Harry makes the case many of us have been saying for years. The experiment in Frisco was good, but it didn't solve the problem.

http://www.odusports.com/ViewArticle.dbm...=211778598

"with top seeds hosting games on their home sites, the conference's best teams are more likely to avoid early upsets. Yes, that gives an advantage to the higher seeds. But shouldn't the regular-season mean something? if you've finished in the first division of the league standings, you've earned a chance to play at home."

"Jones proposes adopting the model used by the Patriot League and playing the tournament on home courts of the higher seeds. Take ten teams, have two play-in games, and then go right to the quarterfinals."

(11-01-2018 01:44 PM)odu09 Wrote:  Harry makes the case many of us have been saying for years. The experiment in Frisco was good, but it didn't solve the problem.

http://www.odusports.com/ViewArticle.dbm...=211778598

"with top seeds hosting games on their home sites, the conference's best teams are more likely to avoid early upsets. Yes, that gives an advantage to the higher seeds. But shouldn't the regular-season mean something? if you've finished in the first division of the league standings, you've earned a chance to play at home."

"Jones proposes adopting the model used by the Patriot League and playing the tournament on home courts of the higher seeds. Take ten teams, have two play-in games, and then go right to the quarterfinals."

He is about 6 years behind on this idea many of us has been saying for years now.....I agree somewhat but my proposal has always been to have 1st rd, 2nd round, and quarterfinals on campus sites, then have semis and finals on neutral site....

(11-01-2018 01:55 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  He is about 6 years behind on this idea many of us has been saying for years now.....I agree somewhat but my proposal has always been to have 1st rd, 2nd round, and quarterfinals on campus sites, then have semis and finals on neutral site....

Why would you want to have our conference finals being played in front of hundreds when it could be played in front of thousands?

Yep. It should be at the number 1 teams home arena. You want the best team with the best opportunity to advance to the NCAA tourney.

Said earlier, last thread on the topic...

https://csnbbs.com/thread-861448-post-15...id15611762

(10-27-2018 12:18 PM)_sturt_ Wrote:  With this many schools and this large of a footprint, it's silly to conform to convention and have the conference tournament played in one spot.

It just is.

Approaching the situation objectively, this screams for tossing tradition in that respect aside, and hosting an East tourney and a West tourney, and then having a championship game at the home arena of the higher rated champion a few days following the the division tournaments. Assured opportunity for larger crowds from each school, and optimizes the chances for the team most deserving by granting a home court advantage. Downside is that you have two tournament venues running simultaneously.

and

https://csnbbs.com/thread-861448-post-15...id15614489

(10-27-2018 07:10 PM)_sturt_ Wrote:  If you stick with the conventional approach, yes.

I'm saying, why are we sticking with the conventional approach, though?.......


.......As for the consideration of arena size...

Quote:Here's one thought... the Hawks are moving their G-League team to a new small arena (Gateway Center) being built about 2 mi from their arena, which could be used for the women's side, and as for the men's... though State Farm (formerly Philips) Arena is probably both too cavernous and probably preoccupied with their main tenant's dates, Georgia Tech's McCamish Pavilion is only 4 mi from Gateway Center. In fact, Atlanta's WNBA franchise plays their games there.

Ga Tech's McCamish seats 8500 if I read correctly. Gateway Center will seat 3500.

Quote:...Conference USA took a step in the right direction when it accepted the advice of a consultant and adopted a “flex” schedule. The last four league games of the season will be scheduled in February, with the top four teams playing each other round-robin.

“That will alleviate the chances of actually going on the road and winning a game but losing points because the team you’re playing has such a bad RPI,” Jones said.

But the league declined to take a second recommendation from consultants, who urged Conference USA move its postseason tournament to campus sites.....

Can anyone explain this? First I had heard this little detail...

Conference officials don't want to be forced to have to leave Texas and possibly have to stay in a place like Bowling Green, Huntington or Hattiesburg. It's beneath them.

I think all games at better seeds home site is the way to do it. We are simply too far spread out to play a championship in a central location and have it well attended on a regular basis. Reward the teams that earned it in the regular season.

Quote:But the league declined to take a second recommendation from consultants, who urged Conference USA move its postseason tournament to campus sites.

“I don’t know why we didn’t do that,” Jones said. “We need to do it next season.”

Jones made a compelling case as to why the league should.

First, it would immediiately make the conference tournament a more more attractive TV product. C-USA's tournament is played on a neutral site, and that guarantees there will be few fans in the stands and that games will be played in an atmosphere that is virtually sterile.

“That doesn’t present the kind of image I believe the league wants to present to fans and recruits,” Jones said.

The only TV product that is actually a product is the championship game.

So, yes, play the championship game at the site of the higher seed of the two semi-final winners.

That resolves that.

Quote:Moreover, with top seeds hosting games on their home sites, the conference's best teams are more likely to avoid early upsets. Yes, that gives an advantage to the higher seeds. But shouldn't the regular-season mean something? if you've finished in the first division of the league standings, you've earned a chance to play at home.

