REPORT OF THE
NCAA DIVISION I MEN'S AND WOMEN'S TENNIS COMMITTEE
JANUARY 6, 2015, TELECONFERENCE
ACTION ITEMS.
1.
Legislative Items.
•
2.
None.
Nonlegislative Items.
a.
Dual Match Format for Team Championships.
(1)
Recommendation. That the Division I Championships/Sports Management
Cabinet support the following changes for the team championships:
(a)
No-ad scoring in singles and doubles (i.e., competitors can win by one
point instead of two);
(b)
Three doubles matches played with each match consisting of one set to
six games, with a 12-point tiebreak at six-games-all, followed (after a
five minute intermission) by six singles matches, each match best-ofthree sets, with a 12-point tiebreak at six-games-all; and
(c)
No warm-up with opponents.
(2)
Effective Date. 2015 NCAA Division I Men’s and Women’s Tennis
Championships.
(3)
Rationale. Under the current format, the matches are regulation dual matches
with three eight-game, pro-set doubles, followed by six singles matches,
played in best-of-three sets. Regular advantage scoring is used and a 12-point
tiebreak is played at seven-games-all in doubles and at six-games-all in
singles.
Currently, the team championships use a clinch/clinch format. The winner of
two of three doubles matches wins the doubles point. The winner of four
points total, doubles and singles combined, wins the match. The doubles
matches are ended as soon as one team wins the doubles point. The singles
matches are ended as soon as one team wins the match.
Discussion began more than four years ago in response to concerns about the
length of matches and the duration of the men’s and women’s tennis
championships. One prong of the proposed solutions is directed at the scoring
format. Even with the clinch/clinch format and these past championships’
Report of the NCAA Division I Men's and Women's Tennis Committee
January 6, 2015, Teleconference
Page No. 2
_________
change to a tiebreak from eight-games-all to a tiebreak at seven-games-all in
doubles, some matches last five hours or more. The committee believes a
scoring format change is necessary to protect student-athlete well-being and to
make the game more exciting and fan friendly.
Over the past two years, the committee collaborated with the Intercollegiate
Tennis Association (ITA) (coaches association) and the United States Tennis
Association (USTA) (national governing body) to involve college coaches,
administrators and other experts in the field to research, experiment, discuss
and vet a new scoring format. (The NCAA uses the ITA rules as the official
playing and practice rules for the sports, with few modifications.) The results
of this collaborative effort led the ITA to adopt the new format for the 201415 academic year. The tennis committee also agreed with the results of the
collaborative effort and submitted a proposal to use the new scoring format for
the 2015 championships. In September 2014, the cabinet tabled consideration
of the proposal and asked the tennis committee to survey men’s and women’s
head coaches as well as tennis student-athletes. An executive summary and
the raw data of the survey are provided as Attachments A and B.
Notes regarding the survey:
• 145 men’s team coaches responded (of 257) - 56.4 percent.
• 176 women’s team coaches responded (of 318) - 55.3 percent.
• 60 of the responding men’s team coaches participated in championships
within the last five years – 41.4 percent of respondents.
• 74 of the responding women’s team coaches participated in
championships within the last five years – 42 percent of respondents.
At its December 2014 coaches convention, the ITA Operating Committee
again approved and adopted the format for the ITA kick-off matches, as well
as non-conference, regular-season collegiate matches, and recommended these
format changes be adopted for the NCAA Division I championships
(Attachment C).
Additionally, the committee requested staff survey the 32 conference offices
and found that 10 conferences have adopted the new format for their 2015
conference matches (Attachment D). The rest of the conferences are awaiting
the cabinet’s action because they need the information to continue their
decision-making process or, by conference policy, they use the same scoring
format as the NCAA championships.
(4)
Estimated Budget Impact. None.
(5)
Student-Athlete Impact. The new format will have a positive impact on
student-athlete well-being and maintain spectator interest for the duration of
Report of the NCAA Division I Men's and Women's Tennis Committee
January 6, 2015, Teleconference
Page No. 3
_________
the match. The typical dual match runs nearly three and a half hours and
upward to six hours. The new format should reduce match time to three hours.
For advancing teams, shorter matches will extend student-athlete rest time
between competitions, and student-athletes competing in both singles and
doubles also will benefit from shorter matches.
b.
