12-27-2018, 10:20 AM
Interesting quirk about Kick-Off Weekend (the 4-team regional pods where the winners go to Indoor Nationals). It's often a benefit for teams, because you get a good non-conference match or two even before you advance to Indoor Nationals. But because of the draft process they use to slot teams, some regions are very top-heavy while others are very balanced. So, Stanford gets two matches that likely won't count toward the rankings by the end of the year (rankings are like the Directors Cup in a way--only your top 10 wins count, along with deductions for all of your losses, so beating lower-tier teams won't give the better teams any boost by the end of the year).
Basically, the top 16 teams in last year's rankings are the host sites, and starting at #17 and going on down the rankings, each team decides where it wants to play. For example, Oklahoma State and Northwestern finished last year #14 and #16 respectively, but they lost key players and expect to have a down year. So, #17 Miami decided to take the 2 seed in Evanston, IL, while #18 Kansas took the 2 seed in Stillwater, OK. Then, rather than be the 2 seed in one of the other 14 regionals, #19 Tulsa decided to take the 3 seed in Evanston, and #20 Illinois took the 3 seed in Stillwater. #21 Michigan decided to take a shot at another potentially vulnerable seed, #8 Ole Miss, as the 2 seed there, but then the Evanston and Stillwater regions got filled up by #22 UCF and #23 UVA before 13 of the 16 regions even had a second team! It makes sense, to be sure--if you're ranked around 20th, you probably feel better about beating two teams right around your same quality level than you would about pulling off an upset of a top 5 or top 10 team.
It makes for an interesting pseudo-ranking system. You can tell the tennis world doesn't think very strongly of #5 Georgia Tech, for example, since they lost some key pieces, as they get the #24, #26, and #33 teams in their regional. Same for #8 Ole Miss (who gets #21 and #31, and then #56). But geography plays a role. For example, #25 Baylor could have decided to be the 3 seed in Atlanta or Oxford, but decided to instead be favored in its first-round match as the 2 seed in Austin before presumably falling to Texas in the second round. #42 Washington State could have been the 3 seed in Los Angeles with a coin flip of a match against Florida International before playing UCLA, but instead chose to be the 2 seed at Stanford. By the time St. Mary's picked, it was just 4 seeds remaining, so they stayed closer to home at Stanford rather than go to Nashville, Chapel Hill, Durham, etc. At a certain point, teams are less concerned about actually making Indoor Nationals then just trying to get a winnable first-round match (for example, #54 SMU probably would have preferred to stay in Texas, but only the 4 seed (meaning a first-round matchup with the Longhorns) was left there, while the 3 was still available in several places, so it took a winnable match against Washington State here at Stanford instead.
The South Carolina regional will be interesting. The #12 Gamecocks are the host, but the 2-3 match between #27 Wake Forest and #36 Arizona State could be a great one, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if #52 Cal knocks off South Carolina in the first round. Cal should be much improved this year.
Basically, the top 16 teams in last year's rankings are the host sites, and starting at #17 and going on down the rankings, each team decides where it wants to play. For example, Oklahoma State and Northwestern finished last year #14 and #16 respectively, but they lost key players and expect to have a down year. So, #17 Miami decided to take the 2 seed in Evanston, IL, while #18 Kansas took the 2 seed in Stillwater, OK. Then, rather than be the 2 seed in one of the other 14 regionals, #19 Tulsa decided to take the 3 seed in Evanston, and #20 Illinois took the 3 seed in Stillwater. #21 Michigan decided to take a shot at another potentially vulnerable seed, #8 Ole Miss, as the 2 seed there, but then the Evanston and Stillwater regions got filled up by #22 UCF and #23 UVA before 13 of the 16 regions even had a second team! It makes sense, to be sure--if you're ranked around 20th, you probably feel better about beating two teams right around your same quality level than you would about pulling off an upset of a top 5 or top 10 team.
It makes for an interesting pseudo-ranking system. You can tell the tennis world doesn't think very strongly of #5 Georgia Tech, for example, since they lost some key pieces, as they get the #24, #26, and #33 teams in their regional. Same for #8 Ole Miss (who gets #21 and #31, and then #56). But geography plays a role. For example, #25 Baylor could have decided to be the 3 seed in Atlanta or Oxford, but decided to instead be favored in its first-round match as the 2 seed in Austin before presumably falling to Texas in the second round. #42 Washington State could have been the 3 seed in Los Angeles with a coin flip of a match against Florida International before playing UCLA, but instead chose to be the 2 seed at Stanford. By the time St. Mary's picked, it was just 4 seeds remaining, so they stayed closer to home at Stanford rather than go to Nashville, Chapel Hill, Durham, etc. At a certain point, teams are less concerned about actually making Indoor Nationals then just trying to get a winnable first-round match (for example, #54 SMU probably would have preferred to stay in Texas, but only the 4 seed (meaning a first-round matchup with the Longhorns) was left there, while the 3 was still available in several places, so it took a winnable match against Washington State here at Stanford instead.
The South Carolina regional will be interesting. The #12 Gamecocks are the host, but the 2-3 match between #27 Wake Forest and #36 Arizona State could be a great one, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if #52 Cal knocks off South Carolina in the first round. Cal should be much improved this year.