NCAA News Archive - 2010

back to 2010 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index

    • Print
    Championships Cabinet approves format change for women's soccer

    Jun 18, 2010 7:28:45 AM

    By Greg Johnson
    The NCAA News

     

    The NCAA Division I Championships/Sports Management Cabinet approved a recommendation to change the women's soccer championship to a 1-1-2-2 format beginning in the fall of 2011.

    The cabinet, which met Tuesday and Wednesday in Indianapolis, decided to adjust the format so that the first round will be conducted at 32 on-campus sites followed by the second round at 16 on-campus sites the next week.

    The third round and quarterfinals of the championship would be contested on the same weekend at four non-predetermined campus-based sites.

    Originally, the proposal called for these matches to be played at four predetermined sites, but cabinet members had concerns about attendance when the host institution is not participating in the event, as well as concerns about staffing the event over Thanksgiving weekend.

    The Women's College Cup semifinals and finals would continue to be played the following weekend at a predetermined site.

    The Division I Women's Soccer Committee believes this format change will enhance the student-athlete experience by allowing more teams to host first-round matches. Committee members also feel that more first-round sites will help mitigate travel challenges by keeping teams closer to their home campuses in the first round.

    Previously, the Division I Women's Soccer Championship had a 2-1-1-2 format, meaning that the first and second rounds occurred on the first weekend of the tournament. Sixteen on-campus sites had four-team pods for first- and second-round competition. Eight sites were used for the third round, and four on-campus sites hosted quarterfinals the following week.

    Under the previous format, the women's soccer committee also had concerns about the lack of time that teams – many of which are coming off conference tournaments the prior week – had to prepare before competing in two matches the next week.

    Track and field

    In another item, the cabinet provided feedback on a "24/8 Plan" from the Men's and Women's Track and Field Committee that would possibly eliminate outdoor regional-qualifying track meets.

    Most of the cabinet members supported the concept that would fix the field size for individual events at 32 participants and relay events at 24.

    In the plan designed by the U.S. Track and Field Coaches and Cross Country Coaches Association, the top 24 declared individuals in each individual event would have access to the championship meet. The remaining eight participants would be the next best conference champions decided by a descending-order list.

    In relays, the top 18 declared teams would have access to the event, with the next best six conference champions filling out the field. Again, that would be determined by a national descending-order list.

    In recent years, track and field regional qualifying has been a topic of conversation within the cabinet. The track and field committee realizes the expenses that institutions incur with the regional-qualifying format, and it estimates that this new proposal would save $3.5-$4.2 million collectively for the membership. The committee also recognizes that the new format would result in a significant budget impact for the Association.

    Research compiled from the 2007-09 outdoor championships showed that an average of 57 percent of the Division I conferences would have been represented at the NCAA meet under the new plan.

    Research also showed that if a straight descending list of the top 32 individuals had been used to determine an individual event field, only 40 percent of Division I conferences would be represented at the national meet.

    Cabinet members who opposed the plan were concerned about not having a more inclusive automatic-qualifying system. They believe too many conference champions would not have access to the NCAA meet. Others suggested that the new two-region model should be evaluated before eliminating regionals.

    Other highlights

    In other items on the agenda: