RebKell's Junkie Boards

[Orion]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/29/AR2007032902271.html

_________________
An original Mystic fan.

[LTF1]

"North Carolina Coach Sylvia Hatchell was not a supporter of predetermined sites when they were introduced. "I felt like it was too early," Hatchell said. "Most of the time, we got to host because we were one of the top 16 teams, and we got great crowds. You say, 'Well, that gives the higher-seeded teams a home-court advantage.' But you know what? You play the whole season for that. . . . "

Summitt said. "I supported neutral sites because there were so many people out there that felt like we were ready. Clearly, we're not ready."

AMEN! Back on the old ESPN hidden board, others along with myself predicted this would happen. But NOOOOO! WCBB had to be JUST LIKE THE MEN! HA!

"We sometimes have to shoot the arena in a different way than we would like to"

Yeah, so as not to remind viewers that the place is 4/5 empty!

And quit sending LSU to the Pacific coast! That's even ridiculous for TV. The LSU-FSU game started at 10:30 PM CST (8:30 PST). My lovely Waffle didn't stay up for it and I know other LSU fans around BR didn't either. Asinine!

[beknighted]

I'd like to see a comparison of attendance the various years to get an idea of whether specific parts of the country do better than others. I have my suspicions, but I don't really know.

Also, the tournament committee did some extremely wacky things this year that clearly hurt attendance. For instance, East Carolina was sent to East Lansing instead of Raleigh, even though 4-13 matchups were available in both places. And, of course, you had the amazing spectacle of 4 teams in Los Angeles that traveled an average of something like 2,000 miles to get there.

I also continue to believe that the women's tournament needs to use somewhat smaller arenas. The Greensboro Coliseum is nice, but even a crowd of 8,000 would look lost in there. 8,000 in Trenton or Bridgeport would be close to a full house (closer in Trenton), and 6,000 would look pretty good in either one.

[LTF1]

BeK:"I'd like to see a comparison of attendance the various years to get an idea of whether specific parts of the country do better than others. I have my suspicions, but I don't really know"

Would that suspicion include that attendance in the West is less than stellar?

[Stephen Shirley]

[beknighted]

[FS02]

I agree something has to be done. It's wrong to have teams playing with their whole season on the line in front of 800 fans.

[HomerCecil]

I think first and second-round sites have been announced through 2009 or 2010. So we might be stuck until then.

I agree, it has to be somewhat deflating to be completely pumped up for a game and then come out to see less than 1,000 fans. And it looks really bad on TV and lets the guys I work with bitch about "why the hell is this on TV anyway?" Not that they necessarily wouldn't, but it would be harder if there were actually people there.

[CalwbbFan]

I don't know why on earth they chose Fresno as a place to hold the regional this year....There are sooooo many good places to host the tourney on the West Coast.....why in the middle of nowhere. It's in the middle of cow pastures, far away from SF, Sacto and LA......How about Portland or Seattle???

Also, why not give blocks tickets away to youth groups, etc. and fill the stands at least--no one wants to pay for bleach seats behind the buckets, put some bodies in 'em....make it look good for tv and give kids the chance to see some fun games. Of course, they'd have to schedule the games when children could actually attend.

[insidewinder]

SaveMart Center is a nice place to watch a game, but I agree Fresno was a terrible choice. I'm in SF, and it is a good 3-3.5 hours to Fresno. That means hotels and expenses to watch games, which I will do for teams I follow but not for some random regional. Sat/Mon means I'd have to miss work on Mon and probably Tuesday unless I wanted to be a zombie. I'd have gone anywhere in the Bay Area or probably even to Sacramento (1.5 hour drive or so) for a regional not involving teams I follow, but no way to Fresno. Fresno State's team had good attendance a few years ago when they had that coach who put herself on billboards and all that stuff, but not so much anymore, so there is not even a strong local base to draw from. Bad choice.

[dukemayo]

My screed from 3 weeks ago has new relevance:

http://boards.rebkell.net/viewtopic.php?t=25178&highlight=

I'll confess to being surprised it didn't spur a single reply back then. Just way ahead of my time, I guess.

Average session attendance for Rounds 1 and 2 was actually better this year than last:

2006 3,852
2007 4,789

but not as good as the first year (2005) of 8 neutral sites: 5,650.

But none of it is good enough.

Back to the Top 16 seeds hosting Rounds 1 and 2. We were getting 6,500+ with that format and trending up!

Regional attendance is getting sicker too.

Maybe the NCAA should consider true geographic regions. It'd mean some teams worthy of #1 seeds from the same conference might meet in a regional, like Duke and North Carolina, but seeding is an inexact science anyway and it'd sure create a lot of needed interest and attendance.