As much as I like to brag about how a certain coach revolutionized college basketball by having UH play a significant game in the Astrodome, this is a step the NCAA needs to take.

While serviceable occasionally, basketball wasn't really meant to be played in large cavernous domes. I'd love to see a Final Four at Madison Square Garden or the Thomas and Mack Center. Right now, only 8 stadiums can host it, maybe 9 if it's possible to play it at the SkyDome in Toronto.

Or maybe they could get some uniformity and hold it at one site like the First Four and D-II title game. If so, Lucas Oil Stadium makes the most sense. Otherwise, it makes little sense to hold the Final Four at the same 5-6 sites year after year.

They shouldn't play any NCAA tournament games in domes. Play 'em all in real arenas that are regularly used for hoops.

Only reason to use the domes is greed. The NCAA is just money-grubbing, and that is completely unnecessary given that CBS/Turner pays the NCAA more than $700 million a year for the tournament TV rights.

If UH were in the tourney, I doubt C2 would say nothing.

What's wrong with domes?

No domes until the Final Four in the next three tournaments....

http://www.ncaa.com/MBBPrelims

(03-29-2015 02:11 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  What's wrong with domes?

I don't have an issue with using them for the Final Four but there is no reason to put the earlier rounds in them.

I don't like football in a baseball stadium. I don't like basketball in a football stadium. Syracuse does the best job of making a football stadium feel like a basketball arena. Still, when you put the floor in the middle of the field, the game gets lost.

(03-29-2015 01:56 AM)RaiderRed Wrote:  If UH were in the tourney, I doubt C2 would say nothing.

Huh? This is not a UH issue. It was spunky and revolutionary once but the time has passed for playing so many games in domes. Honestly, they should be on somebody's campus but since college basketball is so popular, its only a slight step up to play it at somewhere like MSG or the Staples Center, places and prominent cities that never get to host the Final Four. And its better from fan enjoyment aspect imo.

If not, then just hold it in the best host site every year and HQ of the NCAA, in Indianapolis at Lucas Oil Stadium. As much as I love Houston and defend it from ridicule, I think its absurd that Houston gets to regularly host the FF and even New York never does (last time was in 1996, across the river at the Meadowlands).

(03-29-2015 03:11 AM)FargoBison Wrote:  

(03-29-2015 02:11 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  What's wrong with domes?

I don't have an issue with using them for the Final Four but there is no reason to put the earlier rounds in them.

Actually there is. They are used as a dress rehearsal for a site that will host a Final Four, which is why Houston is hosting the South Regional this weekend and the Final Four next year. But every site which can host the FF, save University of Phoenix Stadium, has done so and its not really necessary for regionals to be hosted by them anymore.

(03-29-2015 12:33 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  As much as I like to brag about how a certain coach revolutionized college basketball by having UH play a significant game in the Astrodome, this is a step the NCAA needs to take.

While serviceable occasionally, basketball wasn't really meant to be played in large cavernous domes.

Why not? The games look the same on TV, which zooms in on the court no matter how big or small the venue, and the fans in the stands don't seem to be complaining, so what's your gripe?

Years ago, there were a lot of quirky baseball fields, which tended to favor one style of play or roster makeup than others. Some were right handed hitters' parks, some pitchers' parks, some favored speed over power, etc. Today, the newer stadiums are largely quirk free. But the last place you would expect to be quirky is a host site for college basketball's premier showcase.

Maybe it's purely coincidental that none of the four teams in Houston could shoot worth a toot. Or, just maybe, that site, for whatever reason, just favored the teams that score from within a couple of feet of the basket over those who rely on great outside shooting. The point is, a tournament site shouldn't force a team to change the style of play that got them there. It's fine if the other team can make them do that. But I don't think that's what was going on.

It will be interesting to see if tonight's games are the clangfests we saw on Friday.

^

Remember, Reliant Stadium (as NRG Stadium was known at the time) was the site of the most hideous national title game in history, between Butler and UConn whose final score was 53-41 with Butler struggling to get to 41 and after the teams battled to a 22-19 halftime score, so there's precedent. And it isn't as if the semifinals were much better, I think Kemba Walker led UConn over Kentucky 56-53.

(03-29-2015 08:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2015 12:33 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  As much as I like to brag about how a certain coach revolutionized college basketball by having UH play a significant game in the Astrodome, this is a step the NCAA needs to take.

While serviceable occasionally, basketball wasn't really meant to be played in large cavernous domes.

Why not? The games look the same on TV, which zooms in on the court no matter how big or small the venue, and the fans in the stands don't seem to be complaining, so what's your gripe?