If that's a valid concern, then just dispense with anything but a 4-team tournament, why don't you?

I don't think that's a valid concern, and in fact, the great thing about tournaments is that every school gets to show up and have a legit shot at post-season glory.

Ask any Marshall fan or a fan of any other school that has actually participated in a tournament where the tournament was well-attended... conference basketball tournaments have a unique quality that promotes conference rivalries and at the same time, fans' regard and allegiance for their school's conference.

If you can host the festivities at a legitimately central site, one that is within a day's drive of the schools participating, that is what can happen.

No, you can't have *every* conference school in CUSA within a day's drive of one location, but you can have every division school in CUSA within one day's drive of a central location to its division.

Quote:Jones proposes adopting the model used by the Patriot League and playing the tournament on home courts of the higher seeds. Take ten teams, have two play-in games, and then go right to the quarterfinals.

“You’d have to extend the postseason to two weeks,” he said. “But it would make for much better television, and it would protect the top seeds.

“If we end up playing someone on the road, in front of their crowd, that’s great. I’d rather play to a full house than a few hundred people on a neutral court.”.....

....Miller said playing the tournament on home courts might be a challenge logistically, with travel arrangements being made at the last minute.

“But what do you have to lose?” he said.

It's not a bad option, but it's just not the best option.



There is a third option that doesn't require extending the post-season to two weeks, and that doesn't predict that you'll be playing in front of a few hundred people on a neutral court, and that doesn't require travel arrangements on such a tight schedule:

- Division tournaments hosted in ATL and DFW concurrently on the weekend prior to the current tournament dates, and just as it is now, for both mens and womens teams

- Followed by a conference championship on the same Saturday that we've been having it, in the arena of the higher-seeded team.

(11-01-2018 07:55 PM)banker Wrote:  Conference officials don't want to be forced to have to leave Texas and possibly have to stay in a place like Bowling Green, Huntington or Hattiesburg. It's beneath them.

Funny thing is, there’s probably as many or more accessible hotels in Bowling Green as in Frisco. And for those wanting a more “uppity” experience, Nashville is just down the road...

Just my two cents, but I agree that the early rounds should be on campus sites, but that finals (and probably semifinals) should be at a neutral site. The downside of a #1 seed hosting in a conference like ours (not true home-and-home round robin) is that a team could wind up as the #1 seed by virtue of having played an easier conference schedule than the #2 and #3 seed. If you just go back through league standings, I'm sure you could come up with some instances of this.

I would be all for the #1 seed hosting if we were a conference where we play every team in the league home and home, but we're not. The five leagues that host on campus sites are America East, Atlantic Sun, Big South, Northeast, and Patriot. All of these play every league member twice.

(11-01-2018 09:22 PM)UNT15 Wrote:  Just my two cents, but I agree that the early rounds should be on campus sites, but that finals (and probably semifinals) should be at a neutral site. The downside of a #1 seed hosting in a conference like ours (not true home-and-home round robin) is that a team could wind up as the #1 seed by virtue of having played an easier conference schedule than the #2 and #3 seed. If you just go back through league standings, I'm sure you could come up with some instances of this.

I would be all for the #1 seed hosting if we were a conference where we play every team in the league home and home, but we're not. The five leagues that host on campus sites are America East, Atlantic Sun, Big South, Northeast, and Patriot. All of these play every league member twice.

The unbalanced schedules are history as of this season.

And the second stage round robin truly awards the #1 seed fairly. (Maybe even MORE so than the h-h round robin leagues!)

The only issue is travel. You could have a case where say UTEP plays a semi final at home and wins then has to hop a plane to play at ODU in the final the next day. Or worse, Marshall could have to go UTEP to play a semi on Friday, wins and has to fly back to play at Western on Saturday.

That's the one I can't get around. Just potentially way too much of an edge for the #1 seed if the rest of the bracket doesn't play out to script.

Logistics make home-based conference tournaments very difficult. First round games may work, but going past that create problems with length of tournament and travel.

One-site Conference tournaments also are great events to attend.

(11-01-2018 10:52 PM)banker Wrote:  The only issue is travel. You could have a case where say UTEP plays a semi final at home and wins then has to hop a plane to play at ODU in the final the next day. Or worse, Marshall could have to go UTEP to play a semi on Friday, wins and has to fly back to play at Western on Saturday.

That's the one I can't get around. Just potentially way too much of an edge for the #1 seed if the rest of the bracket doesn't play out to script.

The 'tournament' would span a couple weeks so teams wouldn't have to play back-to-back days like that.

(11-01-2018 08:34 PM)_sturt_ Wrote:  

Quote:Moreover, with top seeds hosting games on their home sites, the conference's best teams are more likely to avoid early upsets. Yes, that gives an advantage to the higher seeds. But shouldn't the regular-season mean something? if you've finished in the first division of the league standings, you've earned a chance to play at home.

