Proposal for a National 7s Framework

Competition Proposal for a National 7s Framework
File Size: 485 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File
The framework in the attached proposal attempts to address the following challenges:

  1. Lack of competitor density in numerous CRs, particularly in the women’s game

  2. How to properly get the top 16 teams in each division (men's & women's); past attempts have been the results from the 3 previous years, only the (1) previous year, allocating 2 per region and seeding by 1's and & 2's, etc. The event never seems to get it right.

  3. The desire among many of the highest performing clubs to play against each other prior to Nationals; again, this is especially notable on the women’s side

  4. Costs for teams qualifying for finals a few weeks before the event

In order for this framework to be successful, it is important that the Competitions Committee: 

  1. Makes sure ‘the math’ still ensures competitive and regional balances

  2. Ensures this doesn’t become a rich club / poor club issue 
 
In addressing concerns:

  1. Having a so-called ‘super regional’ in each former CR (using the CR map as a guide) ensures teams still have access to super regional events within their area

  2. The Competitions Committee is dedicated to verifying the math isn’t imbalanced

  3. The finals event should be expanded to include as many interested & competitive teams as possible; teams should then spend the summer attempting to qualify for the top bracket 

Overall Summary:

This proposal seeks a method to encourage teams to a.) play better competition prior to Nationals each year, b.) be properly qualified based on their strength that season, and c.) address density concerns. A comparison could be made to sports where at-large spots are given to tournament participants (e.g. college basketball), with this tournament structure the points system behind an RPI/ELO type system. Creating a mathematical formula for this is a good first-step and transparent approach to addressing ways to get the best 32 teams (Top 16 men; Top 16 women) into the championship bracket each summer. This is preferable to a selection committee as well as past seeding allocations. Additionally, allowing teams to register their intent to compete prior to the start of the season will be a cost-savings to teams and hosts, and provide more opportunities for athletes to attend the event. 

Operational Framework: Demo

NOTE: WE ARE STILL FINESSING THE FINAL MATH AS SCENARIOS ARE PLAYED OUT. SMALL TWEAKS ARE STILL POSSIBLE/LIKELY
  • Tournaments held in different regions
  • Teams given a Season Score based on their performance
  • Teams may only use the points they acquire from their top 3 tournament finishes (by point total), no matter how many events they go to
  • Teams not allowed to include more than 2 Super Regional point totals in their Season Score
  • Theoretically possible, however unlikely, that a team could play a slightly more local schedule than previously and still qualify for the National Championship division at Nationals
    • The team would have to win all events it attends
    • 7 Local Points + 12 Regional Points + 18 Super Regional Points = ;37 Total Points / Season Score of 37
    • A Season Score of 35-37 is likely good enough to make the Top 16
  • Teams may use up to 2 Regional point totals in their Season Score
  • Regions and sub-regions for Regional Tournaments determined by:
    • a.) using the old CR map
    • b.) sub-dividing based on travel and # of participants, as necessary
  • Teams may go to Super Regionals from outside their region but may not attend other regions' Regional Tournaments
  • Season for Regionals and Super Regionals would be roughly 10 weeks and run from Father's Day through the third weekend in August
Playing around with the calculator, we see that...
  • 40 points basically ensures a team will be in a National Championship division, and most likely in the top half (top 8) of that division when pools are made
  • 42 points, which is the amount a team would gain by winning the 2 Regionals in their area and defending their turf via winning the Super Regional in their area, would likely garner a team a seed in the 4-6 range. This is the equivalent of winning a closed region in the previous structure.
  • Teams need to earn at ~7-8 points at a tournament to make it worth their while in their Season Score. It's not worth calculating potential scores for the purpose of this Demo for those that earn less than 7 points at an event because it won't have affect the National Championship division
  • The demos wound up producing an 8/8 East/West split, which shouldn't be surprising when you think about where teams are likely to travel. 9/7 is possible, but for the most part this does the work of rewarding competitive teams and avoids doing things like seeing a second seed from a region just because it has one good team. 
  • Winning 2 Super Regionals would likely seed a team in the top 4
Overall analysis:
  • The Demo seems to strike the right balance of allowing 'poor' clubs to play in their region and succeed. However, much like they would have had to in many past structures, 'poor' clubs might have to win all of their tournaments (if they tried to count a Local) or do extremely well in all of their tournaments (1sts and 2nds in Regionals) - *and* do well in their region's Super Regional - to advance if they don't intend to leave their region. This seems fair, overall.
  • Teams that *do* leave their region tend to fare much better, but still have to actually perform at events and not take their local tournaments for granted. Finishing outside the top 3 at a Super Regional doesn't help much.
  • Importantly, teams can't just take the Super Regional in their ara for granted. If teams fail to finish in the top 4 at a Super Regional they have a long road ahead of them and need to likely get a top 4 finish at a different Super Regional.
  • If Super Regional registration ends prior to the season starting, we should be able to better aid tournament operators (who can then backfill their fields with social tournaments based on the space available). 

*SAMPLE* Demonstration (1)

Please note this sample is for DEMONSTATION PURPOSES only. It is to illustrate that a variety of teams would still be able to make a championship division at a national tournament in a variety of ways. The teams are fictional (or, a toddler's interpretation of team logos and names - you tell me) and the results are FICTIONAL.

​Demonstration (1) looks at a format where several teams elect to go to Super-Regionals in other areas.

*SAMPLE* Demonstration (2)

Please note this sample is for DEMONSTATION PURPOSES only. It is to illustrate that a variety of teams would still be able to make a championship division at a national tournament in a variety of ways. The teams are fictional (or, a toddler's interpretation of team logos and names - you tell me) and the results are FICTIONAL. 

​Demonstration (2) looks at a format where fewer teams elect to go to Super-Regionals in other areas.
Picture
Picture