ADVERTISEMENT

I really don't understand Seth Davis's argument..

whirlybird optio

whirlybird optio

Head Coach
Gold Member
Feb 4, 2003
14,278
14,900
113
We have to play these games in Dayton because Dayton gets a lot of people to the game? Really?

Who cares if it's a Pitt level NIT crowd, there should be a stipulation that if Dayton is on seed line to play in the first 4 the game has to be moved to a neutral court. If not, make the ncaa like the womens tournament and let everyone play home games. I understand that it going to be a very rare occurrence, but it shouldn't happen. You shouldn't play a road game in the ncaa's.
 
well they can't just move the games in 48 hours notice. it is too complicated. so your suggestion would be that Dayton can't be in the first four? Then they automatically get promoted to the field of 64 even if they don't deserve it, and some other team is forced to play the play-in game. that's not fair either.
 
Switch Dayton and UCLA ... problem solved ...

... and yes ... not a single person would have noticed. In fact, they would have thought it was MORE accurate.
 
Besides ... they switch teams on seed lines all the time ...

... for other reasons -- conference matchups -- stuff like that.
 
No, my suggestion is put the games in an arena no college uses..

Put it in a pro arena somewhere. Even better, play them in Vegas at one of those arenas they only use for tournaments. It just should not be in a college gym.

If it has to stay in Ohio put it in the arena that Columbus has in the city, not on the Ohio st campus.
 
Well it is just....

a weeeeeee little bit different to move a team from like a nine to a ten seed or moving them from not having to play a play in game to having to play a play in game.

If Boise really thought that playing the game in Dayton was too unfair they should have declined the invitation. I'll bet Temple would have happily accepted. I'll bet Colorado State would have happily accepted. And so on.
 
Yes ... a wee bit different ... but ...

... UCLA didn't deserve to be in the Tourney at all. At best, they should have been in the play-in game.
This post was edited on 3/19 12:06 AM by DT_PITT
 
Re: Well it is just....

None of us seemed to complain when Pitt played at Mellon Arena back in 2002. No it wasn't Pitt's home court, but a huge advantage nonetheless.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
Re: Well it is just....

There's a HUGE difference between Mellon arena and playing the games in the Fitzgerald Field House, which is basically what they did.

Everyone keeps saying they have to set these games way in advance....why?

The NIT gets games scheduled at venues only 48 hours after selection.
 
Re: Well it is just....

Not. Too complicated , what 2 spots on the s- curve.
I'd buy it if all play in games were for 16 seeds...for literally the last 8'teams in. But that's not what they do.
 
Re: Well it is just....


Originally posted by Joe the Panther Fan:
a weeeeeee little bit different to move a team from like a nine to a ten seed or moving them from not having to play a play in game to having to play a play in game.

If Boise really thought that playing the game in Dayton was too unfair they should have declined the invitation. I'll bet Temple would have happily accepted. I'll bet Colorado State would have happily accepted. And so on.
Click to expand...
Joe, did the NCAA decide no team was allowed to play a tournament game in their home venue? How is this so different?
 
And the average crowd.....

at the NIT opening round games, as someone posted early today, is somewhere in the 2500 range. Now let's just imagine what that would be if the games were played somewhere other than the campuses of one of the teams in the game. Maybe then it could become clear why they don't do that. If they did they could play the games at someplace like Norwin or North Allegheny high school and have plenty of room for the "throng" that would show up.

Is that really what we want, picking a neutral site venue two days beforehand and ending up with 1000 people in the arena watching the games?
 
Why does crowd size matter at all?

I could care less how many people are there. It's an NCAA tournament game. If it wants to feel like an NCAA game the crowds are never that loud or great anyways. If it's in a half full arena, but the process is fair, what's the problem?

I thought it was all about TV ratings? It's not like people aren't gonna watch cause of a small crowd.
 
It's different because....

the other options are simply worse. The aren't waiting until two days before hand to pick the venue, because then they wouldn't sell any tickets. They aren't putting the game in a "neutral" NBA arena, because there is no way they come close to filling up the building and on one wants these games played in half empty buildings. And they certainly aren't going to screw some team by making them play in the play in game when they deserve to not have to and conversely automatically reward Dayton by avoiding having to play in the play in game when that is what they deserve. And they certainly aren't going to screw Dayton by saying that if they don't make the field without being seeded to appear in the play in game then they are going to get left out.

