Regional Observations

[The Mavin]

After seeing (on the telly) a few of the early regional games, a few problem areas became very obvious.
The bat and ball liveliness has to be addressed. Poorly hit opposite field pop-ups that clear the fence are making a mockery of the game. The logistics of putting the fences where they should be is not really feasible, because many programs built their beautiful stadiums/fields in a cramped area where there would be interference with buildings, roads, and other sports facilities if they tried to expand. So, the bats will have to meet certain standards such as the BBCOR.

The Strike Zone: while making the strike zone smaller in theory, someone forgot to tell some of the umpires where it was. Although in actuality, the umpires for the regional and national games have been a lot better than the political appointees that the NCAA used for the first televised games in the past. There were times when a ball was a foot outside being consistently called a strike by some umpires; I am not exaggerating. There are some of you that will remember those games.
The way the strike zone is being defined and called is causing great inconsistencies. Usually a pitcher in the long run will get more balls called strikes than strikes called balls. In trying to force a precise definition of the strike zone, this has changed to where more strikes are being called balls. It looks like to some umpires that "not quite down the middle" is not good enough for a strike.
It almost looks like the U10 walk-a-thons and the walks and scores from the early games are making that quite evident.
Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on the matter?

 

[RubberBiscuit]

After seeing (on the telly) a few of the early regional games, a few problem areas became very obvious.
The bat and ball liveliness has to be addressed. Poorly hit opposite field pop-ups that clear the fence are making a mockery of the game. The logistics of putting the fences where they should be is not really feasible, because many programs built their beautiful stadiums/fields in a cramped area where there would be interference with buildings, roads, and other sports facilities if they tried to expand. So, the bats will have to meet certain standards such as the BBCOR.

The Strike Zone: while making the strike zone smaller in theory, someone forgot to tell some of the umpires where it was. Although in actuality, the umpires for the regional and national games have been a lot better than the political appointees that the NCAA used for the first televised games in the past. There were times when a ball was a foot outside being consistently called a strike by some umpires; I am not exaggerating. There are some of you that will remember those games.
The way the strike zone is being defined and called is causing great inconsistencies. Usually a pitcher in the long run will get more balls called strikes than strikes called balls. In trying to force a precise definition of the strike zone, this has changed to where more strikes are being called balls. It looks like to some umpires that "not quite down the middle" is not good enough for a strike.
It almost looks like the U10 walk-a-thons and the walks and scores from the early games are making that quite evident.
Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on the matter?

^^^^^^^^^+1 !!!!!!!!

 

[Lenski]

Bat performance is not recent; it has been an issue for a while. What you are witnessing is a better conditioned and stronger athlete on average. The bats themselves have been too hot for over a decade.

As far as the strikezone, it is skinnier than it was. It appears as if the umpires are trying to call the actual strikezone. I don't know if the umpires are squeezing the pitchers though. I don't care to make ball-strike assumptions based on a view of an offset center field camera shot. The diameter of a softball is just under 4 inches, so a ball thrown completely in the river (the area between the plate and the batter's box) might not necessarily be over any part of the plate.

 

[Cannonball]

All bats are tested before the games by the NCAA. My daughter had her game bat thrown out this year. Later, the person doing the testing admitted that she didn't know how to test the bats at the beginning of the day but daughter didn't get her game bat back. Daughter's bat was the first tested. Last year, the entire team lost their game bats.

Per the strike zone, that foot out has been there all year. We had one umpire I'd rate as excellent with the book zone. We had two very good umps who were about a ball out but as consistent as can be. We had one that both coaches and players complained about throughout the game because that guy was all over the place. As the opposing coach said, "At least you are consistent at being inconsistent." All in all, I thought that the umpiring we saw in NCAA competition was outstanding.

 

[SoCal_Dad]

As OP stated, they can't force everyone to move their fences. However, they could establish higher standards in order to host regionals and super regionals.

I believe the NCAA has the most stringest bat standards as evidenced by their approved bat list and on-site testing. The testing is fairly new for some, but I'm confident it is done properly for championship play.

Going to BBCOR, even for D-I, would be too much because there are still low-scoring pitching duels. On the other hand, a reduction of the bat standards would move teams away from relying so much on the long ball and may not reduce scoring as much as some fear.