Sniper wrote:I like having district tournaments better than the super region. It seems like the high school players like the district tournaments, at least the ones I have been around do. I also thought district tournaments were fun to play in as well.
Run4Fun2009 wrote:Sniper wrote:I like having district tournaments better than the super region. It seems like the high school players like the district tournaments, at least the ones I have been around do. I also thought district tournaments were fun to play in as well.
District tourneys are fine for those districts that have enough teams in it.
Many regions that have the super-regional format have districts that are at 6 and those district tourneys are kind of a waste to play out. The nice thing about the super-regional format is that you can't lose the first game and still have a chance to go to State...you have to win out the tourney games to earn that spot.
scc wrote:If the district tournaments remained single-elimination with a possible challenge game, none of this so-called "Super Region" would be necessary. District 4, for example, had only six teams, and often times Grafton had the home floor for the tournament. Playing a bunch of games to retain four out of six teams no longer made sense, plus the new region format allows other schools to potentially host a postseason game. Is this new solution the best one? I don't think so, but it's better than having a double-elimination district tournament.
winner-within wrote:Run4Fun2009 wrote:Sniper wrote:I like having district tournaments better than the super region. It seems like the high school players like the district tournaments, at least the ones I have been around do. I also thought district tournaments were fun to play in as well.
District tourneys are fine for those districts that have enough teams in it.
Many regions that have the super-regional format have districts that are at 6 and those district tourneys are kind of a waste to play out. The nice thing about the super-regional format is that you can't lose the first game and still have a chance to go to State...you have to win out the tourney games to earn that spot.
but there aren't many regions in the format (2 total)... just pointing that out Run
and Region 1 is going to do it starting next season they actually have 14 the only other region with 14 teams (7 in each dist like region 1) is region 3...
all the rest have 13 teams with like you stated 6 in one of the districts...but I dont think the 6 in a district thing is the main factor in eliminating the district tournament....I would say the 2 extra games and everybody plays at least once over rides the number of teams in a district...
hoops247 wrote:I don't have a strong option either way (districts vs. super-region) but I hope the NDHSAA doesn't force everyone to go to a super-region. In the case of Region 6; they have had 16 teams (8 in each district) for several years. This year they are down to 14 teams (7 in each district), but I believe they will be back up to 16 again next year with the addition of Nedrose and South Prairie. If that region was forced to go to a super-region that would immediately lock in 15 games on their schedule. If a team was already playing a regular season tournament and didn't get out there's 3 more games. Now you've got 18 games scheduled. During those years when a team is strong, it doesn't give them much of an opportunity to go out and schedule some quality competition outside their area.
I realize this scenario doesn't affect very many regions anymore, but for the one or two that it does it would be nice that they get to decide their post-season format on their own and not be forced into a super-region by the state in my opinion.
packers21 wrote:hoops247 wrote:I don't have a strong option either way (districts vs. super-region) but I hope the NDHSAA doesn't force everyone to go to a super-region. In the case of Region 6; they have had 16 teams (8 in each district) for several years. This year they are down to 14 teams (7 in each district), but I believe they will be back up to 16 again next year with the addition of Nedrose and South Prairie. If that region was forced to go to a super-region that would immediately lock in 15 games on their schedule. If a team was already playing a regular season tournament and didn't get out there's 3 more games. Now you've got 18 games scheduled. During those years when a team is strong, it doesn't give them much of an opportunity to go out and schedule some quality competition outside their area.
I realize this scenario doesn't affect very many regions anymore, but for the one or two that it does it would be nice that they get to decide their post-season format on their own and not be forced into a super-region by the state in my opinion.
I understand the point you are trying to make but you have your facts wrong. When teams move to the super region they are allowed to play 3 more regular season games, giving them 21. They only need to play their region opponents once. So if Rugby was playing in a Super-Region this year they woulda had to schedule only 13 region games giving them 8 games to play anyone that they want. Almost opposite of what you were saying. I do not think the state will make everyone go to the Super-Region format as long as school numbers in the Regions stays around 15.
hoops247 wrote:No, I think you're missing my point.
NEXT year a Region 6 team would have to play FIFTEEN region games. Add in a tournament and you are up to EIGHTEEN games. Yes, I realize that you have a 21 game schedule when you are in a super-region, which mean you now have THREE games left to fill. If you do decided to go outside your area for competitive you would have to drop a game or two that might be against a neighboring school that is in a different region or drop those natural rivals.
Regardless, my point is that I hope the state never forces a region into a super-region.
winner-within wrote:and also with 3 teams in the top ten from Region 6 I dont think you have to go to far to find competition for years to come....and you certainly dont want to travel to, or host Minnesota IMO ....it stinks to get injuries from a game with a team from another State...its rarely quality play also...
The Schwab wrote:winner-within wrote:and also with 3 teams in the top ten from Region 6 I dont think you have to go to far to find competition for years to come....and you certainly dont want to travel to, or host Minnesota IMO ....it stinks to get injuries from a game with a team from another State...its rarely quality play also...
I disagree with the statement above. Teams in the Region 7 area have 2 quality SD teams they could play in Harding County and Faith. Always a good brand of basketball when you play those two.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests