The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

When do we find out where it's going to be? I'm actually hoping it's not in Birmingham. Why?

1. I'm sick of the whiners who say it gives us an unfair advantage

2. I'm sick of the whiners who say Birmingham doesn't support it and how confident they are that their city would be a better host

I hope CUSA realizes how much money they cost the league by catering to the whiners about what time the games are played. Fair or not, a decision like that probably costs the tournament tens of thousands of dollars (at minimum).

I have always been in favor of maybe a 3 city rotation. But neutral cities won't work.

(03-12-2016 09:10 AM)Blazer85 Wrote:  When do we find out where it's going to be? I'm actually hoping it's not in Birmingham. Why?

1. I'm sick of the whiners who say it gives us an unfair advantage

2. I'm sick of the whiners who say Birmingham doesn't support it and how confident they are that their city would be a better host

I hope CUSA realizes how much money they cost the league by catering to the whiners about what time the games are played. Fair or not, a decision like that probably costs the tournament tens of thousands of dollars (at minimum).

I have always been in favor of maybe a 3 city rotation. But neutral cities won't work.

I think the league should seriously consider splitting up the Men's and Women's tournaments.

I am for a nuetral site, as long as the site is in a city where fans can get to fairly cheap and that fans would want to stay in (for a few days) if their team were to lose.

I don't have a problem with the sites of a particular school, as long as the school has a strong enough fan base that would continue to go to games even if their team loses. Because the empty seats look horrible on tv. But from all the games I've watched, it's a college basketball problem and not just a CUSA problem

When I was at UAB, the tournaments were done both ways. The last year of the Great Midwest Conference, both tournaments were at the same time. When CUSA started, the tournaments were split. Not sure why it went back to being together???

As you've seen since we were put out, neutral court doesn't really work. I suggest them to pick one team on the west to host (UTEP), 1 team on the east (Charlotte/ODU), and Birningham & rotate between the 3. Also, move the tournament to start quarterfinals on Saturday, so that fans can travel and home team doesn't get screwed.

(03-12-2016 09:38 AM)BandGrad Wrote:  When I was at UAB, the tournaments were done both ways. The last year of the Great Midwest Conference, both tournaments were at the same time. When CUSA started, the tournaments were split. Not sure why it went back to being together???

I think cost and logistics were the reason. More expense in advertising and travel for fans/athletes/band and cheerleaders etc. when you put them in different cities. It would be nice if they could put more thought into when teams played so that fans could see both the men and women's teams play. It wouldn't always work but it would help attendance and allow folks more opportunity to support their teams.

The type league we are in if the host loses, attendance will tank. Period. If we were in the ACC or something it wouldn't be an issue. But we aren't and that issue isn't likely to change until/unless CUSA quality improves and you have multiple teams worth watching or that had big time players on the national radar.

I think the best cities to host are probably going to be Charlotte, Birmingham, and Nashville. Norfolk and El Paso are reasonable options but less appealing in my mind.

(03-12-2016 10:12 AM)Blazer85 Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 09:38 AM)BandGrad Wrote:  When I was at UAB, the tournaments were done both ways. The last year of the Great Midwest Conference, both tournaments were at the same time. When CUSA started, the tournaments were split. Not sure why it went back to being together???

I think cost and logistics were the reason. More expense in advertising and travel for fans/athletes/band and cheerleaders etc. when you put them in different cities. It would be nice if they could put more thought into when teams played so that fans could see both the men and women's teams play. It wouldn't always work but it would help attendance and allow folks more opportunity to support their teams.

I think you've hit on something in the bolded statement: so much of CUSA's basketball management seems thoughtless. The whole mirror-scheduling of regular-season men's and women's basketball looks like someone had an intern flip the "at" on each line then headed off to hoist a few and call it a hard day's work.

Another reason that neutral cities is staff.

Who works the tournament at a neutral site? UAB staffers have probably worked their tales off this week. Who will do that at a neutral site?

Put it in a neutral city with something to do, say New Orleans, and see how many people come back to see the games once their team is eliminated. I know I wouldn't.

(03-12-2016 10:26 AM)UAB Band Dad Wrote:  Put it in a neutral city with something to do, say New Orleans, and see how many people come back to see the games once their team is eliminated. I know I wouldn't.

well La Tech wants Shreveport so that problem would be solved.

As bad as CUSA is, I can't see any local support without school affiliation coming out. I love college basketball and I know I wouldn't walk across the street to watch that poor of a product.

And these fans say they will travel to a neutral site. Why haven't they done that yet.
Most fans make their decision on whether to travel by how long they think their team will be in the tournament. For about ten teams this year, that was one game.

I don't disagree with what you all are saying. I just hope they do it elsewhere, even a neutral site they are clamoring for. UAB would probably travel better or at least as well as any other program. And CUSA would probably take a bath in lost revenue from the event. I think it's going to take seeing another site host it and be a complete failure for the half wits at other schools to finally recognize that Birmingham is likely one of only around 2-3 reasonable host sites at this point.

I know other conference folks don't want to see this, but Birmingham makes for a great location. We are centrally located in the conference footprint, plenty of hotels/restaurants, easy airport access, and two great venues to hold the event. I think only Charlotte can compare to this list.

I would expect that most ticket sales for any site would be corporate supporters seeking to show support for their city / school, etc. They buy up blocks of tickets and then distribute them to employees, clients and local nonprofit charities (like Big Brothers/ Big Sisters). Of course, the conference schools get blocks to sell to their fans.

B'ham is as good a central and convenient location for automobile travel as any in C-USA and is better than most alternatives. Auto travel means more families making the trip, and families means more lodging income, more food service income and more shopping income. Unless UAB can become another Calipary type dominant Memphis program, it has no particular advantage by playing at the BJCC that would rule it out.

I agree.

A neutral location is a no-go. People straight up don't care about C-USA basketball. We won't be much of a draw in a city we don't have a presence in to begin with.

People will always whine about something, but I think the tournament should rotate just because it's the fair thing to do. The only reason I think they want the men's and women's tournaments together is become it's logistically cheaper and for marketing reasons. That's cool, but, if you're going to do it that way, you 100% can't have a school having to pick between watching the men or women because they're playing at the same time. That defeats the entire point of having both teams in the same place.

I'm of the opinion that we should split the men and women, only have the top eight teams should go to the tournament, that it should be held later in the week, and that the winner should host the tournament next year. Having a whole year to get the paperwork together and reserve a place should suffice, but, if that's too difficult, biggest bid it should be.

(03-12-2016 11:31 AM)Hopeful Wrote:  I agree.

A neutral location is a no-go. People straight up don't care about C-USA basketball. We won't be much of a draw in a city we don't have a presence in to begin with.

People will always whine about something, but I think the tournament should rotate just because it's the fair thing to do. The only reason I think they want the men's and women's tournaments together is become it's logistically cheaper and for marketing reasons. That's cool, but, if you're going to do it that way, you 100% can't have a school having to pick between watching the men or women because they're playing at the same time. That defeats the entire point of having both teams in the same place.

I'm of the opinion that we should split the men and women, only have the top eight teams should go to the tournament, that it should be held later in the week, and that the winner should host the tournament next year. Having a whole year to get the paperwork together and reserve a place should suffice, but, if that's too difficult, biggest bid it should be.

I'm not sure that every school in the conference has the facilities to host the tournament. Hattiesburg, MS? Huntington, WV?

(03-12-2016 11:42 AM)BandGrad Wrote:  

(03-12-2016 11:31 AM)Hopeful Wrote:  I agree.

A neutral location is a no-go. People straight up don't care about C-USA basketball. We won't be much of a draw in a city we don't have a presence in to begin with.

People will always whine about something, but I think the tournament should rotate just because it's the fair thing to do. The only reason I think they want the men's and women's tournaments together is become it's logistically cheaper and for marketing reasons. That's cool, but, if you're going to do it that way, you 100% can't have a school having to pick between watching the men or women because they're playing at the same time. That defeats the entire point of having both teams in the same place.

I'm of the opinion that we should split the men and women, only have the top eight teams should go to the tournament, that it should be held later in the week, and that the winner should host the tournament next year. Having a whole year to get the paperwork together and reserve a place should suffice, but, if that's too difficult, biggest bid it should be.

I'm not sure that every school in the conference has the facilities to host the tournament. Hattiesburg, MS? Huntington, WV?

Men and women in the same city at the same time allows fans to make one set of travel arrangements and is less expensive for the teams, the conference, and the fans. The problem is the scheduling.

There are a very small number of teams that can handle the tournament with the requirement that both the men and women's teams have to be accommodated in different arenas. UAB, Charlotte, North Texas(Dallas area), WKU(if they could work something out with Bowling Green University), & ODU(if they could work something out with Hampton or Norfolk State) are examples. SMiss is pushing Biloxi and LaTech is pushing Shreveport. FIU/FAU could probably do a joint tournament, but their arenas may be too small for the men's teams...

San Antonio would be great too. Think the Spurs would let us have the AT&T Center? And there wouldn't be a home team advantage.

FWIW: I'm hearing that until they revert back to the previous bracketing philosophy that puts the host team in the evening bracket regardless of seeding - UAB does not intend to place a bid for the conference tournaments for the foreseeable future.

(03-12-2016 12:54 PM)blazerjay Wrote:  FWIW: I'm hearing that until they revert back to the previous bracketing philosophy that puts the host team in the evening bracket regardless of seeding - UAB does not intend to place a bid for the conference tournaments for the foreseeable future.

I don't know why any city would want to. It's a guaranteed money loser.

Did UaB and Birmingham have to guarantee a dollar amount ?

Im betting that if not next year then the year after, the conference will come to UAB begging them to host again.