Match Format for Singles and Doubles Championships.
(1)
Recommendation. That the cabinet support the following format changes for
the singles and doubles championships:
(a)
No-ad scoring in both the singles and doubles championships; and
(b)
In the doubles championships, playing best-of-three sets, with a 12point match tiebreak in lieu of a third set.
(2)
Effective Date. Immediate.
(3)
Rationale. The ITA has adopted these changes for regular-season competition
and has asked the NCAA Division I Men’s and Women’s Tennis Committee
to support this format for the championships. The ITA and USTA
experimented with different formats for nearly two years, and, in working
with the coaching body, believe this scoring format change is a positive step
for the collegiate game. The committee agrees the change would enhance the
student-athlete and the fan experience by addressing the often excessive
length of the collegiate match.
(4)
Estimated Budget Impact. None.
(5)
Student-Athlete Impact. The potential for student-athletes to have shorter
matches positively impacts their well-being and helps to maintain spectator
interest. Shorter matches extend rest time between competitions, particularly
for those student-athletes who participate in both the singles and doubles
championships, which run concurrently.
Committee Chair: Tad Berkowitz, University of Arizona, Pac-12 Conference
Staff Liaisons:
Kelsey Cermak, Kristin W. Fasbender and Marie Scovron, NCAA
Championships and Alliances
January 6, 2015 Teleconference
Participants
Bobby Bayliss, University of Notre Dame
Absentees
Report of the NCAA Division I Men's and Women's Tennis Committee
January 6, 2015, Teleconference
Page No. 4
_________
Tad Berkowitz, University of Arizona
Jeff Conyers, Southern University
Maria Huggins, Big 12 Conference
Laura Ludwick White, Drexel University
Steve Moore, Texas A&M Corpus Christi
Maria Pientka, University of Wisconsin,
Madison
Pierre Pilote, Stetson University
Nathan Pine, College of the Holy Cross
Jim Trego, U.S. Air Force Academy
Jamie Sanchez, Loyola Marymount University
Judy Van Horn, University of South Carolina,
Columbia
Other Participants:
Kelsey Cermak, NCAA
Kristin W. Fasbender, NCAA
Marie Scovron, NCAA
2014 Division I Tennis Championships Format Survey:
Executive Summary
PURPOSE
Per the request of the NCAA Division I Men’s and Women’s Tennis Committee, a survey was developed to obtain feedback
from NCAA Division I head men’s and women’s tennis coaches and tennis student-athletes in regard to potential changes in
the format of championship play. The results from this survey seek to provide the committee with detailed information on
the respondents’ opinions regarding the tennis championships format.
RESPONSE CHARACTERISTICS
The following represents response rates for coaches and student-athletes:
%
n
28.0%
Head Coaches
288
32.2%
Male Student-Athletes
332
39.8%
Female Student-Athletes
410
MAJOR FINDINGS
*Note: The following tables show responses of the majority (more than 50%).
NCAA TEAM CHAMPIONSHIPS FORMAT PREFERENCES
Which NCAA team championships options do you prefer?
Regular scoring in doubles and singles.
Male SAs
71.7%
Female SAs
88.2%
Women’s Head Coaches 72.7%
Warm-up with opponents in doubles and singles.
Male SAs
83.5%
Female SAs
90.9%
Women’s Head Coaches 59.6%
Three doubles matches, each match an eight-game
pro-set.
Male SAs
82.8%
Female SAs
86.2%
Men’s Head Coaches
66.4%
Women’s Head Coaches 85.0%
Three doubles matches with a 12-point tiebreaker at
seven games all.
Men’s Head Coaches
65.7%
Women’s Head Coaches 79.5%
No-ad scoring with opponent in doubles and singles.
Men’s Head Coaches
56.9%
No warm-up with opponent in doubles and singles.
Men’s Head Coaches
59.4%
Three doubles matches, each match one set to six
games.
Three doubles matches with a 12-point tiebreaker at
six games all.
2014 NCAA Division I Tennis Championships Format Survey:
Executive Summary
NCAA SINGLES AND DOUBLES CHAMPIONSHIPS FORMAT PREFERENCES
Which NCAA singles and doubles championship options do you prefer?
Regular scoring in doubles and singles.
No-ad scoring in singles and doubles.