So what is the alternative? And I don't mean just any old thing that someone could make up, I mean a realistic alternative.
 
Re: It's different because....

Play the game permanently in Nationwide arena in Columbus. If the Dayton fans are so awesome that they love basketball so much they'll drive to that game, which is what like an hour from Dayton. The NCAA if they are so worried about attendance can set up shuttle buses from Dayton to get those great fans to the 16-16 matchup they so love.

If Ohio state plays in the first 4, at least it's not at an arena that they use.

There, I solved the problem. Games stay within 70 miles of Dayton, everyone wins.
 
Re: It's different because....

They should play the first four in the same city as the Final Our. Make it a package deal. It's in Indy, play at the Pacers arena. In Dallas, where the Mavs play. In New Orleans, wherehe Pelicans play, etc.

It would be a nice bookend for the tournament.
 
How is it screwing Dayton to make them one of the 11 seeds not in the play in games?

I mean if its Texas or ucla playing tonight, instead, how is that unfair to anyone?
If Dayton is playing in Pittsburgh or Louisville tomorrow instead, how is that unfair to them?

Play the games in Dayton... Just dont seed Dayton to play at home.
 
Seriously? I mean you.....

seriously don't think that the crowd matters? You don't think a good crowd makes for a better atmosphere not only for the players but for the people watching on television? You don't think a game played in a full arena with people into the game isn't better for television than playing the game at Norwin High School in front of 500 people who mostly don't care? If you really think that then I'm not sure what to say, because I don't live in your world, I live in the real world. There's a reason why the NCAA just doesn't build a basketball court in a television studio. I would have thought that the reasons for that would be so obvious that there would be no need to explain it. Maybe I was wrong.

As far as the crowds never being loud or great anyway, if you are talking about when the game is Kentucky beating the crap out of Hamton then sure, the crowd isn't either of those. But when the game is good? When a "little guy" is putting a scare into a prohibitive favorite? When Coppin State is beating Texas at the Civic Arena? When Northwestern State puts on a big comeback late and hits a three at the buzzer to beat Iowa at the Palace at Auburn Hills? If you don't think the crowds at games like that are both loud and great I can only think that you have no idea what those terms mean.
 
Re: It's different because....


Originally posted by whirlybird optio:
Play the game permanently in Nationwide arena in Columbus. If the Dayton fans are so awesome that they love basketball so much they'll drive to that game, which is what like an hour from Dayton. The NCAA if they are so worried about attendance can set up shuttle buses from Dayton to get those great fans to the 16-16 matchup they so love.

If Ohio state plays in the first 4, at least it's not at an arena that they use.

There, I solved the problem. Games stay within 70 miles of Dayton, everyone wins.
Click to expand...
Whirly - after these threads, I stand in awe of Dayton. I never knew that it truly is the best college basketball city in the nation.
rolleyes.r191677.gif
 
Re: Seriously? I mean you.....

Bottom line, it's not fair. If it was fair to play a home game in the tournament all teams should be able to play on their home court if the tournament is scheduled there. If the 1st-2nd rds are in Syracuse, and Syracuse is good enough, than they should be able to play there if Dayton can play on their court.

And I've been to a bunch of NCAA tournament games. I've seen VCU beat Duke, I've seen Duke get beat by Indiana. I've seen great crowds at games, but I've never been at an NCAA game where one team was on their home court. My general point is that the crowd at an NCAAT game, with some exceptions, doesn't usually feel like a road game. Sometimes it does when like you said you have a David-Goliath game, but I can bet, or guarantee, that no one has faced a more hostile environment than Boise tonight.

Is there any particular reason why my Columbus solution wouldn't work? Is there something precluding people in the greater Columbus area from embracing this like Dayton does?

Maybe the best solution is just cutting the last 4 bubble teams and going back to 64. That will never happen though.
 
I think you have....

completely and utterly screwed up the argument.

Of course it doesn't screw Dayton if you say that they can never play in the play in games, that if they deserve to be in the play in game they will automatically be moved to a better position. That isn't screwing Dayton, that's giving Dayton something that they don't deserve, namely that they don't have to play in the play in game to make it to the real first round. In that scenario that team that gets screwed is the one that deserves to not have to play in the play in game but gets stuck having to play in it simply because their name is not Dayton. If Texas or UCLA is playing tonight it's unfair to Texas or UCLA because the committee determined that Texas and UCLA deserved to be seeded into the first round and yet they would have had to have played in the play in game. We might all think that Texas and UCLA didn't deserve to be in the tournament anyway, but the people who's opinion counts disagreed with us. So why should Texas or UCLA or anyone else for that matter get screwed by having to play in the play in game when the committee determined that by merit they earned the right to not have to play that game?

What if next year Pitt is on the bubble and the NCAA tells Pitt "well, your results and therefore your seeding deserve playing in the first round and not in the play in game, but Dayton deserves to play in the play in game and we've decided that they aren't allowed to play in one of those games anymore, so hey, sucks to be you but you need to be in Dayton on Tuesday night"? I mean we'd all think that was perfectly fine, right? Yeah, sure we would.
 
Re: I think you have....


Originally posted by Joe the Panther Fan:

Of course it doesn't screw Dayton if you say that they can never play in the play in games, that if they deserve to be in the play in game they will automatically be moved to a better position. That isn't screwing Dayton, that's giving Dayton something that they don't deserve, namely that they don't have to play in the play in game to make it to the real first round. In that scenario that team that gets screwed is the one that deserves to not have to play in the play in game but gets stuck having to play in it simply because their name is not Dayton. If Texas or UCLA is playing tonight it's unfair to Texas or UCLA because the committee determined that Texas and UCLA deserved to be seeded into the first round and yet they would have had to have played in the play in game. We might all think that Texas and UCLA didn't deserve to be in the tournament anyway, but the people who's opinion counts disagreed with us. So why should Texas or UCLA or anyone else for that matter get screwed by having to play in the play in game when the committee determined that by merit they earned the right to not have to play that game?

What if next year Pitt is on the bubble and the NCAA tells Pitt "well, your results and therefore your seeding deserve playing in the first round and not in the play in game, but Dayton deserves to play in the play in game and we've decided that they aren't allowed to play in one of those games anymore, so hey, sucks to be you but you need to be in Dayton on Tuesday night"? I mean we'd all think that was perfectly fine, right? Yeah, sure we would.
Click to expand...
So, screwing Boise State tonight was okay then?
 
It might not be....

the best college basketball city in the nation, but it is certainly on the short list. That's one of the big reasons why they play the games there. The fact that you apparently didn't know that Dayton is a big college basketball city doesn't mean that it isn't, it just means that you didn't know.
 
It was....

the least worse option. So far the only real option that anyone has come up with is playing the games 70 miles away under the silly notion that all those fans will have no problem making the trip. On a weeknight.
 
Re: It might not be....


Originally posted by Joe the Panther Fan:
the best college basketball city in the nation, but it is certainly on the short list. That's one of the big reasons why they play the games there. The fact that you apparently didn't know that Dayton is a big college basketball city doesn't mean that it isn't, it just means that you didn't know.
Click to expand...
Sarcasm is hard to convey online. There are a number of great college basketball cities in the US, Dayton being one of them. If that is primary to these particular games, rotate the play-in games using that as the pre-requisite. Problem solved.

In all seriousness, do you have business interests in Dayton? What's your connection?
 
Re: It was....

You mean ALL those fans that showed up last night or for the first game tonight?
 
Re: It was....

Or, you know, people in the Columbus area could go to the game.

This is the way I look at it, the worst option is playing a road game, a true road game, in the tournament. It simply is not fair.

Any other option, playing the game in Columbus, playing it in Vegas, playing it on the CBS lot...those options all have huge logistical and practical problems, but the venues would at least be fair. Which, to me, is more important than anything.
 
The easiest, and probably best option, would to simply just have two sites, one for Tuesday and one for Wednesday. Somewhere like maybe Hinkle Fieldhouse, The Palestra, or maybe something out west (ironically, Boise would probably be a good location) in addition to Dayton.

