Rumored NCAA Changes

[Mitch Bridge]

The tv audience will eventually catch up to our great sport at the college level. Don't change the structure of how the match evolves by hoping for a tv contract. Play doubles last and make it worth 3 individual points with 8 game pro sets. No doubles if up 6-0 or 5-1 in the dual. When players are available after a ten minute break they start their doubles instead of waiting for the longer singles matches to finish. Doubles to determine the outcome will give college tennis a different flavor-as well as the insane cheering-than pro tennis. So will the huge rivalries!

[athleticstennis]

Originally Posted by Mitch Bridge

The tv audience will eventually catch up to our great sport at the college level. Don't change the structure of how the match evolves by hoping for a tv contract. Play doubles last and make it worth 3 individual points with 8 game pro sets. No doubles if up 6-0 or 5-1 in the dual. When players are available after a ten minute break they start their doubles instead of waiting for the longer singles matches to finish. Doubles to determine the outcome will give college tennis a different flavor-as well as the insane cheering-than pro tennis. So will the huge rivalries!

I agree with this. I think this would be a very good change that many more people could agree with. Why not first singles, then doubles? But I still think doubles should worth 1 point. And if the match is decided before the doubles, then is more of an option between coaches if they want to play it or not.

[SoCal10s]

who are these NCAA people who are making these decisions? they sound like USTA clowns doing their dirty work again..

[kme5150]

These are the committee members as stated on the bottom of the document:

Cathy Beene, Georgia Southern University - Athletics' Senior Woman Administrator & former coach
Men's Team - No National Ranking
Women's Team - No National Ranking

Tad Berkowitz, University of Arizona - Head Men's Coach
Men's Team - No National Ranking
Women's Team - #27 National Ranking

Tim Cass, University of New Mexico - Deputy Athletic Director &
Former Texas A&M and UNM Men's Head Coach. Was a good coach.
Men's Team - #61 National Ranking
Women's Team - No National Ranking

Jeff Conyers, Southern University - Women's Head Coach
Men's Team - Does not have a Men's Team
Women's Team - No National Ranking

Alex Dorato, Yale University - Head Men's Coach
Men's Team - No National Ranking
Women's Team - #29 National Ranking

D.J. Gurule, Gonzaga University - Women's Head Coach
Men's Team - No National Ranking
Women's Team - No National Ranking

Callie Hubbell, Conference USA - Coordinator of Student Services
Played for Vanderbilt and then was an assisant Women's coach for Texas A&M for 2 years.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0By9s...pli=1&sle=true

To the committee members - Start by fixing your own tennis programs before you recommend how other should do it. I would like see the attendance records for tennis matches at your own institutions. I would like to see the television contract that states they would show matches on television if the matches were less than 3 hours.

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by Mitch Bridge

The tv audience will eventually catch up to our great sport at the college level. Don't change the structure of how the match evolves by hoping for a tv contract. Play doubles last and make it worth 3 individual points with 8 game pro sets. No doubles if up 6-0 or 5-1 in the dual. When players are available after a ten minute break they start their doubles instead of waiting for the longer singles matches to finish. Doubles to determine the outcome will give college tennis a different flavor-as well as the insane cheering-than pro tennis. So will the huge rivalries!

Originally Posted by athleticstennis

I agree with this. I think this would be a very good change that many more people could agree with. Why not first singles, then doubles? But I still think doubles should worth 1 point. And if the match is decided before the doubles, then is more of an option between coaches if they want to play it or not.

Sorry, I don't agree with this. First of all, the number of matches that would actually be 3-3 going into the doubles would be very low. Secondly, unless you plan on taking the doubles out of the NCAAs, the coaches would always (unless weather doesn't allow it) play out the doubles as there are doubles rankings, and they would be screwing their players by not playing them.

The doubles are usually pretty quick, and I think if they were to do anything it would be that they should abandon the third doubles match if the doubles point is already decided. But even then, you could be messing with the rankings in doubles. As it is now, if the doubles point is decided, they play out the third match, with a tiebreak at 7-7 instead of 8-8 (some conferences shorten it even more when the doubles point is decided).

My experience as an ITA referee is that even when there is potential rain in the forecast, the coaches and players are very reluctant to play singles first, followed by doubles. Since the coaches make the rules, I don't ever see this happening.

[floridatennisdude]

In my decade of following college tennis, I've never disliked the format. Some matches are long, but so was Isner-Mahut. It's the game. Many sports go into OT, tennis's OT is the 3rd set. Eliminating it for a super breaker is like taking PKs in soccer after a regulation tie. Or shooting free throws for a basketball game, etc, etc.

Biggest shame is that this type of change would likely disrupt the flow of quality players that come to college tennis in lieu of the futures and challengers. A breaker 3rd won't teach those kids how to grind out big wins.

[aceprojesus]

Originally Posted by mikej

1) yes, i'm aware that can be tiring...GOOD! tennis is a physical, tiring sport that brings fitness and heart into play...again, GOOD!

2) it adds artificially created "excitement", yes...playing one point for each of the nine matches would be "exciting" and add "tension"...but it's not the sport I love

3) again, if we're interested in spicing up the draw with upsets rather than seeing which team has more heart and fitness and is the better team at the end of a war, play one point for each match, you'll see plenty of upsets

if someone finds me a coach or player of a top 20 team that supports this change, i will be shocked! (as much as this poster seems to think only people who don't play the game oppose the change) just one such coach or player, find him for me!

