I have gotten some insight into some of the surprising selections for pod hosts.
As has been mentioned/explained by others, the reason Amherst, Messiah, Chicago and Johns Hopkins are not hosting the pods in which they are the top seed is because their women's teams are also the top seed in their pods, and following the alternating hosting priority schedule, the women have hosting priority. No big news there.
In past years, as long as geography didn't point the committee in a different direction, the second seed in the pod would typically be chosen to host in these situations. This brought on consistent feedback that when the top two seeds advanced to the second round as expected, it was unfair that the top seed that had earned the right to host, not only didn't get to host, but now had to play at the home of a potentially very strong second round opponent. In other words, the strongest challenger to the top seed advancing to the Sweet 16 was being given the advantage it hadn't earned to use against the team that actually deserved it.
In response to this feedback, the committee this year selected the third seeds in these pod to host, thus making the likely second round match a neutral game. That doesn't completely make up for the lost hosting advantage, but at least it doesn't hand that advantage to their more likely second round opponent. This is why Keene State, Oneonta State, Hope and Catholic are hosting pods.
My initial thoughts/observations are as follows:
• In general and on first thought, this seems like a sensible thing to do. It's nice to try not to penalize a team just because their women's team is also extremely good.
• The strongest challenger in a pod may not actually be who the NCAA's selection criteria says it is. The third seed by their criteria might actual be the top seeds' biggest threat, so this approach might now always be the better for the top seed. For example, opinion may vary on whether third seed Oneonta State or second seed Babson is the better team and the team with the better chance to stop Messiah from advancing.
• In strong pods with three relatively strong teams, this doesn't make much or any difference for the top seed. However, it now unfairly helps the third seed have a better chance against the second seed in round one. Since this is about fairness, is it fair that Ohio Wesleyan has to play at host Hope to open the tournament? Is it fair that Catholic's chances of advancing got such an unearned/undeserved boost?
As has been mentioned/explained by others, the reason Amherst, Messiah, Chicago and Johns Hopkins are not hosting the pods in which they are the top seed is because their women's teams are also the top seed in their pods, and following the alternating hosting priority schedule, the women have hosting priority. No big news there.
In past years, as long as geography didn't point the committee in a different direction, the second seed in the pod would typically be chosen to host in these situations. This brought on consistent feedback that when the top two seeds advanced to the second round as expected, it was unfair that the top seed that had earned the right to host, not only didn't get to host, but now had to play at the home of a potentially very strong second round opponent. In other words, the strongest challenger to the top seed advancing to the Sweet 16 was being given the advantage it hadn't earned to use against the team that actually deserved it.
In response to this feedback, the committee this year selected the third seeds in these pod to host, thus making the likely second round match a neutral game. That doesn't completely make up for the lost hosting advantage, but at least it doesn't hand that advantage to their more likely second round opponent. This is why Keene State, Oneonta State, Hope and Catholic are hosting pods.
My initial thoughts/observations are as follows:
• In general and on first thought, this seems like a sensible thing to do. It's nice to try not to penalize a team just because their women's team is also extremely good.
• The strongest challenger in a pod may not actually be who the NCAA's selection criteria says it is. The third seed by their criteria might actual be the top seeds' biggest threat, so this approach might now always be the better for the top seed. For example, opinion may vary on whether third seed Oneonta State or second seed Babson is the better team and the team with the better chance to stop Messiah from advancing.
• In strong pods with three relatively strong teams, this doesn't make much or any difference for the top seed. However, it now unfairly helps the third seed have a better chance against the second seed in round one. Since this is about fairness, is it fair that Ohio Wesleyan has to play at host Hope to open the tournament? Is it fair that Catholic's chances of advancing got such an unearned/undeserved boost?