod I (@ Downey-Modesto)
(8) Galt (SVC) vs. (1) Downey-Modesto (MMC)
(5) Lathrop (VOL) vs. (4) Stagg-Stockton (SJAA)
(6) Benjamin Holt Academy-Stockton (MVL) vs. (3) Excel Academy-Stockton (CCAA)
(7) Waterford (SL) vs. (2) Amador-Sutter Creek (MLL)
Pod J (@ Orestimba-Newman)
(8) Tioga-Groveland (MVL) @ (1) Orestimba-Newman (SL)
(5) Franklin-Stockton (SJAA) vs. (4) Humphreys-Stockton (MVL)
(6) Dos Palos (WSL) vs. (3) Stone Ridge Christian-Merced (CCAA)
(7) Buhach Colony-Atwater (CCC) vs. (2) East Union-Manteca (VOL)
Saturday, January 31, 2015
New CIF Football Format
1/31/15
Yesterday, the CIF approved a new 13-division format for the state football championship. This ensures that every 11-man section champion will get at least a regional bowl game. Also, the divisions will be based on competitive equality and not by enrollment. One division will have a play-in game for the Northern California regional bowl. At this point, I do not know how they will work that out, or how they will decide "competitive equality". That did not stop me from wondering what the regional bowl games would look like if the CIF did that this year. This blog will provide one possibility. Based solely on calpreps.com ratings, here is what the regional games would look like.
First what we need to know: The Northern California region is the Central Coast, North Coast, Northern, Oakland, Sac-Joaquin, and San Francisco sections. The Southern California region is the Los Angeles, San Diego, and Southern sections. Starting next year, the Central Section will be split between North and South. The Central Section Divisions I, III, and V champions will be in the North. The Divisions II, IV, and VI champions will remain in the South.
Next what we must assume: For this blog, we are going to assume that all the higher-rated teams will choose to host, and not have the game at a neutral site, or have the opponents host.
Division Open Large
North: Folsom @ De La Salle (Concord)
South: Centennial (Corona)
Note: Normally, the lower-division would have the play-in game. However, in this, I can see the top division having the play-in game. I am sure the CIF would want to give the top team in the South a bye week.
Division 1A
North: Campolindo (Moraga) @ Grant (Sacramento)
South: Mission Viejo @ Oceanside
Division 1AA
North: Clayton Valley (Concord) @ Edison (Fresno)
South: El Capitan (Lakeside) @ Redlands East Valley (Redlands)
Division 2A
North: Sacred Heart Prep (Atherton) @ Enterprise (Redding)
South: Paso Robles @ Trabuco Hills (Mission Viejo)
Division 2AA
North: Sutter @ Oakdale
South: Crescenta Valley (La Crescenta) @ Ridgeview (Bakersfield)
Division 3A
North: Aptos @ Hanford
South: St. Augustine (San Diego) @ Narbonne (Los Angeles-Harbor City)
Division 3AA
North: Central Catholic (Modesto) @ St. Francis (Mountain View)
South: Palos Verdes (Palos Verdes Estates) @ Colony (Ontario)
Division 4A
North: McClymonds (Oakland) @ San Benito (Hollister)
South: Liberty (Madera) @ Palm Springs
Division 4AA
North: Salesian (Richmond) @ Justin-Siena (Napa)
South: Pomona @ Christian (El Cajon)
Division 5A
North: Terra Nova (Pacifica) @ Capital Christian (Sacramento)
South: Nipomo @ Bishop's (La Jolla)
Division 5AA
North: Winters @ Bear River (Grass Valley)
South: St. Margaret's (San Juan Capistrano) @ Hamilton (Los Angeles)
Division 6A
North: Maxwell @ Corcoran
South: Kennedy (Delano) @ Garden Grove
Division: 6AA
North: Stone Ridge Christian (Merced) @ Mission (San Francisco)
South: La Jolla Country Day (La Jolla) @ Los Angeles
Note: One source I read says all divisions will be based on "competitive equality". Another source says only two divisions will be based on "competitive equality" and the rest will be on enrollment. I went with the first source for my model. If it turns out that the second one is correct, then Mission (San Francisco) and Los Angeles would be placed in higher divisions.
Sources: Modesto Bee, sfgate blog, calpreps.com,
Yesterday, the CIF approved a new 13-division format for the state football championship. This ensures that every 11-man section champion will get at least a regional bowl game. Also, the divisions will be based on competitive equality and not by enrollment. One division will have a play-in game for the Northern California regional bowl. At this point, I do not know how they will work that out, or how they will decide "competitive equality". That did not stop me from wondering what the regional bowl games would look like if the CIF did that this year. This blog will provide one possibility. Based solely on calpreps.com ratings, here is what the regional games would look like.
First what we need to know: The Northern California region is the Central Coast, North Coast, Northern, Oakland, Sac-Joaquin, and San Francisco sections. The Southern California region is the Los Angeles, San Diego, and Southern sections. Starting next year, the Central Section will be split between North and South. The Central Section Divisions I, III, and V champions will be in the North. The Divisions II, IV, and VI champions will remain in the South.
Next what we must assume: For this blog, we are going to assume that all the higher-rated teams will choose to host, and not have the game at a neutral site, or have the opponents host.
Division Open Large
North: Folsom @ De La Salle (Concord)
South: Centennial (Corona)
Note: Normally, the lower-division would have the play-in game. However, in this, I can see the top division having the play-in game. I am sure the CIF would want to give the top team in the South a bye week.
Division 1A
North: Campolindo (Moraga) @ Grant (Sacramento)
South: Mission Viejo @ Oceanside
Division 1AA
North: Clayton Valley (Concord) @ Edison (Fresno)
South: El Capitan (Lakeside) @ Redlands East Valley (Redlands)
Division 2A
North: Sacred Heart Prep (Atherton) @ Enterprise (Redding)
South: Paso Robles @ Trabuco Hills (Mission Viejo)
Division 2AA
North: Sutter @ Oakdale
South: Crescenta Valley (La Crescenta) @ Ridgeview (Bakersfield)
Division 3A
North: Aptos @ Hanford
South: St. Augustine (San Diego) @ Narbonne (Los Angeles-Harbor City)
Division 3AA
North: Central Catholic (Modesto) @ St. Francis (Mountain View)
South: Palos Verdes (Palos Verdes Estates) @ Colony (Ontario)
Division 4A
North: McClymonds (Oakland) @ San Benito (Hollister)
South: Liberty (Madera) @ Palm Springs
Division 4AA
North: Salesian (Richmond) @ Justin-Siena (Napa)
South: Pomona @ Christian (El Cajon)
Division 5A
North: Terra Nova (Pacifica) @ Capital Christian (Sacramento)
South: Nipomo @ Bishop's (La Jolla)
Division 5AA
North: Winters @ Bear River (Grass Valley)
South: St. Margaret's (San Juan Capistrano) @ Hamilton (Los Angeles)
Division 6A
North: Maxwell @ Corcoran
South: Kennedy (Delano) @ Garden Grove
Division: 6AA
North: Stone Ridge Christian (Merced) @ Mission (San Francisco)
South: La Jolla Country Day (La Jolla) @ Los Angeles
Note: One source I read says all divisions will be based on "competitive equality". Another source says only two divisions will be based on "competitive equality" and the rest will be on enrollment. I went with the first source for my model. If it turns out that the second one is correct, then Mission (San Francisco) and Los Angeles would be placed in higher divisions.
Sources: Modesto Bee, sfgate blog, calpreps.com,
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
If I Was King of Sports #9- California High School Football Bowl Games
I know this is late, but my blog-writing time is limited, and I wanted to touch on this subject, anyway.
Currently, 18 out of 51 section champions move on to the regional championship games. I do not think that is right, especially, because the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) uses a committee to decide who continues to play and whose seasons end. There are undefeated teams who get no reward for their great seasons. Sacred Heart Prep-Atherton, Liberty-Madera, Crescenta Valley-La Crescenta, and Bishop's-La Jolla were undefeated teams who did not get a chance to prove they were deserving of more football. In addition, there is no championship for 8-man football. That needs to change. I will present a model for more football for these kids. The CIF does not need to use my model. They can come up with one of their own, but these kids need to be rewarded with another game.
My model uses a few bowl game series. Once the teams are selected for the regional championship bowl games, I would take the remaining teams and put them in bowl games. I would probably have them played the week of the regional bowl games. There would be sites predetermined for these games. In these games, it is not guaranteed that the north would play south. There would also be games for the 8-man teams. Finally, I am considering having consolation bowl games where the losers of the regional bowl games play each other. If I do, the team with the fewer losses would host. If the two teams have the same amount of losses, then the team rated higher by calpreps.com would host.
Rules for selection of extra bowl games
1) Section champions only.
2) If there are an odd number of section champions, the top rated runner-up, who is also a league champion, will get an at-large spot. (This year, it is St. John Bosco of Bellflower).
3) Teams of the same section would not play each other (though, to try to get the games as fair as possible, I break my own rule here in one game).
4) The games will not always be Northern California vs. Southern California.
5) I would try to keep the games fair by enrollment and by rating, but there is no guarantee.
6) Should a team not accept an invite for any reason, highest-rated available section runner-up can be used as an at-large.
Here are the bowl games
State Bowl (The ones that actually happened) (@ Carson, CA)
Open- De La Salle (Concord) vs. Centennial (Corona) (won by De La Salle)
I- Folsom vs. Oceanside (won by Folsom)
II- Clayton Valley (Concord) vs. Redlands East Valley (Redlands) (won by Redlands East Valley)
III-Campolindo (Moraga) vs. El Capitan (Lakeside) (won by Campolindo)
IV-Central Catholic (Modesto) vs. St. Margaret's (San Juan Capistrano (won by Central Catholic)
Bowl Games I Would Have If I Was King of Sports
Consolation Bowls (If I would decide to have them)
I- Edison (Fresno) @ Grant (Sacramento)
II- Oakdale @ Ridgeview (Bakersfield)
III-Paso Robles @ Sutter
IV- Christian (El Cajon) @ Capital Christian (Sacramento)
8-Man- Big Valley (Bieber) @ Mojave
Bay Area Bowls (Location would alternate between San Francisco and Oakland
SF vs. OAK: McClymonds (Oakland) vs. Mission (San Francisco)
NCS vs. CCS: Salesian (Richmond) vs. Terra Nova (Pacifica)
CCS vs. NCS (8-Man): Trinity Christian (Monterey) vs. Anderson Valley (Booneville)
Note: I read that the San Francisco and Oakland winners would play each other before the state bowl games were created. I would like to bring that back. If an Oakland team is chosen for the Regional Bowl Game, a North Coast team would play in its place. If a San Francisco team is chosen, a Central Coast team would be chosen in its place.
Central Valley Bowl Games (Location would alternate between Fresno, Stockton, and Chico)
SS vs. SJS: Nipomo vs. Bear River (Grass Valley)
SD vs. CS: St. Augustine (San Diego) vs. Hanford
LA vs. NS: Los Angeles vs. Enterprise (Redding)
NCS vs. CS: Justin-Siena (Napa) vs. Liberty (Madera)
NS vs. SJS: Maxwell vs. Stone Ridge Christian (Merced)
Southern Section Bowl Games (I would alternate location between Anaheim and Riverside)
LA vs. SS: Hamilton-Los Angeles vs. Trabucco Hills (Mission Viejo)
CCS vs. SS: San Benito (Hollister) vs. Crescenta Valley (La Crescenta)
SS vs. SS: Colony (Ontario) vs. Mission Viejo
CCS vs. SS: St. Francis (Mountain View) vs. Garden Grove
SS vs. LA: St. John Bosco (Bellflower) vs. Narbonne (Los Angeles-Harbor City)
Small School Bowls (I would pick random hosts for this one)
My 8-Man State Championship: Kings Christian (Leemore) vs. Joshua Springs (Yucca Valley)
NS vs. CS: Winters vs. Corcoran
SD vs.CS: La Jolla Country Day vs. Kennedy (Delano)
SD vs. LA (8-Man): Borrego Springs vs. Fulton (Los Angeles-Van Nuys)
Medium School Bowls (I would pick random hosts for this one)
CCS vs. SS: Sacred Heart Prep (Atherton) vs. Palos Verdes (Palos Verdes Estates)
SS vs. CCS: Pomona vs. Aptos
SS vs. SD: Palm Springs vs. Bishop's (La Jolla)
Key
CS: Central Section
CCS: Central Coast Section
LA: Los Angeles Section
NCS: North Coast Section
NS: Northern Section
OAK: Oakland Section
SJS: Sac-Joaquin Section
SD: San Diego Section
SF: San Francisco Section
SS: Southern Section
Again, this is just my model. I just wish that somehow, every section champion, at least the undefeated ones, get rewarded at least one extra game. There have been discussions about adding more divisions to fit all the champions, but at this point, it is just talk.
Currently, 18 out of 51 section champions move on to the regional championship games. I do not think that is right, especially, because the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) uses a committee to decide who continues to play and whose seasons end. There are undefeated teams who get no reward for their great seasons. Sacred Heart Prep-Atherton, Liberty-Madera, Crescenta Valley-La Crescenta, and Bishop's-La Jolla were undefeated teams who did not get a chance to prove they were deserving of more football. In addition, there is no championship for 8-man football. That needs to change. I will present a model for more football for these kids. The CIF does not need to use my model. They can come up with one of their own, but these kids need to be rewarded with another game.
My model uses a few bowl game series. Once the teams are selected for the regional championship bowl games, I would take the remaining teams and put them in bowl games. I would probably have them played the week of the regional bowl games. There would be sites predetermined for these games. In these games, it is not guaranteed that the north would play south. There would also be games for the 8-man teams. Finally, I am considering having consolation bowl games where the losers of the regional bowl games play each other. If I do, the team with the fewer losses would host. If the two teams have the same amount of losses, then the team rated higher by calpreps.com would host.
Rules for selection of extra bowl games
1) Section champions only.
2) If there are an odd number of section champions, the top rated runner-up, who is also a league champion, will get an at-large spot. (This year, it is St. John Bosco of Bellflower).
3) Teams of the same section would not play each other (though, to try to get the games as fair as possible, I break my own rule here in one game).
4) The games will not always be Northern California vs. Southern California.
5) I would try to keep the games fair by enrollment and by rating, but there is no guarantee.
6) Should a team not accept an invite for any reason, highest-rated available section runner-up can be used as an at-large.
Here are the bowl games
State Bowl (The ones that actually happened) (@ Carson, CA)
Open- De La Salle (Concord) vs. Centennial (Corona) (won by De La Salle)
I- Folsom vs. Oceanside (won by Folsom)
II- Clayton Valley (Concord) vs. Redlands East Valley (Redlands) (won by Redlands East Valley)
III-Campolindo (Moraga) vs. El Capitan (Lakeside) (won by Campolindo)
IV-Central Catholic (Modesto) vs. St. Margaret's (San Juan Capistrano (won by Central Catholic)
Bowl Games I Would Have If I Was King of Sports
Consolation Bowls (If I would decide to have them)
I- Edison (Fresno) @ Grant (Sacramento)
II- Oakdale @ Ridgeview (Bakersfield)
III-Paso Robles @ Sutter
IV- Christian (El Cajon) @ Capital Christian (Sacramento)
8-Man- Big Valley (Bieber) @ Mojave
Bay Area Bowls (Location would alternate between San Francisco and Oakland
SF vs. OAK: McClymonds (Oakland) vs. Mission (San Francisco)
NCS vs. CCS: Salesian (Richmond) vs. Terra Nova (Pacifica)
CCS vs. NCS (8-Man): Trinity Christian (Monterey) vs. Anderson Valley (Booneville)
Note: I read that the San Francisco and Oakland winners would play each other before the state bowl games were created. I would like to bring that back. If an Oakland team is chosen for the Regional Bowl Game, a North Coast team would play in its place. If a San Francisco team is chosen, a Central Coast team would be chosen in its place.
Central Valley Bowl Games (Location would alternate between Fresno, Stockton, and Chico)
SS vs. SJS: Nipomo vs. Bear River (Grass Valley)
SD vs. CS: St. Augustine (San Diego) vs. Hanford
LA vs. NS: Los Angeles vs. Enterprise (Redding)
NCS vs. CS: Justin-Siena (Napa) vs. Liberty (Madera)
NS vs. SJS: Maxwell vs. Stone Ridge Christian (Merced)
Southern Section Bowl Games (I would alternate location between Anaheim and Riverside)
LA vs. SS: Hamilton-Los Angeles vs. Trabucco Hills (Mission Viejo)
CCS vs. SS: San Benito (Hollister) vs. Crescenta Valley (La Crescenta)
SS vs. SS: Colony (Ontario) vs. Mission Viejo
CCS vs. SS: St. Francis (Mountain View) vs. Garden Grove
SS vs. LA: St. John Bosco (Bellflower) vs. Narbonne (Los Angeles-Harbor City)
Small School Bowls (I would pick random hosts for this one)
My 8-Man State Championship: Kings Christian (Leemore) vs. Joshua Springs (Yucca Valley)
NS vs. CS: Winters vs. Corcoran
SD vs.CS: La Jolla Country Day vs. Kennedy (Delano)
SD vs. LA (8-Man): Borrego Springs vs. Fulton (Los Angeles-Van Nuys)
Medium School Bowls (I would pick random hosts for this one)
CCS vs. SS: Sacred Heart Prep (Atherton) vs. Palos Verdes (Palos Verdes Estates)
SS vs. CCS: Pomona vs. Aptos
SS vs. SD: Palm Springs vs. Bishop's (La Jolla)
Key
CS: Central Section
CCS: Central Coast Section
LA: Los Angeles Section
NCS: North Coast Section
NS: Northern Section
OAK: Oakland Section
SJS: Sac-Joaquin Section
SD: San Diego Section
SF: San Francisco Section
SS: Southern Section
Again, this is just my model. I just wish that somehow, every section champion, at least the undefeated ones, get rewarded at least one extra game. There have been discussions about adding more divisions to fit all the champions, but at this point, it is just talk.