How would it be artificially created excitement? That doesn't even make sense...excitement is excitement. Obviously the better teams wouldn't support this change because it would even out the playing field a little more. But honestly, if they're not all winning their matches in straight sets, they're not much better after all.

[aceprojesus]

Originally Posted by andfor

I'm a former player. I played in the stone age when all matches were best of 9, 2 out of 3 sets for both singles and doubles. If we got tired in a match and lost on fitness, you had heck to pay in conditioning the next few days. Not one player/teammate cried about it. There was no such thing as a match TB, we used polyester string (we used Kevlar) and I wore canvas Nike's because they were free.

Back then DI played No-Ad. Ask UGA about No-Ad and their loss to Lander. Then ask why they don't play No-Ad any more.

A little history may just serve you well along with some humility.

What? You don't have to act like a jerk...we're talking about today's game not what happened "back then"

[SoCal10s]

no -ad college tennis ... now that's an idea ..

[JLyon]

Originally Posted by SoCal10s

no -ad college tennis ... now that's an idea ..

as an official I can just see the amount of hooking that would happen on the no-ad points ad then the screaming matches.

[SoCal10s]

Originally Posted by JLyon

as an official I can just see the amount of hooking that would happen on the no-ad points ad then the screaming matches.

so, is it any different on game points ,if cheating is going to happen how can it be prevented ? it's always going to be this way unless technology can put a ''hawkeye'' on every court ... old umpires don't have better eyes than D1 players.. it's a tough job...

[MarTennis]

Originally Posted by Satsuma Illini

It's all money based decisions probably. College tennis isn't making any money, so the NCAA, which only cares about what will bring them more money, is going to sit down and carve up the sports that don't make money to the bare bone and act like they are doing everyone a favor.

Reducing to defacto club status.

[JLyon]

Originally Posted by SoCal10s

so, is it any different on game points ,if cheating is going to happen how can it be prevented ? it's always going to be this way unless technology can put a ''hawkeye'' on every court ... old umpires don't have better eyes than D1 players.. it's a tough job...

You're right but amazing how tight the lines get in pressure situations, also a large majority of schools do not have the benefit of of chair officials, so with 2-3 roving it is not an easy job for officials or the players

[BHSC]

Originally Posted by Mitch Bridge

Play doubles last and make it worth 3 individual points with 8 game pro sets. No doubles if up 6-0 or 5-1 in the dual.

For years, Doubles was played last.

However, so many matches ended without doubles or with just one doubles match finishing, de-emphasizing doubles.

In the early 1990s, they changed the system to what we currently use.

It's officially called the Scarpa System, named for Paul Scarpa, Furman's long time coach, who recently retired and was inducted in the ITA Hall of Fame this past May.

One reason for the change was to bring back the emphasis on doubles and make it an integral part of a match.

[Tennishacker]

Originally Posted by SoCal10s

so, is it any different on game points ,if cheating is going to happen how can it be prevented ? it's always going to be this way unless technology can put a ''hawkeye'' on every court ... old umpires don't have better eyes than D1 players.. it's a tough job...

The majority of umps will not over rule players.

I applaud the ones that do.

[Tennishacker]

Originally Posted by BHSC

For years, Doubles was played last.

However, so many matches ended without doubles or with just one doubles match finishing, de-emphasizing doubles.

In the early 1990s, they changed the system to what we currently use.

It's officially called the Scarpa System, named for Paul Scarpa, Furman's long time coach, who recently retired and was inducted in the ITA Hall of Fame this past May.

One reason for the change was to bring back the emphasis on doubles and make it an integral part of a match.

Thanks for info, I was wondering when and who can up with the system.

IMO, it's a great system that works very well.

[goran_ace]

One thing that comes to mind from my college tennis days is that our coach use to make us do a lot of conditioning work. His philosophy was that we will have the edge anytime a match goes to a third set because fitness will not be a factor.

If this new system were adopted for every college match, I can imagine instead of doing all that conditioning work he might emphasize working on how to hit bigger serves because in a tiebreak having a big serve can give you the edge.

[Jack the Hack]

Originally Posted by mikej

the people i see speaking up like manny diaz say this will "kill our college game as we know it today"...and check out this article to see what top junior coaches such as frank salazar and vesa ponnka (a badass i was lucky enough to train under for a few years) have to say about the third set tb:
http://www.tennisrecruiting.net/article.asp?id=1479

Thank you for posting that article. It's a well written summary of the (not so) super tie-breaker by Chuck Kriese, the former Clemson coach, who knows what he's talking about (he's a 4 time National Coach of the Year). Kriese wrote several excellent books on coaching, and fitness was a hallmark of his players. Great read, including the history and opposition to the breaker previously.

[bubba maroon]

Originally Posted by Towerofpower205

why even play matches if shortening it is an issue? Just give the trophy to the top recruiting class.

just count up the stars divide by six and let the kids play a best of five points doubles match and remember only the blue chips get their travel paid for

allow only allow 10 seconds on a changeover and have the line judge only look at that aspect and then commission a multi-million dollar study into the health benefits achieved by shortening the match by an average of 20 seconds

also do not permit injury timeouts unless blood is evident or the higher ranked player {more stars) is losing

[bubba maroon]

a think changes to both organizations are urgently needed