I think they should reduce the amount of dome hosts. I'd much rather see the regionals at Toyota Center than NRG. Forgetting that it's a dump at this point, even Hofienz Pavilion would provide a more electric atmosphere.

I know it's about money but these domes often times hurt the atmosphere. I remember sitting up in the nosebleed of Reliant for the 2011 Final Four and barely being able to see the players on the court.

(03-29-2015 08:49 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  ^

Remember, Reliant Stadium (as NRG Stadium was known at the time) was the site of the most hideous national title game in history, between Butler and UConn whose final score was 53-41 with Butler struggling to get to 41 and after the teams battled to a 22-19 halftime score, so there's precedent. And it isn't as if the semifinals were much better, I think Kemba Walker led UConn over Kentucky 56-53.

(03-29-2015 08:14 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-29-2015 12:33 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  As much as I like to brag about how a certain coach revolutionized college basketball by having UH play a significant game in the Astrodome, this is a step the NCAA needs to take.

While serviceable occasionally, basketball wasn't really meant to be played in large cavernous domes.

Why not? The games look the same on TV, which zooms in on the court no matter how big or small the venue, and the fans in the stands don't seem to be complaining, so what's your gripe?

I think they should reduce the amount of dome hosts. I'd much rather see the regionals at Toyota Center than NRG. Forgetting that it's a dump at this point, even Hofienz Pavilion would provide a more electric atmosphere.

I know it's about money but these domes often times hurt the atmosphere. I remember sitting up in the nosebleed of Reliant for the 2011 Final Four and barely being able to see the players on the court.

Sounds like had that Final 4 been held at the Toyota Center, you wouldn't have had a ticket to the games because of lack of seating. So I'd be happy that I was in NRG's nose-bleed section.

I could have bought a ticket to the lower bowl if I wanted it. Some people are fine with it and that's good but I've soured on the idea of holding every Final Four and any regionals at domed sites.

I agree, basketball in a dome stadium sucks. Possible exception is Syracuse. Depth perception affects shooters, you're playing in half of the stadium, and who enjoys having to watch a basketball game with binoculars?

(03-29-2015 12:33 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  As much as I like to brag about how a certain coach revolutionized college basketball by having UH play a significant game in the Astrodome, this is a step the NCAA needs to take.

While serviceable occasionally, basketball wasn't really meant to be played in large cavernous domes. I'd love to see a Final Four at Madison Square Garden or the Thomas and Mack Center. Right now, only 8 stadiums can host it, maybe 9 if it's possible to play it at the SkyDome in Toronto.

Or maybe they could get some uniformity and hold it at one site like the First Four and D-II title game. If so, Lucas Oil Stadium makes the most sense. Otherwise, it makes little sense to hold the Final Four at the same 5-6 sites year after year.

No more games at Jerry World?

I think it would be cool to have 100,000 watch a Final Four Jerry World. Like I said, it's not about eliminating domes but I think it'd be good to mix in a few traditional arenas every now and then. If they're worried about losing money, then just jack up the ticket, concession, game program, parking, etc... prices for those years that the non-students and non-parents of the participating schools take part. They could even offer a few PSL's to those who go to the Final Four every year.

(03-29-2015 02:11 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  What's wrong with domes?

They suck, unless they're inflatable domes. Then they blow.

Although seriously, I prefer arenas that were constructed specifically for basketball games being used over domed football stadiums. At least then you are pretty much assured of having a good view of the game. Almost half the seats in a dome require astronomy binoculars, or a telescope, to follow the action - if you have an unobstructed view, and perfect vision.

IMO that's ripping off anyone occupying those seats.

(03-29-2015 10:58 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(03-29-2015 02:11 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  What's wrong with domes?

They suck, unless they're inflatable domes. Then they blow.

Although seriously, I prefer arenas that were constructed specifically for basketball games being used over domed football stadiums. At least then you are pretty much assured of having a good view of the game. Almost half the seats in a dome require astronomy binoculars, or a telescope, to follow the action - if you have an unobstructed view, and perfect vision.

IMO that's ripping off anyone occupying those seats.

I agree, if those people aren't told about the nature of the seats. If they are and buy anyway, well, that's their choice.

Personally, if Georgetown ever makes another Final 4, I'd rather it be played in a 50,000 seat stadium I might be able to get a cheap-seat ticket to without breaking the bank.

IMO just making those seats an option is a rip off - warning or no - especially when there are better options available. And there are many better options available.

And I must say that the only exception to what I'm saying is the Carrier Dome since it at least regularly hosts college basketball.