2019 FALL “HOT” TAKES: CHB protects the ITA Cup

Happy fall, boys and girls. It’s that dreaded time of year when the only major sports we have to fill our lives are the World Series, the NFL, the NBA, the NHL,  professional tennis, professional golf, college football, and soon college basketball. DIII tennis has closed up shop for the season, but that doesn’t mean we stop (did we really ever start this fall?) What can we do to get you through this hard time? Don’t worry, we’ll have the usual slog of season previews starting in December, but first we have our now annual Fall Hot Takes series (the Pumpkin Spice series, if you will). Today, we start out with a tennis-related take (don’t worry, most of these have very little connection to tennis). Resident Blog historian (now that the Guru has passed onto another etherial plane of existence) CHB is here to dish about the expanded size of the ITA Cup. He has the experience, he has the old player references that half of you won’t know, and he has a cute/shaggy dog of whom he occasionally sends pics to the blogger group chat. What else could you possibly need?

CHB TAKE/DEFENSE 

I like the new ITA Cup format. As someone who flew to Mobile, AL to lose a match to a Trinity doubles team twice, I support any format that allows for more tennis. Point #2: during the 2011 tournament, I watched Yevgeny Perepelov of Hunter College play Joey Fritz. Halfway through the second set, Perepelov went for a drop shot-peg on Fritz then watched in indignation as Joey reflexed a backhand volley for a winner. Perepelov proceeded to go on a 5-minute tirade, arguing that Joey only made the volley because of a double-hit, with his indistinctly Eastern European accent. It was amazing. Any format that allows for more Hunter vs. Amherst action is ok with me.

RegNE/C: I like the field being expanded, but I think each region should send a different number of players based on strength of that region. For example, the Central and New England ITAs should probably send like 4 players each, while the Northeast and Northwest ITAs should send more like 1-2 players. The exact determination of how many each region sends should be based on something related to team ranking (I’m on my phone so that’s as much detail as I’m going to get into). Also, the at-large selection should be revamped for the scenarios when people decline going.

ASWomens: Women’s side touched on the ITA Cup format briefly in our recent roundtables but overall I support this take. Given the general unimportance of fall tennis I think it is totally reasonable to play as many matches as possible if you have the time and resources. I only wish I was able to witness the interaction described above. All I can say is I applaud Fritz for not crying because anyone who hits a ball at me then yells at me better be ready for the water works.

NE: I’m with CHB here. While that’s a dangerous place to be in the blogger group chat, I think the good in the expansion of the of the draw well outweighs the “watering down” of the field. Making the finals of your ITA is a big accomplishment, no matter the section of the country. To have the ability to compete against the best in the country is a crowning accomplishment, and one from which you can learn as you head towards the spring season, be it your first or your last. Also, I’m obviously here for the Joey Fritz reflex volley (though his backhand was one of the sexiest shots in DIII tennis history).  

AVZ: I love ITAs. It might be my favorite D3 event of the year. This is probably due to the fact that my own experience at ITAs has been good, but overall I like the ability for anyone to come out on top. Now as for allowing runner ups to go to the ITA cup, I don’t know what I think of it. There is such a disparity between some of the deeper ITA regionals that even a champion at one of them likely is not in the top 20 overall so allowing runner ups to go makes that gap even wider. What I do support is how they got rid of the play-in match. That was brutal for teams and budgets to travel a long way just to play one match. So it has pros and cons and I could argue for either side. 

NEWomens: I’m undecided on the new ITA Cup format. It’s nice for players to get down there and know they’ll be able to play more than one match, but also do we really need it? I guess it’s pretty cool to see some match-ups we probably would only ever dream of.

AS: Convince me that the ITA Cup is worth having after ITAs

NewRegional: I believe my previous position on this was that it was unnecessary and watered down the draw. I’m going to go back on that position and am now a strong proponent of the expanded draw. Coach C’s comment on ASouth’s “Why Play the ITA Cup” made a lot of sense to me. The fall is the time for individual tournaments, and it makes sense to wrap up the season with a fall tournament. Expanding the draw gives us more quality tennis, which is something of which we should all approve of.

CentralWomens: I am indifferent. It seems like an expensive and time consuming opportunity for match play. However it is a chance to see some of the new players in action. 

newCentral: I like the argument in favor of the expanded ITA Cup format that leans on “more unexpected or new matchups”, but I think that we can take that notion one step forward and take a page out of d1 tennis’ playbook. Let’s allow the champion and runner-up of each ITA to go to the ITA Cup, but let’s SHAKE UP the ITA groupings. I want the host school (and if they’re different) the number one and fourth ranked team that’s slated to be at that ITA to stay at their “traditional ITA” location, but I want the 2nd and 3rd ranked teams to have the freedom to go to any other ITA selected in the order of the team’s national ranking the previous year. So in practice it would allow all the 2nd and 3rd best teams in any respective ITA to select which ITA to attend. I’d be cooler with the ITA Cup format (which I currently believe has watered down its field too much) if it would utilize my “shake it up” ITA format. Likely? Probably not. Entertaining? Absolutely. Blog Content? OH MON DIEU it would be so lit – Fall deserves its own Selection Sunday. 

RegAS: I feel like I flip flop back and forth on this topic. Some days I’m like, “ugh, I hate participation trophies,” and other days, I’m like, “this is dope.” There are arguments for both sides, but I think in general I’m going to lean towards liking this new format. I think at the top of the DIII tennis world, there are a number of players who can make deep runs and get hot, so giving more talented players, who work their butts off, a chance to win a national championship gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside. In the future it’ll give us more chances to root for the under dogs that might not get as many chances to play the top dogs, which I am all for as well.