Monday, December 15, 2014
If I Was King of Sports #8-Baseball Rule Changes
For the past few editions, I posted tournaments I wanted to see. This time, I will get to some rule changes, which was the original purpose for this blog series. There are some rules that some people like that I cannot stand and vice versa. There are two rules I would change in Major League Baseball, and one I would keep the same, but I feel the need to post it, anyway.
1) Get rid of mid-season trades
A lot of people like mid-season trades. Their teams can get instant improvement with a the "final piece of the puzzle." However, I find these trades annoying. A lot of people I have talked to have problems with teams like the Yankees "buying championships". I have no problem with it, but my annoyance is with teams "renting players to get a championship". What I mean is when they trade for a player, don't have any intentions to keep him, and try to get a World Series title (i.e. the Brewers trading for C.C. Sabathia from the Cleveland Indians). Plus, it makes baseball hard to follow. As much as I follow sports, I watch games, see players on new teams, and find myself saying, "Whoa, when'd that happen?" IF I WAS KING OF SPORTS, those trades would be gone. Whatever hand you have, is what you play with the entire season. If changes need to be made, they are to be made from the minor-league system, or the free agent market. For those teams who do it to get younger players and prepare for the future, I notice that rarely works, and when it does, it takes at least a decade. Last year, the Pirates were relevant for the first time since 1992. They could have had more success if they had kept their good players. The Royals are relevant for the first time since 1985. However, if I am missing something, and mid-season trades must be kept, then I will have rule #2.
2) The trade deadline is the trade deadline. NO EXCEPTIONS OR LOOPHOLES!
After the trade deadline, the Oakland A's were able to trade for Adam Dunn, because there are a couple of loopholes in the trade deadline. My question is if the trade deadline is not going to be enforced, why have it? IF I WAS KING OF SPORTS, no trades would be allowed after the trade deadline. If a team needs different players, they would need to get them through their minor-league system.
3) Cut interleague to two series for each team.
Interleague baseball was one of those things I thought was cool when it was first created. It was a wonderful new idea for the A's to play the Giants, Dodgers play the Angels, the Cardinals play the Royals, and other match ups, because the teams are close to each other and they would never play in the regular season. However, it was become overkill over the past few years, and especially now, when there has to be an interleague series every day. The first thing I would do IF I WAS KING OF SPORTS, is to add two teams. My recommendation is Vancouver, BC and Louisville, KY. If the league wants balance, then add 6 teams to allow each division to have 6 teams each. Where would I put them?
West Central East
Vancouver, BC Indianapolis, IN Charlotte, NC
El Paso, TX Louisville, KY (I'd move Pittsburgh to NL East)
New Orleans, LA
What would be the two series? The first one would be against the geographic rival, for example, Giants-A's; Dodgers-Angels, Rangers-Astros, Indians-Reds, Cardinals-Royals, Twins-Brewers, Mets-Yankees, Cubs-White Sox, etc. The second one would be picked randomly, as long as it is not a second series against the geographic rival. The drawing would occur before schedules come out.
4) Keep the designated hitter (DH) in the American League, and keep the pitcher hitting in the National League.
There has been a call by American League owners to have the DH in both leagues. This comes out of a fear of the pitchers being injured when they have to play in a National League park. Twenty years ago, I would have been okay with it, because there was still a philosophical difference between the American League and the National, plus, fewer players switched leagues than they do today. In my opinion, if there was the DH in both leagues, then Major League Baseball might as well switch to Eastern and Western Conference (although, how cool would it be to have the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Phillies, and Pirates in the Northeast Division)?
5) Get rid of the balk rule
I am still questioning whether I would want to add this one in. I can partly understand the rule, because batters only have a quarter of a second to decide whether or not they should swing at the ball. Therefore, a movement from the pitcher is like a false start in football. However, the reason I put this in is because of the perspective of the base runners. A few years ago, baseball got rid of the rule that allowed the pitcher to fake the throw to third base and then try to pick off the runner at first and vice versa. I say the MLB needs to bring that rule back. If runners are going to lead off, the pitcher needs to be able to have a fair chance at picking him off.
6) Catchers would be limited to 9 innings per game at that position
There has been a push for player safety in all sports, and this rule needs to be added for the sake of the catcher. The knees of the catcher get ruined after squatting for nine innings, day after day. These same catchers are often asked to work overtime if the game is sent to extra innings. IF I WAS KING OF SPORTS, the catchers would only be allowed to catch nine innings at that position. If the game goes into extra innings, then the catcher must be replaced. The starting catcher would be allowed to play another position if the manager wants to keep him on the field. To make accomodations for this rule, I would allow a 26th person on the roster, but that 26th man would have to be a catcher. Each team would be required to carry 3 catchers on the roster.
7) Special pinch runner
In another rule involving the catcher, I would allow a special pinch runner. In interest of saving time, IF I WAS THE KING OF SPORTS, a team could send a special pinch runner for the catcher if there are two outs before the catcher gets a base hit. I have not decided where that runner could come from, it would either be the last out like it is in the softball leagues I have played in, or someone from the bench. The idea is that the special pinch runner can run for him while he is putting on his catcher's gear. The catcher would still be in the game, and it would not count as an official appearence for the pinch runner. In order for this rule to take effect, there has to be two outs before the catcher comes up to the plate.
8) Decide home-field advantage of the World Series by 1. Seeding in the playoffs, 2. Regular season record
Anyone else tired of the all-star game deciding the home-field advantage of the World Series? That game is meant to be an exhibition. I also hate the idea of a wildcard team getting the home-field advantage over a team with the best record in the major leagues just because the league of the wildcard won the all-star game. There would be a priority to decide home-field advantage. 1) Playoff seeding, higher seed gets the advantage. 2) Record. If the teams have the same seeding, the one with the better record gets home-field. 3) If they are still tied after that, then I am ok with having the all-star winning league getting home-field.
Baseball is a great game, and overall, the officials and players do a great job. No league is perfect. There is something we all would want to change. These are the changes I would like to see made.
