MBB: Landmark Conference

[Pat Coleman]

It does seem that the swing in the Mid-Atlantic has gone as such:

1) Bias toward F&M in the 1990s.
2) Backlash starting sometime in the early 2000s.
3) To be determined, but F&M is the worthy host of this sectional with all the factors taken into account.

Heck, Staten Island didn't even have live stats for its tournament games last week.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Quick thought on neutral sites... the crowds would be dismal. It is hard enough for people to travel to games when they aren't at neutral sites, but to then find a location that wants to host a D3 tournament when the crowds are not going to fill their arena... difficult at best. And don't expect a school to want to step up and host when they don't have a vested interest.

You might not like the system for a variety of reasons, but I don't think neutral sites is a viable option (it is also yet another cost factor).

Also, women on Thursday/Saturday... men on Friday/Sunday flies in the face of "student-athlete" mentality in Division III.

[Reserved Seat]

Definitely, a backlash in the 2000's.  Thanks for the confirmation.

[Pat Coleman]

Definitely, a backlash in the 2000's.  Thanks for the confirmation.

I think it evened out there, yes.

Also, agreed with Dave. I am not sure how many neutral sites there are willing to host a sectional. If you look at baseball, almost all of the regional hosts are bidding with the hope that their team makes it.

[Bucket]

Quick thought on neutral sites... the crowds would be dismal. It is hard enough for people to travel to games when they aren't at neutral sites, but to then find a location that wants to host a D3 tournament when the crowds are not going to fill their arena... difficult at best. And don't expect a school to want to step up and host when they don't have a vested interest.

I concur. Middlebury's Elite Eight match-up with St. Mary's last year was essentially a neutral site game (Rochester had lost the previous night), and the atmosphere was nowhere near what it should have been for such a game. Both teams were far from home, and while both brought vocal contingents, the arena was half-filled at best. Now, this can always happen on Saturday if the host school loses Friday night, but to purposefully set up such a situation for all games would be silly.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Quick thought on neutral sites... the crowds would be dismal. It is hard enough for people to travel to games when they aren't at neutral sites, but to then find a location that wants to host a D3 tournament when the crowds are not going to fill their arena... difficult at best. And don't expect a school to want to step up and host when they don't have a vested interest.

I concur. Middlebury's Elite Eight match-up with St. Mary's last year was essentially a neutral site game (Rochester had lost the previous night), and the atmosphere was nowhere near what it should have been for such a game. Both teams were far from home, and while both brought vocal contingents, the arena was half-filled at best. Now, this can always happen on Saturday if the host school loses Friday night, but to purposefully set up such a situation for all games would be silly.

I watched the video stream of NCC at WashU the other night.  WashU is not exactly small or remote and they didn't even have the place full.  I'm not sure you can argue for neutral sites until the home teams actually sell the place out.

[ronk]

  Well, let's argue for a geographically positioned host so the fans aren't disadvantaged like Cabrini with an 8-hour trip.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

  Well, let's argue for a geographically positioned host so the fans aren't disadvantaged like Cabrini with an 8-hour trip.

6.5 tops, even in a bus.

[ronk]

  At any distance, it's longer than it would be with a geographical host, minimizing distance for the schools as a group.

[onetinsoldier]

Quick thought on neutral sites... the crowds would be dismal. It is hard enough for people to travel to games when they aren't at neutral sites, but to then find a location that wants to host a D3 tournament when the crowds are not going to fill their arena... difficult at best. And don't expect a school to want to step up and host when they don't have a vested interest.

I concur. Middlebury's Elite Eight match-up with St. Mary's last year was essentially a neutral site game (Rochester had lost the previous night), and the atmosphere was nowhere near what it should have been for such a game. Both teams were far from home, and while both brought vocal contingents, the arena was half-filled at best. Now, this can always happen on Saturday if the host school loses Friday night, but to purposefully set up such a situation for all games would be silly.

Bucket,  this is always going to happen when a host loses round 1.  I understand all the issues with neutral site hosting and the money lost.  I also understand that the idea of playing a road game in front of 2000 people (potentially) is a thrill for the student athlete.  But so is playing in front of 1-2k fans at a neutral site in salem, which you potentially take away.  I just have trouble wrapping my hands around the idea that, because of the ripple effect, a womens game in amherst could conceivably cost Cabrini a final four trip. 

Of course, the other answer would be to ditch the NCAA geographical diversity program and clump regions together irregardless of strength.  As bad as that might sound, is it really worse than a system where the No. 2 MA team hosts over the #1 NE team, while the #1 MA team travels to the #2 NE team? 

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

  At any distance, it's longer than it would be with a geographical host, minimizing distance for the schools as a group.

The home team always has an advantage, it's not quite fair to give an advantage to a weaker team.  Scranton is the logical host for the pod, but probably the weakest squad.  I'm not sure we want to see that; I certainly don't.

[Bucket]

  Well, let's argue for a geographically positioned host so the fans aren't disadvantaged like Cabrini with an 8-hour trip.

Middlebury had a long trip to Rochester last year, and it didn't bother the Panthers any.

Again, hosting guarantees nothing. And having to travel is not an excuse, either.

[ronk]

  Well, let's argue for a geographically positioned host so the fans aren't disadvantaged like Cabrini with an 8-hour trip.

Middlebury had a long trip to Rochester last year, and it didn't bother the Panthers any.

Again, hosting guarantees nothing. And having to travel is not an excuse, either.

We're not discussing the effect on the teams, only the likelihood of fans discouraged from making a 6+ hour trip. I'd rather go back to regional regionals and sectionals than these pods of teams from 300+ miles away.

[augie]

Hoops fan it is exactly 7hrs and 56 minutes for Cabrini and 5hrs 31 minutes for Scranton.Dave last night watching Hoopsville and coach Danzing was on. You made the statement that Middlebury was better then Scranton on paper the game is not won on paper it is won on the basketball court.Bluntly

[cold_case]

Pat, I appreciate your acknowledgement of a bias towards F&M in the 1980's and '90's and of course the F&M partisans are going to agree.
I'm not directing anything towards you. What I'm saying is my lengthy post earlier about the sectional site would never have been posted if they moved the Amherst women to Saturday and Sunday afternoons.
But, when there is an abnormality, you can bet it will benefit F&M.
I know Amherst would not balk at moving games around since nothing would be different.
And that's the gist of my post regarding the court jesters that are the selection committees, especially in this region.
Maybe they want Glenny to win that ever-elusive national title.