The way the field is grouped seems strange, so I am wondering if there is any transparency to how this is done or who does it. Is it the same committee that does the original selections?

Five national seeds survived, so it seems obvious that two will be in one pool and three in the other, which is how it worked out. However, the #2 overall got paired with #5 & #7, while the #5 overall got paired with the #8 and two non-national seeds. On top of that, the #2 overall got the highest seeded (regional 2nd seed) of the three non-national seeds thrown in too. Seems like a strange way to organize them.

Why wouldn't you re-seed them 1-8 according to original national rank and regional seeding and then pool them that way. This would have resulted in a much more even bracket in my opinion.

1. Vandy
2. Arkansas
3. Mississippi State
4. Louisville
5. Tech
6. Auburn
7. Florida St.
8. Michigan

Pool #1 - Vandy/Louisville/Tech/Michigan

Pool #2 - Arkansas/Miss. St./Auburn/Florida St.

Can't argue SEC bias because both put three in one and one in the other, but it seems like this approach would have been more fair and logical...........wait, is this an NCAA event................Nevermind, I just answered my own question.

There is no reseed for Omaha. The groupings are set when the original brackets are set.

CypressAg09 said:

---

I don't really see the not "fair and logical" part of this. Seeds are set at the beginning of the tournament and if chalk held all the way through, the pools would be set as you described. Reseeding here would be the same as reseeding during the Elite 8 of the NCAA basketball tournament. Don't see the point.

---

Before 1999, they actually did reseed the field at Omaha. Of course, the ones weren't ranked at all before the CWS in that format.

twk said:

---

CypressAg09 said:

---

I don't really see the not "fair and logical" part of this. Seeds are set at the beginning of the tournament and if chalk held all the way through, the pools would be set as you described. Reseeding here would be the same as reseeding during the Elite 8 of the NCAA basketball tournament. Don't see the point.

---

Before 1999, they actually did reseed the field at Omaha. Of course, the ones weren't ranked at all before the CWS in that format.

---

I guess it made more sense then. I was more talking about now that they actually seed 1-16, I don't really see the need to reseed. Seeding 1-16 from the beginning was a much needed change imo.

Scheduling to maximize revenue makes sense. They do that with regionals and supers, too, as far as I am aware. Drawing in revenue helps the sport.

twk said:

---

Yes, I'm fine with the current set up. The only thing odd about it is that they don't go ahead and set the schedule for Omaha based on the brackets. That is a holdover from the days of reseeding that should probably be eliminated.

---

I could be wrong, but I think they hold on setting the dates to give a team an extra day if they have really bad weather at one of the super sites. If one of the supers goes until Tuesday due to bad weather, they can put that group on the Sunday start schedule.

nereus said:

---

twk said:

---

Yes, I'm fine with the current set up. The only thing odd about it is that they don't go ahead and set the schedule for Omaha based on the brackets. That is a holdover from the days of reseeding that should probably be eliminated.

---

I could be wrong, but I think they hold on setting the dates to give a team an extra day if they have really bad weather at one of the super sites. If one of the supers goes until Tuesday due to bad weather, they can put that group on the Sunday start schedule.

---

Call my cynical, but I think it's more about television getting the best games for primetime. Otherwise, they would have scheduled the super regionals so that the side of the bracket that starts play in Omaha on Saturday started their supers on Friday, and the side that starts on Sunday would have started on Saturday.

My original post was unclear. I don't think they should re-seed, I think that they should build the pools based on the original seeding, which they did not do as I outlined in my post. Lots of opinions that they should leave the seeding alone, which I agree with. Wondering what the rationale is for the arrangement of the bracket that they set, which seems random.

Looking at it again, it does appear that TV may have influenced it, as they split up the smaller schools as the logical grouping based on seed would have had Vandy, Louisville, and Tech together while the other side of the bracket would have had all large football schools with big fan bases.

SABUILDERAG said:

---

Looking at it again, it does appear that TV may have influenced it, as they split up the smaller schools as the logical grouping based on seed would have had Vandy, Louisville, and Tech together while the other side of the bracket would have had all large football schools with big fan bases.

---

The bracket was 100% set on selection Monday. There is no rearranging or reseeding after that. The only thing that can change is the time of the games. If 4 4-seeds had upset Vandy, Louisville, miss state, and Auburn, they'd all be on the same side of the bracket, with 1 guaranteed in the championship series.

SABUILDERAG said:

---

Looking at it again, it does appear that TV may have influenced it, as they split up the smaller schools as the logical grouping based on seed would have had Vandy, Louisville, and Tech together while the other side of the bracket would have had all large football schools with big fan bases.

---

I think you need to look up the enrollments of the schools and see who is small and who is not