1) Get rid of mid-season trades
A lot of people like mid-season trades. Their teams can get instant improvement with a the "final piece of the puzzle." However, I find these trades annoying. A lot of people I have talked to have problems with teams like the Yankees "buying championships". I have no problem with it, but my annoyance is with teams "renting players to get a championship". What I mean is when they trade for a player, don't have any intentions to keep him, and try to get a World Series title (i.e. the Brewers trading for C.C. Sabathia from the Cleveland Indians). Plus, it makes baseball hard to follow. As much as I follow sports, I watch games, see players on new teams, and find myself saying, "Whoa, when'd that happen?" IF I WAS KING OF SPORTS, those trades would be gone. Whatever hand you have, is what you play with the entire season. If changes need to be made, they are to be made from the minor-league system, or the free agent market. For those teams who do it to get younger players and prepare for the future, I notice that rarely works, and when it does, it takes at least a decade. Last year, the Pirates were relevant for the first time since 1992. They could have had more success if they had kept their good players. The Royals are relevant for the first time since 1985. However, if I am missing something, and mid-season trades must be kept, then I will have rule #2.
2) The trade deadline is the trade deadline. NO EXCEPTIONS OR LOOPHOLES!
After the trade deadline, the Oakland A's were able to trade for Adam Dunn, because there are a couple of loopholes in the trade deadline. My question is if the trade deadline is not going to be enforced, why have it? IF I WAS KING OF SPORTS, no trades would be allowed after the trade deadline. If a team needs different players, they would need to get them through their minor-league system.
3) Cut interleague to two series for each team.
Interleague baseball was one of those things I thought was cool when it was first created. It was a wonderful new idea for the A's to play the Giants, Dodgers play the Angels, the Cardinals play the Royals, and other match ups, because the teams are close to each other and they would never play in the regular season. However, it was become overkill over the past few years, and especially now, when there has to be an interleague series every day. The first thing I would do IF I WAS KING OF SPORTS, is to add two teams. My recommendation is Vancouver, BC and Louisville, KY. If the league wants balance, then add 6 teams to allow each division to have 6 teams each. Where would I put them?
West Central East
Vancouver, BC Indianapolis, IN Charlotte, NC
El Paso, TX Louisville, KY (I'd move Pittsburgh to NL East)
New Orleans, LA
What would be the two series? The first one would be against the geographic rival, for example, Giants-A's; Dodgers-Angels, Rangers-Astros, Indians-Reds, Cardinals-Royals, Twins-Brewers, Mets-Yankees, Cubs-White Sox, etc. The second one would be picked randomly, as long as it is not a second series against the geographic rival. The drawing would occur before schedules come out.
4) Keep the designated hitter (DH) in the American League, and keep the pitcher hitting in the National League.
There has been a call by American League owners to have the DH in both leagues. This comes out of a fear of the pitchers being injured when they have to play in a National League park. Twenty years ago, I would have been okay with it, because there was still a philosophical difference between the American League and the National, plus, fewer players switched leagues than they do today. In my opinion, if there was the DH in both leagues, then Major League Baseball might as well switch to Eastern and Western Conference (although, how cool would it be to have the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, Phillies, and Pirates in the Northeast Division)?
5) Get rid of the balk rule
I am still questioning whether I would want to add this one in. I can partly understand the rule, because batters only have a quarter of a second to decide whether or not they should swing at the ball. Therefore, a movement from the pitcher is like a false start in football. However, the reason I put this in is because of the perspective of the base runners. A few years ago, baseball got rid of the rule that allowed the pitcher to fake the throw to third base and then try to pick off the runner at first and vice versa. I say the MLB needs to bring that rule back. If runners are going to lead off, the pitcher needs to be able to have a fair chance at picking him off.
6) Catchers would be limited to 9 innings per game at that position
There has been a push for player safety in all sports, and this rule needs to be added for the sake of the catcher. The knees of the catcher get ruined after squatting for nine innings, day after day. These same catchers are often asked to work overtime if the game is sent to extra innings. IF I WAS KING OF SPORTS, the catchers would only be allowed to catch nine innings at that position. If the game goes into extra innings, then the catcher must be replaced. The starting catcher would be allowed to play another position if the manager wants to keep him on the field. To make accomodations for this rule, I would allow a 26th person on the roster, but that 26th man would have to be a catcher. Each team would be required to carry 3 catchers on the roster.
7) Special pinch runner
In another rule involving the catcher, I would allow a special pinch runner. In interest of saving time, IF I WAS THE KING OF SPORTS, a team could send a special pinch runner for the catcher if there are two outs before the catcher gets a base hit. I have not decided where that runner could come from, it would either be the last out like it is in the softball leagues I have played in, or someone from the bench. The idea is that the special pinch runner can run for him while he is putting on his catcher's gear. The catcher would still be in the game, and it would not count as an official appearence for the pinch runner. In order for this rule to take effect, there has to be two outs before the catcher comes up to the plate.
8) Decide home-field advantage of the World Series by 1. Seeding in the playoffs, 2. Regular season record
Anyone else tired of the all-star game deciding the home-field advantage of the World Series? That game is meant to be an exhibition. I also hate the idea of a wildcard team getting the home-field advantage over a team with the best record in the major leagues just because the league of the wildcard won the all-star game. There would be a priority to decide home-field advantage. 1) Playoff seeding, higher seed gets the advantage. 2) Record. If the teams have the same seeding, the one with the better record gets home-field. 3) If they are still tied after that, then I am ok with having the all-star winning league getting home-field.
Baseball is a great game, and overall, the officials and players do a great job. No league is perfect. There is something we all would want to change. These are the changes I would like to see made.
Road to Stockton (updated 5/4/15)
These are the college conference tournaments that will take place in Stockton in 2015.
CCAA BASEBALL (Regular season champion: Sonoma St. Tournament champion: UC-San Diego)
The tournament will remain in Stockton for the 2015 season, but the exact venue has changed. The 2015 CCAA tournament will take place at the University of the Pacific. The top 4 teams will make the double-elimination tournament. Here is what the first day looks like.
(4) CSU-Dominguez Hills (22-18 CCAA, 28-22) vs. (1) Cal Poly-Pomona (28-12 CCAA, 36-14)
(3) CSU-Monterey Bay (27-13 CCAA, 32-18) vs. (2) UC-San Diego (27-13 CCAA, 32-17)
Day 2
(4) CSU-Dominguez Hills vs. (3) CSU-Monterey Bay (CSUDH 6-4)
(1) Cal Poly-Pomona vs. (2) UC-San Diego (CPP 2-1)
Day 3
(4) CSU-Dominguez Hills vs. (2) UC-San Diego (CSUDH 3-2 10 innings)
(4) CSU-Dominguez Hills vs. (1) Cal Poly-Pomona (CPP 4-0)
Cal Poly-Pomona Broncos win the CCAA championship
First 2 out: Cal State-L.A., CSU-East Bay
STANISLAUS ST. finished in 10th place at (16-24 CCAA, 21-29).
PLAYERS FROM 209 IN TOURNAMENT
CSU-Monterey Bay
Todd Stewart (FR, P, Gregori-Modesto)
WCC BASEBALL (Regular Season champion: Pepperdine Tournament champion: Pepperdine)
The West Coast Conference baseball tournament will return to Banner Island Ballpark, home of the California League, Stockton Ports, in 2015. The top 4 teams will make the double-elimination tournament. If the tournament was today, here is what the first day would look like.
(4) BYU (13-10 WCC, 24-22) vs. (1) San Diego* (19-8 WCC, 30-20)
(3) San Francisco (15-9 WCC, 25-24) vs. (2) Pepperdine (15-9 WCC, 25-24)
First 2 out: Loyola Marymount, Gonzaga
*=Clinched a spot in the tournament
Pacific is in 9th place (9-15 WCC, 12-35)
SOFTBALL (Regular season champion: Humboldt St. Tournament champion: Humboldt St.)
Once again, the CCAA softball tournament will take place at Arnaiz Stadium in Stockton. The top 4 teams will make the double-elimination tournament.
May 1st
Game 1: (4) Chico St. (21-15 CCAA, 25-18) vs. (1) CSU-Monterey Bay (28-8 CCAA, 44-10) 3:00 P.M. CSUMB 7-6 (10)
Game 2: (3) Sonoma St. (24-11 CCAA, 38-17) vs. (2) Humboldt St. (25-11 CCAA, 39-15) 5:30 P.M. HSU 4-0
May 2nd
Game 3: CSU-Monterey Bay vs. Humboldt St. Noon CSUMB 5-3
Game 4: Chico St. vs. Sonoma St. 2:30 P.M. SSU 6-3
Game 5: Humboldt St. vs. Sonoma St. 5:00 P.M. HSU 8-1
May 3rd
Game 6: CSU-Monterey Bay vs. Humboldt St. 10:00 A.M. CSUMB 2-0
Players from 209 in tournament
CSU-Monterey Bay
#3 Alissa Greenhaw (SR, IF, Galt)
#21 Marielle Valdez (JR, C/OF, Atwater)
#27 Trina Solario (SR, IF, Manteca)
Humboldt St.
#3 Breonna Bejaran (SO, C/1B, Modesto Christian)
#6 Hanna Holland (FR, OF, Oakdale)
Chico St.
#3 Kelli Keefe (SR, IF, Sonora)
First 2 out: CSU-San Bernardino, CSU-East Bay
STANISLAUS ST. finished tied for 9th place (7-29 CCAA, 15-35)
MEN'S TOURNAMENT (Defending regular season champion: CSU-San Bernardino. Defending CCAA tournament champion: Stanislaus St.)
Results
Thursday March 5, 2014
(6) CSU-San Bernardino (12-10 CCAA, 12-13) vs. (3) Humboldt St. (15-7 CCAA, 21-7) 8:05 P.M (HSU 92-87 (OT))
(5) UC-San Diego (14-8 CCAA, 16-10) vs. (4) STANISLAUS ST. (14-8 CCAA, 17-10) 5:35 P.M. (CSUS 61-46)
Friday March 6, 2014
(4) Stanislaus St. vs. (1) Chico St. (18-4 CCAA, 21-6) 5:35 P.M. (CSU 72-60)
(3) Humboldt St. vs. (2) Cal Poly-Pomona (17-5 CCAA, 21-6) 8:05 P.M. (CPP 78-68)
Saturday March 7, 2014
(2) Cal Poly-Pomona Broncos vs. (1) Chico St. Wildcats (CPP 62-57 OT)
1st 2 out: CSU-Monterey Bay, Sonoma St.
WOMEN'S TOURNAMENT (Defending regular season champion: Cal Poly-Pomona. Defending CCAA tournament champion: CSU-Dominguez Hills.)
Results
Thursday March 5, 2015
(6) CSU-East Bay (11-9 CCAA, 16-10) vs. (3) Cal Poly-Pomona (16-4 CCAA, 18-6) (CSUEB 75-70)
(5) UC-San Diego (14-6 CCAA, 16-9) vs. (4) CSU-San Bernardino (14-6 CCAA, 18-6) (CSUSB 69-58)
1st round byes: (2) Humboldt St. (18-2 CCAA, 22-3), (1) CSU-Dominguez Hills (17-3 CCAA, 22-6)
1st 2 out: Cal State-L.A. Chico St.
Stanislaus St. is tied for 8th place (6-14 CCAA, 8-16)
Friday March 6, 2015
(5) CSU-San Bernardino vs. (1) CSU-Dominguez Hills (CSUDH 69-66 OT)
(6) CSU-East Bay vs. (2) Humboldt St. (CSUEB 73-67)
Saturday March 7, 2015
(6) CSU-East Bay Pioneers vs. (1) CSU- Dominguez Hills Toros (CSUDH 76-57)
GCC WOMEN'S WATER POLO (Defending champion: None, first year as a conference)
Seven teams joined together to form the Golden Coast Conference. It is a one-sport only conference with all seven teams in primary conferences. This tournament will take place at the University of the Pacific from April 23-25. Every team makes this tournament. There will be no automatic qualifying spot to the NCAA tournament; and from what I read, the games of this tournament will likely be the end of the season for all seven teams.