Women’s Head Coaches 76.0%
Men’s Head Coaches
54.9%
For Doubles: Best of three sets with a 12-point
tiebreaker played at six games all for the first two
For Doubles: Best of three sets with a 12-point
sets. If needed, a super tiebreaker (first to 10 points,
tiebreaker played at six games all.
must win by 2 points) will be played in lieu of a third
set.
Male SAs
56.5%
Men’s Head Coaches
68.3%
Female SAs
55.7%
Women’s Head Coaches 64.6%
STUDENT-ATHLETE PARTICIPATION
How many years have you competed in tennis at the NCAA Division I level?
Male Student-Athletes
Female Student-Athletes
n
%
n
%
I have not yet competed.
74
22.4%
73
17.9%
1 year
103
31.1%
120
29.4%
2 years
64
19.3%
105
25.7%
3 years
59
17.8%
81
19.9%
4 years
31
9.4%
29
7.1%
In which championships did you compete?
Male Student-Athletes
n
%
Team
96
90.6%
Singles
40
37.7%
Doubles
40
37.7%
Female Student-Athletes
n
%
116
88.5%
66
50.4%
54
41.2%
n
147
223
169
140
60
n
212
106
94
Total
Total
%
19.9%
30.2%
22.9%
18.9%
8.1%
%
89.5%
44.7%
39.7%
Indicate which round(s) of the men’s/women’s team championship you competed:
Total Student-Athletes
n
%
First/Second Round
177
10.3%
Finals
66
6.4%
When was your most recent championship experience?
Male Student-Athletes
n
%
I did not
compete at this
40
37.7%
level.
Team
2014
56
52.8%
2013
6
5.7%
2012
4
3.8%
Female Student-Athletes
n
%
n
Total
%
39
29.8%
79
33.3%
72
14
6
55.0%
10.7%
4.6%
128
20
10
54.0%
8.4%
4.2%
Page No. 2
2014 NCAA Division I Tennis Championships Format Survey:
Executive Summary
When was your most recent championship experience? (Continued)
Male Student-Athletes
Female Student-Athletes
n
%
n
%
I did not
compete at this
75
70.8%
77
58.8%
level.
Singles
2014
29
27.4%
43
32.8%
2013
2
1.9%
10
7.6%
2012
0
0.0%
1
0.8%
Male Student-Athletes
Female Student-Athletes
n
%
n
%
I did not
compete at this
75
70.8%
84
64.1%
level.
Doubles
2014
28
2.8%
38
29.0%
2013
3
0.0%
7
5.3%
2012
0
0.0%
2
1.5%
n
Total
%
152
64.1%
72
12
1
30.4%
5.1%
0.4%
n
Total
%
159
67.1%
66
10
2
27.8%
4.2%
0.8%
COACH PARTICIPATION
Are you currently the head coach of the following NCAA Division I men’s/women’s tennis team?
Head Coaches
n
%
Men’s tennis team
145
50.9%
Women’s tennis team
176
61.8%
In which championships did you coach?
Head Coaches
n
%
Men’s team
105
52.0%
Women’s team
118
58.4%
Men’s singles
72
35.6%
Women’s singles
75
37.1%
Men’s doubles
65
32.2%
Women’s doubles
71
35.1%
Indicate which round(s) of the men’s/women’s team championships coached:
Men’s Head Coaches
Women’s Head Coaches
n
%
n
%
First/Second Round
92
8.9%
106
10.3%
Finals
30
2.9%
23
2.2%
Page No. 3
2014 NCAA Division I Tennis Championships Format Survey:
Executive Summary
When was your most recent championship experience?
Men’s Team
n
%
I did not coach at this
120
59.4%
championship.
2014
29
14.4%
2013
13
6.4%
2012
5
2.5%
2011
6
3.0%
2010
7
3.5%
2009
2
1.0%
2008
2
1.0%
2007
2
1.0%
2006
5
2.5%
2005
1
0.5%
2004
2
1.0%
2003
1
0.5%
Prior to 2003
7
3.5%
Men’s Singles
n
%
I did not coach at this
147
72.8%
championship.
