(11-21-2013 08:22 PM)Wolfman Wrote: Rounds 1 and 2 should be at regional sites to make it easier for fans to get to. Rounds 3 and 4 should be in NYC.
The problem with that is you have to decide in advance where the regional sites are going to be so you run the very real chance of having your regional sites being competitively unbalanced in the name of keeping it regional, or you defeat the purpose of having regional sites by assigning the teams for competitive reasons. Let's say you have a regional site in Charlotte and one in say NYC, but because of the way the seedings fall UNC and NC State are assigned to NYC with BC and ND and Syracuse and Pitt are in Charlotte with Duke and GT? What did we accomplish?
It isn't going to please the majority of our fans but the best thing the ACC can do for the entire conference is establish an equal rotation of Greensboro, NYC, Atlanta and DC with an occasional bone thrown to Boston, Pittsburgh, Louisville, Charlotte, and a Florida site . That way you maximize your exposure in all four of the regions (NYC & the NE, the Mid Atlantic, Tobacco Rd and the southern flank) while giving the secondary markets an occasional boost.
A hypothetical rotation could work something like this:
2015 - Greensboro
2016 - DC
2017 - NYC
2018 - Atlanta
2019 - Charlotte
2020 - Greensboro
2021 - DC
2022 - NYC
2023 - Atlanta
2024 - Louisville
So on and so forth.
You are going to alienate some portion of the conference by giving preference for either NYC or Greensboro, and IMO you are not maximizing the exposure of the conference by limiting it to one or two sites year after year. I know there will be some drawbacks to holding the tourney at the home site of a conference member (like at the Yum!) but with the way the ACC distributes tickets the home court effect will be minimal at best.
We need to get past the parochial line of thinking that it's all or nothing when the reality is we need to be doing what we can to maximize our exposure in ALL of our markets.