April 23rd
Game 1: (6) Santa Clara Broncos (2-4 GCC, 14-13) vs. (3) Loyola Marymount Lions (4-2 GCC, 19-11) LMU 13-10
Game 2: (7) Fresno Pacific Sunbirds (0-6 GCC, 7-22) vs. (2) PACIFIC TIGERS (5-1 GCC, 14-9) UOP 14-5
Game 3: (5) California Baptist Lancers (2-4 GCC, 19-13) vs. (4) Azusa Pacific Cougars (2-4 GCC, 10-15) CBU 17-8
April 24th
Game 4: Santa Clara Broncos vs. Fresno Pacific Sunbirds SCU 14-8
Game 5: (Semifinal #1) Loyola Marymount Lions vs. PACIFIC TIGERS LMU 6-3
Game 6: (Semifinal #2) California Baptist Lancers vs. (1) San Diego St. Aztecs (6-0 GCC, 16-14) SDST 11-6
April 25th
Game 7: Santa Clara Broncos vs. Azusa Pacific Cougars (5th place) SCU 11-8
Game 8: PACIFIC TIGERS vs. California Baptist Lancers (3rd place) UOP 12-9
Game 9: Championship- Loyola Marymount Lions vs. San Diego St. Aztecs LMU 9-5
CCAA MEN'S GOLF (Defending champion: STANISLAUS STATE)
Tournament is Monday - Wednesday. Admission is free
I can't do one of these projections for golf, but the Brookside Country Club in Stockton is holding the CCAA Men's golf tournament. Somehow, UC-San Diego is the official host of the tournament. On a personal note, Torrey Pines is near La Jolla (the town UC-San Diego is actually in). If the Tritons are going to host, it should be at Torrey Pines.
April 20th results
Team (Score after 2 rounds)
1. Chico St. 559 (-17)
2. CSU-Monterey Bay 566 (-10)
3. STANISLAUS ST. 573 (-3)
4. CSU-East Bay 574 (-4)
5. Sonoma St. 576 (E)
6. CSU-San Bernardino 581 (+5)
7. UC-San Diego 582 (+6)
8. CSU-Dominguez Hills 586 (+10)
Individual
Connor Day (STANISLAUS ST.) and Alistair Docherty (Chico St.) are tied for the lead at -6. Docherty won the individual championship in a playoff hole.
April 21st
Team
(4) CSU-East Bay vs. (1) Chico St. CSUEB 3-2
(3) STANISLAUS ST. vs. (2) CSU-Monterey Bay CSUS 3.5-1.5
April 22nd
Team
(4) CSU-East Bay vs. (3) STANISLAUS ST. CSUS 3.5-1.5
STANISLAUS STATE WARRIORS won the team championship.
source: www.goccaa.org
CCAA BASEBALL (Regular season champion: Sonoma St. Tournament champion: UC-San Diego)
The tournament will remain in Stockton for the 2015 season, but the exact venue has changed. The 2015 CCAA tournament will take place at the University of the Pacific. The top 4 teams will make the double-elimination tournament. Here is what the first day looks like.
(4) CSU-Dominguez Hills (22-18 CCAA, 28-22) vs. (1) Cal Poly-Pomona (28-12 CCAA, 36-14)
(3) CSU-Monterey Bay (27-13 CCAA, 32-18) vs. (2) UC-San Diego (27-13 CCAA, 32-17)
Day 2
(4) CSU-Dominguez Hills vs. (3) CSU-Monterey Bay (CSUDH 6-4)
(1) Cal Poly-Pomona vs. (2) UC-San Diego (CPP 2-1)
Day 3
(4) CSU-Dominguez Hills vs. (2) UC-San Diego (CSUDH 3-2 10 innings)
(4) CSU-Dominguez Hills vs. (1) Cal Poly-Pomona (CPP 4-0)
Cal Poly-Pomona Broncos win the CCAA championship
First 2 out: Cal State-L.A., CSU-East Bay
STANISLAUS ST. finished in 10th place at (16-24 CCAA, 21-29).
PLAYERS FROM 209 IN TOURNAMENT
CSU-Monterey Bay
Todd Stewart (FR, P, Gregori-Modesto)
WCC BASEBALL (Regular Season champion: Pepperdine Tournament champion: Pepperdine)
The West Coast Conference baseball tournament will return to Banner Island Ballpark, home of the California League, Stockton Ports, in 2015. The top 4 teams will make the double-elimination tournament. If the tournament was today, here is what the first day would look like.
(4) BYU (13-10 WCC, 24-22) vs. (1) San Diego* (19-8 WCC, 30-20)
(3) San Francisco (15-9 WCC, 25-24) vs. (2) Pepperdine (15-9 WCC, 25-24)
First 2 out: Loyola Marymount, Gonzaga
*=Clinched a spot in the tournament
Pacific is in 9th place (9-15 WCC, 12-35)
SOFTBALL (Regular season champion: Humboldt St. Tournament champion: Humboldt St.)
Once again, the CCAA softball tournament will take place at Arnaiz Stadium in Stockton. The top 4 teams will make the double-elimination tournament.
May 1st
Game 1: (4) Chico St. (21-15 CCAA, 25-18) vs. (1) CSU-Monterey Bay (28-8 CCAA, 44-10) 3:00 P.M. CSUMB 7-6 (10)
Game 2: (3) Sonoma St. (24-11 CCAA, 38-17) vs. (2) Humboldt St. (25-11 CCAA, 39-15) 5:30 P.M. HSU 4-0
May 2nd
Game 3: CSU-Monterey Bay vs. Humboldt St. Noon CSUMB 5-3
Game 4: Chico St. vs. Sonoma St. 2:30 P.M. SSU 6-3
Game 5: Humboldt St. vs. Sonoma St. 5:00 P.M. HSU 8-1
May 3rd
Game 6: CSU-Monterey Bay vs. Humboldt St. 10:00 A.M. CSUMB 2-0
Players from 209 in tournament
CSU-Monterey Bay
#3 Alissa Greenhaw (SR, IF, Galt)
#21 Marielle Valdez (JR, C/OF, Atwater)
#27 Trina Solario (SR, IF, Manteca)
Humboldt St.