2014
23
11.4%
2013
3
1.5%
2012
2
1.0%
2011
1
0.5%
2010
4
2.0%
2009
3
1.5%
2008
4
2.0%
2007
3
1.5%
2006
4
2.0%
2005
0
0.0%
2004
0
0.0%
2003
1
0.5%
Prior to 2003
7
3.5%
Women’s Team
n
%
102
50.5%
36
17.8%
13
6.4%
16
7.9%
3
1.5%
6
3.0%
1
0.5%
5
2.5%
4
2.0%
4
2.0%
1
0.5%
3
1.5%
1
0.5%
7
3.5%
Women’s Singles
n
%
138
68.3%
20
7
6
8
3
1
1
3
3
2
1
2
7
9.9%
3.5%
3.0%
4.0%
1.5%
0.5%
0.5%
1.5%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
1.0%
3.5%
Page No. 4
2014 NCAA Division I Tennis Championships Format Survey:
Executive Summary
When was your most recent championship experience? (Continued)
Men’s Doubles
n
%
I did not coach at this
151
74.8%
championship.
2014
23
11.4%
2013
3
1.5%
2012
3
1.5%
2011
2
1.0%
2010
3
1.5%
2009
2
1.0%
2008
1
0.5%
2007
2
1.0%
2006
3
1.5%
2005
0
0.0%
2004
1
0.5%
2003
1
0.5%
Prior to 2003
7
3.5%
PARTICIPATING CONFERENCES
America East Conference
American Athletic
Conference
Atlantic 10 Conference
Atlantic Coast Conference
Atlantic Sun Conference
Big 12 Conference
Big East Conference
Big Sky Conference
Big South Conference
Big Ten Conference
Big West Conference
Colonial Athletic Association
Conference USA
Horizon League
Independent
Metro Atlantic Athletic
Conference
Mid-American Conference
Mid-Eastern Athletic
Conference
Men’s Head
Coaches
n
%
3
2.1%
Women’s Doubles
n
%
Women’s Head
Coaches
n
%
6
3.4%
140
69.3%
13
12
1
6
7
2
1
3
4
2
0
1
10
6.4%
5.9%
0.5%
3.0%
3.5%
1.0%
0.5%
1.5%
2.0%
1.0%
0.0%
0.5%
5.0%
Male StudentAthletes
n
%
3
0.9%
Female StudentAthletes
n
%
14
3.4%
6
4.1%
6
3.4%
3
0.9%
7
1.7%
7
7
6
5
7
3
3
10
3
2
3
0
5
4.8%
4.8%
4.1%
3.4%
4.8%
2.1%
2.1%
6.9%
2.1%
1.4%
2.1%
0.0%
3.4%
8
12
5
6
7
4
4
12
5
7
7
0
4
4.5%
6.8%
2.8%
3.4%
4.0%
2.3%
2.3%
6.8%
2.8%
4.0%
4.0%
0.0%
2.3%
19
17
15
0
2
10
16
16
2
17
7
10
2
5.7%
5.1%
4.5%
0.0%
0.6%
3.0%
4.8%
4.8%
0.6%
5.1%
2.1%
3.0%
0.6%
15
23
14
3
25
13
6
45
14
19
26
5
0
3.7%
5.6%
3.4%
0.7%
6.1%
3.2%
1.5%
11.0%
3.4%
4.6%
6.3%
1.2%
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
6
1.8%
12
2.9%
3
2.1%
5
2.8%
5
1.5%
4
1.0%
2
1.4%
5
2.8%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Page No. 5
2014 NCAA Division I Tennis Championships Format Survey:
Executive Summary
PARTICIPATING CONFERENCES (CONTINUED)
Missouri Valley Conference
Mountain West Conference
Northeast Conference
Ohio Valley Conference
Pac 12 Conference
Patriot League
Southeastern Conference
Southern Conference
Southland Conference
Southwestern Athletic
Conference
Sun Belt Conference
The Ivy League
The Summit League
West Coast Conference
Western Athletic
Conference
Men’s Head
Coaches
n
%
3
2.1%
3
2.1%
2
1.4%
4
2.8%
10
6.9%
6
4.1%
8
5.5%
4
2.8%
1
0.7%
National Collegiate Athletic Association
December 16, 2014
MAR:ms
Women’s Head
Coaches
n
%
4
2.3%
6
3.4%
1
0.6%
4
2.3%
11
6.3%
4
2.3%
6
3.4%
7
4.0%
1
0.6%
Male StudentAthletes
n
%
4
1.2%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
4
1.2%
46
13.9%
24
7.2%
27
8.1%
9
2.7%
0
0.0%
Female StudentAthletes
n
%
8
2.0%
4
1.0%
8
2.0%
9
2.2%
26
6.3%
18
4.4%
10
2.4%
12
2.9%
5
1.2%
5
3.4%
5
2.8%
4
1.2%
7
1.7%
3
4
6
5
2.1%
2.8%
4.1%
3.4%
4
5
3
7
2.3%
2.8%
1.7%
4.0%
0
16
15
28
0.0%
4.8%
4.5%
8.4%
5
1
11
40
1.2%
.2%
2.7%
9.8%
2
1.4%
2
1.1%
5
1.5%
1
0.2%
Page No. 6
ATTACHMENT C
From: David A Benjamin [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 11:47 AM
To: Scovron, Marie; Fasbender, Kristin; Cermak, Kelsey; Berkowitz, Tad C - (tadb)
([email protected]); Laura Ludwick White
Cc: Billy Pate; Sheila McInerney; Jenny Mainz; Bill Richards; Angel Prinos; Tom Loughrey; Lynn Flannery;
Cory Brooks