If Syracuse can't be seeded in the East when the Regional Final is in the Carrier Dome, because they might make it there, then Dayton surely shouldn't be given a home game because they never considered the possibility of them being in the first four.

This post was edited on 3/19 7:11 AM by mvk112
 
The only time I feel that Dayton should be in the First Four is if they were really, truly, and obviously the WORST at-large team in the field and were almost a "WTF" kind of a pick.........sorta like NCSU last year who nobody but me had in the field. Other than that, if you could make an argument that there are 4 teams worse than Dayton, then I think Dayton should be promoted to the 2nd round by some sort of unwritten rule. Most people had Dayton in the 2nd Round but somehow the committee felt they were the worst at-large team. Those last 5, 6, 7 teams are all so close, nobody would know or care if Dayton got a "bye" even if the committee felt they didn't truly deserve it.
 
I don't really think Dayton deserved a "bye" into the field of 64. They were the final at large bid according to the committee and they played like it. I don't think they would've beat any of the other three teams on a neutral floor. They won by one point at home.

Just have a second site and you could avoid this crap. Another team shouldn't be pushed to the first four just because they made a decision to only play in Dayton. Pick a second site, and that solves everything.
 
There is simply NO EXCUSE for having 68 teams in a 64-team field.

The committee needs to grow a set. Why is the 61st team playing on Tuesday or Wednesday, and the 60th team watching tape of their next opponent? Make a freaking decision. Just a few more $$$ to fund the glitzy NCAA convention. Spare me, please. Every at-large team is in because they made a decision....make a few more.
 
Originally posted by mvk112:
The easiest, and probably best option, would to simply just have two sites, one for Tuesday and one for Wednesday. Somewhere like maybe Hinkle Fieldhouse, The Palestra, or maybe something out west (ironically, Boise would probably be a good location) in addition to Dayton.
Click to expand...
The palestra is the correct answer to pretty much any question
 
Re: There is simply NO EXCUSE for having 68 teams in a 64-team field.

Totally agree. I just don;t understand the reasoning behind this new format.

I guess as a fan, I should be happy as a fan with the additional games, which tend to be pretty damned exciting as well. But somehow I'm not, and I sit there watching them thinking exactly what you stated.
 
This has happened exactly one time in the 10 years of play in games and has no bearing in the overall outcome of the Tournament.

So yes, by all means, let's panic.
 
Originally posted by wbrpanther:
This has happened exactly one time in the 10 years of play in games and has no bearing in the overall outcome of the Tournament.

So yes, by all means, let's panic.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's panic to suggest ways that might improve upon the format. Obviously they have no problem tinkering with the tournament, adding a second site for these play-in games makes a ton of sense if there is a chance for Dayton to be in one of the games.

Manhattan-Hampton followed by Dayton-Boise State would've done just fine in The Palestra.
 
Why are those games always in Dayton? What's the reason behind it? Some stupid, antiquated, meaningless "tradition" I suppose?
 
Originally posted by wbrpanther:
This has happened exactly one time in the 10 years of play in games and has no bearing in the overall outcome of the Tournament.

So yes, by all means, let's panic.
Click to expand...
It's not panic, it's simply following the NCAA's own rules of never letting a team play in their home venue. A rule that's been around for for what - 32 years now? It's not rocket science that what happened last night was not only blatantly unfair, but broke the model. What's stupid is to just ignore it when a fix is pretty easy. I'm still scratching my head over anyone defending this. Since it's the first time in 10 years, there is ZERO excuse for it to happen ever again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K

Cincy should be a great case study this year on handling a team with an awful ooc.

Replies
11
Views
812
Center Court at the Pete
316 S Bouquet
316 S Bouquet
S

NCAA Tournament Expansion and 2 new metrics added

Replies
17
Views
1K
Basketball Board
Sean Miller Fan
S
NC Panther

NET Quadrant information.

Replies
13
Views
2K
Basketball Board
DC_Area_Panther
D
S

ACC/SEC Challenge Thread

Replies
57
Views
3K
Basketball Board
JD1976
J
S

Heather Basketball Scheduling

Replies
25
Views
2K
Basketball Board
Atilla Cosby
Atilla Cosby
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back