I can get behind the logic in this, but it's never been quite the bee in my bonnet that it has been for some fonts.
I've always appreciated that the 2-seed in a regional would have an opportunity to bat in the bottom at some point. I guess this is more reason to get that top-8 seed...
I got mixed feelings about it. I think it’s a better system than it was, but still far from perfect.
If it were up to me; in a regional the highest seed in whichever side of the bracket you’re in should be the home team, and in the final, the regional record takes precedence in game 1 of the final, seed takes precedence in game 2
But let’s take our last home regional against Auburn for an example. It should’ve worked out where we were home in the first 2 games against FAMU & Auburn. Assuming we still lost the Auburn game, we should’ve been the home team against Coastal, then the road team against Auburn in game 1 of the final. If we win game 1 we become the home team in game 2.
If there were ever a scenario where a #4 seed happened to start 2-0, they should be the home team in game 1 of the regional final IMO. They earned that right by playing the best over the weekend.
I think the Supers should always be a 1-1-1 format as well. Changing that format is really bad IMO, much worse than changing the regional format. Especially since there are no real objective qualifications for being a top 8 seed, and the seeds are given out based on subjective biases most of the time. Like, the #8 national seed being the permanent home team against the #9 national seed just seems kind of dumb to me. There’s almost no real argument you could make to definitively say the team they put at 8 deserved their spot way more than the team they put at 9. It’s even more reason for SEC teams to push the narrative that they’re “so much better” than everyone else. It’ll end up being 5 of the top 8 out of the SEC and they’ll have an even larger advantage than they already do.