Subject: ITA FORMAT PROPOSAL
Hi Marie, Kristin, Kelsey, Tad, and Laura,
In follow up to the ITA Division I Operating Committee meetings that took place in
Naples this past December, we would like to provide you with a brief summary of
the format decisions made by this group for the 2015 Division I team match
season, as well as the proposal that we put forward last week to the
NCAA Division I Tennis Committee for the re-consideration of the NCAA Division
I Championships/Sports Management Cabinet.
It should be emphasized that the ITA Operating Committee felt that it was very
important for Division I men and women’s tennis to play with the same format (a
sentiment very strongly supported by coaches attending the ITA Convention and
many other Division I coaches) – one that would enhance the student-athlete
experience, be more fan-friendly, more exciting, and make college tennis more
relevant on the college campus.
The ITA Division I Operating Committee decisions are as follows:
1) After giving strong consideration to all the different feedback that was
provided by the membership throughout the fall (post the NCAA Division I
Championships Cabinet decision to table the initially submitted format proposal), as
well as the ITA Division I Roundtable Membership meetings that took place during
the ITA Convention (in December), the ITA Division I Operating Committee, at its
final meeting on December 13, 2014, moved to re-submit its dual match format
proposal to the NCAA Division I Tennis Committee for the 2015 NCAA Division I
Team Championships.
And the Operating Committee also re-affirmed its support for no ad scoring to be
played in the NCAA Division I Singles and Doubles Championships, with the singles
matches two out of three sets, and the doubles matches two sets with a match tiebreak to be played in lieu of a third set.
The following is the ITA shortened format proposal for the 2015 (and
beyond) NCAA Division I Team Championships:
* No-ad scoring in singles and doubles.
* Three doubles matches played, each match one set to 6, with a tie-break at
6-all.
* Followed (after a 5 minute intermission) by six singles matches, each match
2 out of 3 sets, with tie-breaks at 6-all.
* No warm-up with opponents (in doubles and in singles)
2) The ITA Division I Operating Committee felt strongly that these changes
should be implemented immediately, and has therefore mandated playing the
shortened format during the upcoming 2015 ITA Kick-Off Weekend and 2015 ITA
Division I National Men’s and Women’s Team Indoor Championships, as well as in
ALL all non-conference dual match competition, but with all singles matches being
played to completion, while doubles will remain “clinch” (for your reference, I am
attaching a copy of the ITA Press release, along with a follow up letter emailed to
the ITA coach membership about these decisions, and directing that the ITA
shortened format be played immediately in all non-conference matches).
3) It is understood that NCAA Conference rules supersede ITA rules, and
therefore any NCAA Conference can decide to do otherwise.
It should be noted that these decisions have been strongly supported by the USTA
(The National Governing Body of US Tennis), in partnering with the ITA in our
commitment to adopt creative and innovative measures to enhance the sport of
tennis during this time of seismic change in collegiate athletics.
In closing, we would like to thank once again the NCAA Division I Tennis Committee
for its longstanding partnership support of the ITA and Division I varsity tennis.