If that's a valid concern, then just dispense with anything but a 4-team tournament, why don't you?

I don't think that's a valid concern, and in fact, the great thing about tournaments is that every school gets to show up and have a legit shot at post-season glory.

I believe in this scenario, you'd have 10 teams making it into the tournament. Isn't that enough? Last year the 11th place team went 6-12 in conference, 12-19 overall. Should that team and those below it complain about not getting their chance at post season glory? Or should they have taken care of that during the regular season?

(11-01-2018 02:31 PM)_sturt_ Wrote:  Said earlier, last thread on the topic...

https://csnbbs.com/thread-861448-post-15...id15611762

(10-27-2018 12:18 PM)_sturt_ Wrote:  With this many schools and this large of a footprint, it's silly to conform to convention and have the conference tournament played in one spot.

It just is.

Approaching the situation objectively, this screams for tossing tradition in that respect aside, and hosting an East tourney and a West tourney, and then having a championship game at the home arena of the higher rated champion a few days following the the division tournaments. Assured opportunity for larger crowds from each school, and optimizes the chances for the team most deserving by granting a home court advantage. Downside is that you have two tournament venues running simultaneously.

Problem with that is uneven power between divisions. Top three projected all reside in the east this year. I like home venues for higher seeds but scheduling and travel might be an issue.

(11-02-2018 07:24 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 02:31 PM)_sturt_ Wrote:  Said earlier, last thread on the topic...

https://csnbbs.com/thread-861448-post-15...id15611762

(10-27-2018 12:18 PM)_sturt_ Wrote:  With this many schools and this large of a footprint, it's silly to conform to convention and have the conference tournament played in one spot.

It just is.

Approaching the situation objectively, this screams for tossing tradition in that respect aside, and hosting an East tourney and a West tourney, and then having a championship game at the home arena of the higher rated champion a few days following the the division tournaments. Assured opportunity for larger crowds from each school, and optimizes the chances for the team most deserving by granting a home court advantage. Downside is that you have two tournament venues running simultaneously.

Problem with that is uneven power between divisions. Top three projected all reside in the east this year. I like home venues for higher seeds but scheduling and travel might be an issue.

Yes, but even in a conventional bracket, often we end up with a school in that #1 or #2 or #3 slot that is a surprise compared to the preseason predictions. And probability says for every year that the best two teams come from one division, the next year they'll come from both. And too, you effectively can have the same "problem" merely by a team expected to do well, faltering for whatever reason, and your presumed best team ends up in the #2 side of the bracket, or your presumed #3 team ends up in the #1 side of the bracket. Happens with some regularity, actually, just as-is.

I'm one of those who has come to believe that the dual division tournaments format is not only the best option based on the benefits, but the best option because it sidesteps the most severe disadvantages of the other two options that people normally have contained themselves to considering.

A conference with so few fans and with so much geography shouldn't even hold a tournament. It doesn't have to be done.

(11-02-2018 09:16 AM)_sturt_ Wrote:  

(11-02-2018 07:24 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(11-01-2018 02:31 PM)_sturt_ Wrote:  Said earlier, last thread on the topic...

https://csnbbs.com/thread-861448-post-15...id15611762

(10-27-2018 12:18 PM)_sturt_ Wrote:  With this many schools and this large of a footprint, it's silly to conform to convention and have the conference tournament played in one spot.

It just is.

Approaching the situation objectively, this screams for tossing tradition in that respect aside, and hosting an East tourney and a West tourney, and then having a championship game at the home arena of the higher rated champion a few days following the the division tournaments. Assured opportunity for larger crowds from each school, and optimizes the chances for the team most deserving by granting a home court advantage. Downside is that you have two tournament venues running simultaneously.

Problem with that is uneven power between divisions. Top three projected all reside in the east this year. I like home venues for higher seeds but scheduling and travel might be an issue.

Yes, but even in a conventional bracket, often we end up with a school in that #1 or #2 or #3 slot that is a surprise compared to the preseason predictions. And probability says for every year that the best two teams come from one division, the next year they'll come from both. And too, you effectively can have the same "problem" merely by a team expected to do well, faltering for whatever reason, and your presumed best team ends up in the #2 side of the bracket, or your presumed #3 team ends up in the #1 side of the bracket. Happens with some regularity, actually, just as-is.

I'm one of those who has come to believe that the dual division tournaments format is not only the best option based on the benefits, but the best option because it sidesteps the most severe disadvantages of the other two options that people normally have contained themselves to considering.

I'm not concerned with preseason prediction and if you falter that's fair as well. I'm saying actual rankings going into the tourney. Last year 1-4 were all from the East. Whoever from the west was getting a much easier path to the title game, no question. I want to go as long as I can in the tourney before facing Marshall or WKU. For the teams in the West that would automatically be the title game.