- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
College World Series old format question
Posted on 5/28/25 at 10:45 am
Posted on 5/28/25 at 10:45 am
1987 was the last year of a format that I found particularly interesting. There were still 8 teams in the CWS. It wasn’t split into two brackets of 4, like we have now. Also, apparently they would reorganize the bracket on the loser’s side to avoid rematches. Looking at ‘87:
Arkansas and Florida State were 1-1, losing their first and winning their second. In order to avoid a second Arkansas/Texas game and a second LSU/FSU, the NCAA randomly placed LSU against Arkansas and Texas against Florida State. I didn’t know they did not follow a strict format.
Also, because the CWS was double elimination all the way through the end, you had games where an undefeated team could win the game and the title, and a 1-loss team would have to beat the opposition twice.
Lastly, I’m seeing where winning your first three games under the pre-‘88 format would qualify a team for the championship. But they STILL had to play a “semifinal” game. Looking at ‘87, Oklahoma State won their first 3, qualified for the title, then lost their 4th game to Texas. Okie State still went to the title, but lost to Stanford. Does this mean if Okie State beat Texas, Stanford would have had to beat the Pokes twice?
Arkansas and Florida State were 1-1, losing their first and winning their second. In order to avoid a second Arkansas/Texas game and a second LSU/FSU, the NCAA randomly placed LSU against Arkansas and Texas against Florida State. I didn’t know they did not follow a strict format.
Also, because the CWS was double elimination all the way through the end, you had games where an undefeated team could win the game and the title, and a 1-loss team would have to beat the opposition twice.
Lastly, I’m seeing where winning your first three games under the pre-‘88 format would qualify a team for the championship. But they STILL had to play a “semifinal” game. Looking at ‘87, Oklahoma State won their first 3, qualified for the title, then lost their 4th game to Texas. Okie State still went to the title, but lost to Stanford. Does this mean if Okie State beat Texas, Stanford would have had to beat the Pokes twice?
3
Posted on 5/28/25 at 10:57 am to TexasTiger08
I guess the current format is more fair, but that one game for the championship hit different. Especially on CBS on a Saturday.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 11:11 am to TexasTiger08
I think they should flip brackets like softball does
Posted on 5/28/25 at 12:53 pm to TheWalrus
The current system is
4 team regional
best of 3
4 team regional
best of 3
IMO they should either turn the CWS back into a double elimination tournament or put more space in between the finals and the tournament portion like with the regionals and supers, i don't want to watch a 3 game final without the teams' best arms. In what world is Skeenes not pitching in a final series good for the game?
4 team regional
best of 3
4 team regional
best of 3
IMO they should either turn the CWS back into a double elimination tournament or put more space in between the finals and the tournament portion like with the regionals and supers, i don't want to watch a 3 game final without the teams' best arms. In what world is Skeenes not pitching in a final series good for the game?
Posted on 5/28/25 at 12:57 pm to barry
Devil's advocate to that is that a team that makes it to the championship unscathed should have an advantage.
I think I mostly agree with you though. If you make it out your "regional" you've earned it, now play a legitimate best 2/3.
I think I mostly agree with you though. If you make it out your "regional" you've earned it, now play a legitimate best 2/3.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 1:29 pm to TexasTiger08
The system before Regionals and Super Regionals was way more enjoyable. Some of those Regionals in the late 80 and early 90s were just some of the best games I ever watched in the box. LSU, Cal State Fullerton, USC, Georgia Tech, etc.....
LSU going to A&M and beating them in 89 was one of the best regions of all time.
LSU going to A&M and beating them in 89 was one of the best regions of all time.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 1:54 pm to LSUminati
quote:
Devil's advocate to that is that a team that makes it to the championship unscathed should have an advantage.
you do. You play 2 fewer games than a team coming from the losers bracket to make the title game, so you typically will have your top pitchers pitching against the other team's lower end starters or bullpen guys. Look at Florida/LSU in 2017. LSU had to come through the losers bracket and pitch Lange against Oregon St to make the title series. Then, LSU had to pitch a midweek guy against Florida's ace in game 1. Same thing with LSU in 2023. Skenes had to pitch against Wake through the loser's bracket, so he didn't pitch in the title series at all. It is massive advantage from a pitching staff standpoint to win your first three games. I honestly think it's too much of an advantage. Through the loser's bracket, you have to play 5 games as opposed to 3 if you don't lose. A 2 game penalty essentially squeezed into a 7 day pre-title series tournament is a little much. LSU ended up playing 8 games in 10 days to win the CWS. Florida played 6 over 11 days, including a two day break between the quarter finals and semi-finals and a two day break between the semi-finals and the title series
It's also always been so nuts to me that to build the best record to make the NCAAT, you construct your team to be built to win 3 game weekend series all season. Then, it's not largely dissimilar in 4 team regionals and then in the super regionals it's completely unchanged from the regular season. But then, in the most important part of the season, you're playing in a double elimination tournament over a week and half that's is completely different from anything teams have been designed to play all season. There really is no way to fix it without making the CWS last 2-3 weeks and that's mechanical almost impossible with the MLB draft and needing to get guys out to summer assignments and their minor league teams for upper-classmen, but I have always hated that you spend your whole season playing one way only to have to play a completely different way to determine the champion of your sport. No other college sport is really like that.
This post was edited on 5/28/25 at 3:05 pm
Posted on 5/28/25 at 2:02 pm to LSUDAN1
quote:
The system before Regionals and Super Regionals was way more enjoyable. Some of those Regionals in the late 80 and early 90s were just some of the best games I ever watched in the box. LSU, Cal State Fullerton, USC, Georgia Tech, etc....
Eh, I get that. I don’t think the games are less exciting. I think the games you want to see are just called Super Regionals now. The difference is that instead of having up to 3 big names in a regional, it’s usually 1.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 2:51 pm to Cliff Booth
quote:
but that one game for the championship hit different
Used to bother me (because baseball, etc.) and a 1- off after such a long season but it made for better TV and ergo better entertainment and that's sort of what sports is in the business of.
College baseball is one sport that has quietly bucked the sports landscape mantra that sports be centered around eyeballs and profit...
Even in your example, it shows the format was very cognizant of making it easier for people to watch (example of rescheduling potential early rematch back when the prevailing view was, nobody wants to see back-to-back opponents in a supposed elimination tournament). Who could blame them? Not many were watching the Tourney back in the 80s but tuning in for a Saturday championship game was no hassle.
This post was edited on 5/28/25 at 2:53 pm
Posted on 5/28/25 at 3:22 pm to LSUminati
quote:
Devil's advocate to that is that a team that makes it to the championship unscathed should have an advantage.
Agree and baseball is unique to this to some degree with the double elimination format AND limited use of a key player like an SP, so keep the college feel and just do a tournament, but if you have this "Final" series than i think its better for the game to have your stud SP.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 11:44 am to TexasTiger08
quote:
Eh, I get that. I don’t think the games are less exciting. I think the games you want to see are just called Super Regionals now. The difference is that instead of having up to 3 big names in a regional, it’s usually 1.
Not really. What I liked about the old format was that it was more difficult to come out of a region if you loss game 1 with a 6 team format. You had to claw your way out of it. After going to the old regionals and the new regionals/supers the older regionals were just more exciting to me personally. I find the new format boring.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News