Always,
David
David A Benjamin
Executive Director
Intercollegiate Tennis
Association (ITA)
(609) 497-6925 (o)
(609) 672-6440 (cell)
Prinos, Angel <[email protected]>
Division I dual match format update ­ Jan. 6
David Benjamin <[email protected]>
Reply­To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:03 PM
Dear Coach,
Greetings! Happy New Year and we hope you had an enjoyable holiday break.
We would like to remind you about the ITA Division I Operating Committee decision made this past December regarding format,
with the brief addition below in bold.
The ITA shortened format:
No­ad scoring in singles and doubles.
Three doubles matches played, each match one set to 6, with a tie­break at 6­all.
Followed (after a 5­minute intermission) by six singles matches, each match 2 out of 3 sets, with tie­breaks at 6­all.
No warm­up with opponents (in doubles and in singles)
This is the official format for all non­conference dual match competition with all singles matches being played to completion
(doubles will remain "clinch"). It should be noted that NCAA conference rules supersede ITA rules, and therefore any
conference can decide to do otherwise.
Best of luck in your upcoming matches.
Always,
David A Benjamin
Executive Director
Intercollegiate Tennis Association (ITA)
Forward this email
This email was sent to [email protected] by [email protected] | Update Profile/Email Address | Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.
Intercollegiate Tennis Association | 174 Tamarack Circle | Skillman | NJ | 08558
Prinos, Angel <[email protected]>
Shortened Format Strongly Supported at 2014 ITA Coaches Convention
Tom Loughrey <[email protected]>
Reply­To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 5:02 PM
For Immediate Release
Contact: Tom Loughrey, ITA ([email protected], 609­638­4952)
December 15, 2014 Shortened Format Strongly Supported at 2014 ITA Coaches Convention
No­ad scoring, 6­game doubles set highlight decision
NAPLES, FL (Dec. 15) ­ The ITA Division I Operating Committee moved to re­submit its dual match
format proposal to the NCAA Division I Tennis Committee for the 2015 NCAA Division I Team
Championships during its final meeting of 2014 on Saturday, Dec. 13. This decisive vote (25 yes, 0
no, 9 abstentions) ­ supported by the USTA and the USTA's Athletic Directors Advisory Council ­ is a
powerful indication of the group's commitment to adopt creative and innovative measures to
enhance the sport of tennis during this time of seismic change in collegiate athletics.
In addition the ITA Operating Committee voted 26­8 in favor of playing the shortened format during
the 2015 ITA Kick­Off Weekend and 2015 ITA Division I National Men's and Women's Team Indoor
Championships. Also, the Committee voted to adopt (30 yes, 0 no, 4 abstentions) the shortened
format for all non­conference dual match competition with all singles matches being played to
completion (doubles will remain "clinch"). It should be noted that NCAA conference rules supersede
ITA rules, and therefore any conference can decide to not play the ITA format if it should so wish.
The ITA shortened format:
No­ad scoring in singles and doubles.
Three doubles matches played, each match one set to 6, with a tie­break at 6­all.
Followed (after a brief intermission; time TBD) by six singles matches, each match 2
out of 3 sets, with tie­breaks at 6­all.
No warm­up with opponents (in doubles and in singles)
The ITA Operating Committee felt that it was very important for Division I men and women's tennis to
play with the same format ­ one that would enhance the student­athlete experience, be more fan­
friendly, be more exciting and make college tennis more relevant. And in this quickly changing
landscape, the Committee also agreed to continue to monitor the pulse of the membership in looking
ahead to the future.
"Over the past several years the ITA Division I member coaches have engaged in a vigorous and
dynamic dialogue about format and best ways to grow and promote the sport of college tennis," said
David Benjamin, ITA Executive Director. "We are very proud of the way in which all of our coaches
of men's and women's tennis programs ­ from widely diverse institutions ­ have managed to work
together and present a unified front on such a complicated and critical issue."
"We are supportive of the format recommendation made by the ITA Division I Operating Committee,"
said Virgil Christian Jr., USTA Senior Director, Market/Facility Development & Collegiate Tennis.
"The collegiate coaches have navigated through a thorough and comprehensive process to reach
this point. This is a critical first step in continuing to increase the relevance of college tennis on
campuses across the country."
