Pool C

[sac]

Bidding as a neutral site host results in lower bids for the NCAA because of the unknown home town attendance, if the bidder does not make the playoffs. It would be interesting to have data from a school that hosted  a non-participating neutral playoff versus when they hosted a playoff where that school participated. Schools don't want to lose money on hosting (when you consider the guarantee paid to the NCAA) so the bid would be naturally lower.

I can tell you that when Hope hosted the women's final four in 08 and 09 the actual crowd was about 1/3 of what was expected had Hope advanced to the Final Four in a 3,500 seat arena.

Its been 20+ years but when Hope also hosted the women's final four in 1990 attendance was around 2200 to 2500 in a smaller building (capacity 2700), vs around 1,000 for the two final fours in 2008 and 2009 in Holland where Hope didn't participate.

But it seems any event that involves Hope's large supporting crowd really isn't the norm around D3.


Unless its the Championship weekend, neutral site games to me are a bad idea and seem contradictory to the D3 philosophy.  I really don't even like the pod system we use now.  Hosting NCAA tournament games is a great experience for the host school and fans, and 13 teams are denied that opportunity in round 1 because of the pod system.

[Ralph Turner]

Bidding as a neutral site host results in lower bids for the NCAA because of the unknown home town attendance, if the bidder does not make the playoffs. It would be interesting to have data from a school that hosted  a non-participating neutral playoff versus when they hosted a playoff where that school participated. Schools don't want to lose money on hosting (when you consider the guarantee paid to the NCAA) so the bid would be naturally lower.

I can tell you that when Hope hosted the women's final four in 08 and 09 the actual crowd was about 1/3 of what was expected had Hope advanced to the Final Four in a 3,500 seat arena.

Its been 20+ years but when Hope also hosted the women's final four in 1990 attendance was around 2200 to 2500 in a smaller building (capacity 2700), vs around 1,000 for the two final fours in 2008 and 2009 in Holland where Hope didn't participate.

But it seems any event that involves Hope's large supporting crowd really isn't the norm around D3.


Unless its the Championship weekend, neutral site games to me are a bad idea and seem contradictory to the D3 philosophy.  I really don't even like the pod system we use now.  Hosting NCAA tournament games is a great experience for the host school and fans, and 13 teams are denied that opportunity in round 1 because of the pod system.

Okay, choose your preference.

61/64 team tourney with the current format in which there are "16" hosts sites in the first round?

48 team tourney under the old Away/Home/Bye scenario that allows for 32 host sites for first/second round action?

[Pat Coleman]

I would probably reject those as being the only two choices. We had 64 teams once with Thursday/Saturday games and it seemed to be alright.

I whole-heartedly agree with sac about it being a big loss for those schools that no longer get home games. The only group that really benefits here is NCAA administrators who have to deal with fewer hosting sites.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I would probably reject those as being the only two choices. We had 64 teams once with Thursday/Saturday games and it seemed to be alright.

I whole-heartedly agree with sac about it being a big loss for those schools that no longer get home games. The only group that really benefits here is NCAA administrators who have to deal with fewer hosting sites.

When was the Thursday/Saturday thing done? I remember the 64-team field when Goucher made it and it was a Friday/Saturday thing. The next year we were back to 48 or whatever and I remember CUA beating LVC (?) on Thursday and then coming to Goucher on Saturday for the second round.

[Greek Tragedy]

I remember a Lawrence fan complaining about the Thursday/Saturday schedule when LU had to travel to St. Thomas(?) and then home and then go to UWSP on Saturday.  That complaint now would involve 3 teams.  If they changed it back, wouldn't it involve 16 then (or whatever the number would be)?  I realize part of the reason would be that Point didn't play Thursday, but even if it had, it probably would've been at home. 

[John Gleich]

I remember a Lawrence fan complaining about the Thursday/Saturday schedule when LU had to travel to St. Thomas(?) and then home and then go to UWSP on Saturday.  That complaint now would involve 3 teams.  If they changed it back, wouldn't it involve 16 then (or whatever the number would be)?  I realize part of the reason would be that Point didn't play Thursday, but even if it had, it probably would've been at home. 

I actually just wrote about that on the Hoopsville thread last night... Here's the discussion, brought over...:

The Wisdom of Hoopsville

"You wanna play that Thrusday game."

                                       --Hoopsville opening theme

(Please help me with the origins, date and speaker for this pearl.  I cited the quote on the Pool C board back in 2009.  UTD actually beat Trinity TX on their way to the Elite 8.  UTD lost Guilford in OT.)

TEAMS WITH 1st ROUND BYES
Puget Sound-(C)
Texas-Dallas-(A)
Ithaca-(C)
Middlebury-(A)

As you can plainly see, awarding byes on the basis of geography rather than merit is just a bunch of caca.

You wanna play that Thursday game.

                                                               --- The Wisdom of Hoopsville

If wish that UTD had played on Thursday.

If I am a high seed, and I am getting a "lower half seed" at home, then I want to play the first round game!

That's me, from the 2005 Selection Sunday night broadcast, responding to a comment from a Buena Vista fan complaining that they did not get a first-round bye. In the 48-team bracket I think getting your feet wet is very helpful, and especially for a program that had accomplished what BVU had to that point.

I can attest to that, too... we got spanked at home by Gustavus Adolphus after a first round bye and a really good regular season in 02-03.  We didn't have as good a regular season in 03-04... so we hosted Benedictine in that Thursday game before traveling back to Gustavus on Saturday.  I think that in 02-03, the experience really got Gustavus ready to come to SP... and it propelled them to the Final.

For us, the Thursday game in 03-04 really helped us get our feet wet... and it gave us the confidence to go into Gustavus and grind out a tough victory.  And for us (not sure about Gustavus...) the game against Gustavus was really a marquis win.  It showed us that we could compete with the best.  And I think that it allowed us to take the best that Lawrence and Williams had to throw at us and respond.

The next year, in 04-05, we had the experience... we really didn't need the Thursday game and I actually think we benefitted from it.  We got to rest while Lawrence had to travel to St. Peter to play at GAC... and then turn around and plat at Stevens Point two nights later.


For this reason (though it's this reason only...) I like the pods.  Instead of a team having to travel on Thursday and beat the home team and then turn around and travel again on Saturday to take on another home team, that team has the luxury of only 1) having to travel once 2) getting an extra day to prepare for the first opponent and 3) getting a few extra hours rest after playing the early game for the contest on Saturday night.


But I don't like how half of the teams get a home game taken away from them.  If they played well enough to earn that first round home game, then they should get the extra advantage... they shouldn't be penalized...  Truly, the pod host has a distinct advantage in both of their games and the next-best team in the pod (the other would-be host) has a neutral game and then is the visitor.

[dahlby]

At least with 4 team pods where one of the participants is hosting, that student body would enjoy the experience. When teams travel, especially long distances, it limits the traveling team's student fans ability to experience the playoffs. Parents are usually the ones that will travel to wherever.

Playing Friday/Saturday limits the amount of classes that the student athletes miss.
2 games over a weekend is enough. Any more to a pod would require at least 3 games in a 3 or 4 day period and would be a strain on the hosting school. The NW and Southern Caliifornia  teams would usually require Thursday/Saturday games, to hold the travel down to 1 team flying from Southern California or the NW. If the NW doesn't have 2 qualifiers, then fly someone to the NW from the Midwest to have a four team pod on the west coast.

I am in favor of keeping the pods as regional as possible and as close to home as possible
to facilitate the regional flavor of the game, limit missed school and give student body's the opportunity to support their teams. I really don't care if Team A had already played team B once or twice. It makes for a good rematch. Spreading the teams out and playing in neutral sites will only reduce the already scarce dollars available for D3 playoffs.

Just my thoughts, IMHO.

[dahlby]

"Mac",

There can't be a Friday/Saturday game(s) when two teams from the NW/SCal areas play and travel north or south to meet a team from the north or south. It physically cannot be done due to the distance factor. And it is cheaper to have 2 SCal teams play down here and only have the winner fly.

[Greek Tragedy]

So you are in favor of the pod system over the neutral site system, but would take Thurs/Sat. games with two hosts in Rd 1 over the pod system?

[dahlby]

Old-School:
I think we posted at the same time. See my posting above yours. I only would favor the Thursday/Saturday scenario under the above posted circumstance.

On the other hand, if 4 schools were within an hour or so bus ride of each other, I would have no problem with splitting a four team pod. There would be more student participation, the players could sleep in their own beds, they would miss less school, and there would be more money for the NCAA. Chapman plays Redlands Thursday nite, only an hour or so bus ride. Our 2400 plus/minus gym will be packed for the game with fans from both teams, just as it was for the unforgetable CMS/Chapman playoff game last year.

I am not that familiar with travel distances iin the other parts of the country, but it seems that some areas would be similiar to S Cal.

[sac]

I would probably reject those as being the only two choices. We had 64 teams once with Thursday/Saturday games and it seemed to be alright.

I whole-heartedly agree with sac about it being a big loss for those schools that no longer get home games. The only group that really benefits here is NCAA administrators who have to deal with fewer hosting sites.

When was the Thursday/Saturday thing done? I remember the 64-team field when Goucher made it and it was a Friday/Saturday thing. The next year we were back to 48 or whatever and I remember CUA beating LVC (?) on Thursday and then coming to Goucher on Saturday for the second round.

I think you have to go back to the early 90's up through the mid 90's.  While I was in school Hope played on a Thursday twice, one year at Allegheny, a couple years later at Wittenberg.   Two days later played at Calvin.  I think travel distance played into when the games were played, and have very vague memories of 1st round games being either on Thursday or Friday.

As late as 1998 I can remember Allegheny coming to Holland on a Saturday after having played a first round game vs someone on Thursday.  Hope had a bye that year, that was the 48 team field years.

In 1997 Hope hosted Denison and Wooster on Thursday/Saturday first and second round games as well.

[Pat Coleman]

I would probably reject those as being the only two choices. We had 64 teams once with Thursday/Saturday games and it seemed to be alright.

I whole-heartedly agree with sac about it being a big loss for those schools that no longer get home games. The only group that really benefits here is NCAA administrators who have to deal with fewer hosting sites.

When was the Thursday/Saturday thing done? I remember the 64-team field when Goucher made it and it was a Friday/Saturday thing. The next year we were back to 48 or whatever and I remember CUA beating LVC (?) on Thursday and then coming to Goucher on Saturday for the second round.

In 1996 it was Thursday-Saturday. I remember specifically because the first round wasn't played in March, it was played on Feb. 29.

[LustyLarryintheToilet]

Point and dahlby, great points.  I'm in favor of a pod system if it regionalizes the teams so that fans can actually enjoy the tournament experience.  The last two years seemed to do that.  This year, the NCAA seemed to expand the pods so there are several geographic dichotomies, limiting fan options for travel.  Perhaps the answer is to make the pods sat night/sunday afternoon.  Most people i talk to cant travel 300 miles on friday, but are using the caveat i might go saturday "if we win."  Sat/Sun takes that out of the equation.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Point and dahlby, great points.  I'm in favor of a pod system if it regionalizes the teams so that fans can actually enjoy the tournament experience.  The last two years seemed to do that.  This year, the NCAA seemed to expand the pods so there are several geographic dichotomies, limiting fan options for travel.  Perhaps the answer is to make the pods sat night/sunday afternoon.  Most people i talk to cant travel 300 miles on friday, but are using the caveat i might go saturday "if we win."  Sat/Sun takes that out of the equation.

The problem with that is there are a number of schools who regularly make the tourney who will not play on Sundays.

[dahlby]

Larry,
Good point also, but there may be some religious concerns.