#3 Breonna Bejaran (SO, C/1B, Modesto Christian)
#6 Hanna Holland (FR, OF, Oakdale)
Chico St.
#3 Kelli Keefe (SR, IF, Sonora)
First 2 out: CSU-San Bernardino, CSU-East Bay
STANISLAUS ST. finished tied for 9th place (7-29 CCAA, 15-35)
MEN'S TOURNAMENT (Defending regular season champion: CSU-San Bernardino. Defending CCAA tournament champion: Stanislaus St.)
Results
Thursday March 5, 2014
(6) CSU-San Bernardino (12-10 CCAA, 12-13) vs. (3) Humboldt St. (15-7 CCAA, 21-7) 8:05 P.M (HSU 92-87 (OT))
(5) UC-San Diego (14-8 CCAA, 16-10) vs. (4) STANISLAUS ST. (14-8 CCAA, 17-10) 5:35 P.M. (CSUS 61-46)
Friday March 6, 2014
(4) Stanislaus St. vs. (1) Chico St. (18-4 CCAA, 21-6) 5:35 P.M. (CSU 72-60)
(3) Humboldt St. vs. (2) Cal Poly-Pomona (17-5 CCAA, 21-6) 8:05 P.M. (CPP 78-68)
Saturday March 7, 2014
(2) Cal Poly-Pomona Broncos vs. (1) Chico St. Wildcats (CPP 62-57 OT)
1st 2 out: CSU-Monterey Bay, Sonoma St.
WOMEN'S TOURNAMENT (Defending regular season champion: Cal Poly-Pomona. Defending CCAA tournament champion: CSU-Dominguez Hills.)
Results
Thursday March 5, 2015
(6) CSU-East Bay (11-9 CCAA, 16-10) vs. (3) Cal Poly-Pomona (16-4 CCAA, 18-6) (CSUEB 75-70)
(5) UC-San Diego (14-6 CCAA, 16-9) vs. (4) CSU-San Bernardino (14-6 CCAA, 18-6) (CSUSB 69-58)
1st round byes: (2) Humboldt St. (18-2 CCAA, 22-3), (1) CSU-Dominguez Hills (17-3 CCAA, 22-6)
1st 2 out: Cal State-L.A. Chico St.
Stanislaus St. is tied for 8th place (6-14 CCAA, 8-16)
Friday March 6, 2015
(5) CSU-San Bernardino vs. (1) CSU-Dominguez Hills (CSUDH 69-66 OT)
(6) CSU-East Bay vs. (2) Humboldt St. (CSUEB 73-67)
Saturday March 7, 2015
(6) CSU-East Bay Pioneers vs. (1) CSU- Dominguez Hills Toros (CSUDH 76-57)
GCC WOMEN'S WATER POLO (Defending champion: None, first year as a conference)
Seven teams joined together to form the Golden Coast Conference. It is a one-sport only conference with all seven teams in primary conferences. This tournament will take place at the University of the Pacific from April 23-25. Every team makes this tournament. There will be no automatic qualifying spot to the NCAA tournament; and from what I read, the games of this tournament will likely be the end of the season for all seven teams.
April 23rd
Game 1: (6) Santa Clara Broncos (2-4 GCC, 14-13) vs. (3) Loyola Marymount Lions (4-2 GCC, 19-11) LMU 13-10
Game 2: (7) Fresno Pacific Sunbirds (0-6 GCC, 7-22) vs. (2) PACIFIC TIGERS (5-1 GCC, 14-9) UOP 14-5
Game 3: (5) California Baptist Lancers (2-4 GCC, 19-13) vs. (4) Azusa Pacific Cougars (2-4 GCC, 10-15) CBU 17-8
April 24th
Game 4: Santa Clara Broncos vs. Fresno Pacific Sunbirds SCU 14-8
Game 5: (Semifinal #1) Loyola Marymount Lions vs. PACIFIC TIGERS LMU 6-3
Game 6: (Semifinal #2) California Baptist Lancers vs. (1) San Diego St. Aztecs (6-0 GCC, 16-14) SDST 11-6
April 25th
Game 7: Santa Clara Broncos vs. Azusa Pacific Cougars (5th place) SCU 11-8
Game 8: PACIFIC TIGERS vs. California Baptist Lancers (3rd place) UOP 12-9
Game 9: Championship- Loyola Marymount Lions vs. San Diego St. Aztecs LMU 9-5
CCAA MEN'S GOLF (Defending champion: STANISLAUS STATE)
Tournament is Monday - Wednesday. Admission is free
I can't do one of these projections for golf, but the Brookside Country Club in Stockton is holding the CCAA Men's golf tournament. Somehow, UC-San Diego is the official host of the tournament. On a personal note, Torrey Pines is near La Jolla (the town UC-San Diego is actually in). If the Tritons are going to host, it should be at Torrey Pines.
April 20th results
Team (Score after 2 rounds)
1. Chico St. 559 (-17)
2. CSU-Monterey Bay 566 (-10)
3. STANISLAUS ST. 573 (-3)
4. CSU-East Bay 574 (-4)
5. Sonoma St. 576 (E)
6. CSU-San Bernardino 581 (+5)
7. UC-San Diego 582 (+6)
8. CSU-Dominguez Hills 586 (+10)
Individual
Connor Day (STANISLAUS ST.) and Alistair Docherty (Chico St.) are tied for the lead at -6. Docherty won the individual championship in a playoff hole.
April 21st
Team
(4) CSU-East Bay vs. (1) Chico St. CSUEB 3-2
(3) STANISLAUS ST. vs. (2) CSU-Monterey Bay CSUS 3.5-1.5
April 22nd
Team
(4) CSU-East Bay vs. (3) STANISLAUS ST. CSUS 3.5-1.5
STANISLAUS STATE WARRIORS won the team championship.
source: www.goccaa.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)