The NCAA Division I Tennis Committee will teleconference on Tuesday, January 6th to review the
ITA shortened format proposal for possible implementation in the 2015 NCAA Team Championship.
If endorsed by the Tennis Committee, it will be put forward to the NCAA Division I
Championships/Sports Management Cabinet for its approval.
ITA Operating Committee co­Chair Sheila McInerney knows college tennis is on a long­term plan to
become more fan­friendly and exciting.
"Coming out of the ITA Convention, the men's and women's Operating Committees are excited to
play the new scoring format," McInerney said. "We feel this shorter and more exciting format will
benefit college tennis and are hopeful the NCAA Tennis Committee will endorse this format for the
upcoming 2015 NCAA Team Championship."
Boise State head men's tennis coach Greg Patton is filled with hope for the future of college tennis.
"I think it's a dynamic step in the future that is going to dramatically and positively impact the growth
of tennis in this country," Patton said. "Tennis could be in the top five [of college sports] if we do it
right and we're trying to take steps to do it. We can't keep on being satisfied with the product that
we're giving. We want to make sure it's exciting and timely. If we can keep it into a certain time
frame, it's going to be really incredibly compelling and incredibly attractive to people. It's hopefully
going to attract a lot of kids to the sport."
Forward email
This email was sent to [email protected] by [email protected] | Update Profile/Email Address | Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.
Intercollegiate Tennis Association | 174 Tamarack Circle | Skillman | NJ | 08558
ATTACHMENT D
DIVISION I TENNIS FORMAT - CONFERENCE SURVEY
Conference
Men's Vote
On New Format
Date of Vote
Women's Vote
New Format
against
On
Format Used for Conference Play
no regular season conference play, conf champ same
as NCAA Championships
America East
No vote
American Athletic
09/09/14
8-0, 1 absent
10-0, 1 absent
TBD
Atlantic Coast
09/08/14
10-0-0, 3 absent
10-0-0, 5 absent
same as NCAA Championships
Atlantic Sun
09/24/14
7-0
7-0
new format
Atlantic 10
X
Big East
01/12/15
6-2
4-5-1
same as NCAA Championships
Big Sky
01/20/15
7-1-4
7-1-4
new format
Big South
09/01/14
2-5-2
1-8-1
current format
Big 10
01/13/15
10-2
8-6
same as NCAA Championships
Big 12
08/21/14
6-0
9-1
new format
Big West
01/12/15
4-2
2-7
same as NCAA Championships
Colonial Athletic
8/14
5-1-2
5-1-3
new format
Conference USA
No Poll
No Poll
No Poll
same as NCAA Championships
Horizon League
01/21/15
0-5
0-7
TBD
Ivy League
X
new format
TBD
TBD
Metro Atlantic
01/22/15
7-1
8-1
new format
Mid-American
01/15/15
majority support new
9-0
new format
Mid-Eastern
X
in favor
new format
Missouri Valley
X
7-0
consensus in favor
new format, same as NCAA Championship
Mountain West
10/14
5-3
8-0
new format, depending on NCAA Championships
Northeast
X
4-2, 1 absent
1-4, 3 absent
TBD
Ohio Valley
No vote
Pac-12 men
Pac-12 women
01/14/15
01/14/15
Patriot League
Southeastern - men
Southeastern - women
1-17
not in support
8-0
no regular season conference play, conf champ same
as NCAA Championships
TBD
9-1-1
new format
TBD, most likely same as NCAA Championships
10/30/14 no vote generally supportive
against
same as NCAA Championships
11/17/14
01/12/15
14-0
new format
same as NCAA Championships
13-0
ATTACHMENT D
Southern
08/12/14
Southland
09/03/14
Southwestern
01/12/15
3-2, 1 absent
3-2, 3 absent
current format
Summit
01/12/15
5-1-1
2-4-2
new format
Sun Belt
01/12/15
4-2, 1 absent
6-4
same as NCAA Championships
West Coast
09/16/14
5-5
8-2
same as NCAA Championships for conf tourney
Western Athletic
01/15/15
1-4, 1 absent
0-5, 1 absent
Ok with new format except doubles
As of 1/22/2015
tabled
tabled
8-3-2, 1 absent
current format
TBD
TBD