|
Post by IdahoBoy on Dec 10, 2005 15:18:32 GMT -5
Not sure where we find the stats, but I'm guessing this is right up there with pre-expansion numbers.
It's ridiculous, not only does the NCAA not give volleyball the recognition it deserves or even TRY to make a profit with the tournament, they seemingly sabotage the best teams and all the fan's chances.
I'm very close to adding the NCAA EVERYTHING to my list of banned events. Already on the list are: the NBA, the NFL, and poker.
|
|
|
Post by beachman on Dec 10, 2005 15:51:56 GMT -5
The NCAA folks need to take a long, hard, deep look into how they have screwed up this tournament! PRe-selected regionals, I know, seemed like a good idea but they just don't work. It is obvious that they chose the regional sites based on their "predictions" of who would be there and who wouldn't but something happened "on the way to the party". Rallye scoring has really added a lot of parity to the sport, and when you combine that with the plain fact that there are many more very good programs out there today, it makes it pretty tough for any one program to really dominate like we have seen in the past. They need to go back to the old way they did it. You earned the right to host based on your play, ranking, rpi, etc. I know that this was far from a perfect system, but IT WAS A HELLUVA LOT BETTER THAN THE PIECE OF CRAPOLA WE NOW HAVE! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Dec 10, 2005 15:52:34 GMT -5
Let's just say if there were ever any discussions about Omaha as a permanent host, those discussions just got alot more serious. The Nebraska friday attendance may end up being double of what the other 3 where on both nights. Yikes!
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Dec 10, 2005 15:57:12 GMT -5
Let's just say if there were ever any discussions about Omaha as a permanent host, those discussions just got alot more serious. The Nebraska friday attendance may end up being double of what the other 3 where on both nights. Yikes! Makes you wonder whether the NCAA set this up from the beginning. Actually, I'm not saying the "NCAA" planned this; perhaps some influential member in the NCAA planned this. Design the brackets and host sites (notice how Hawaii was conspicuously left off?) for all the rounds such that: 1. Omaha gets the largest attendance; and 2. Other sites get piss-poor attendance. Then, they can take the figures and say, "See, I told you we should make Omaha the permanent site!" Yes...all the sites were just patsies in this scam.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Dec 10, 2005 15:59:49 GMT -5
That is a very Oliver Stonian theory. I think they just screwed up, and that Nebraksan's just really support these type of events.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Dec 10, 2005 16:11:16 GMT -5
Yeah, you're probably right. The NCAA is not known for thinking -- in-the-box or out-of-the-box.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Dec 10, 2005 16:18:10 GMT -5
Is anyone even convinced the NCAA committee could even outthink a box?
|
|
|
Post by Babar on Dec 10, 2005 16:58:37 GMT -5
I'd like to take a different point of view on some of this. First, I believe a majority of the head coaches supported predetermined regional sites for several reasons. It meant that a team didn't have to try and lobby, manipulate, or schedule in a way that would give them the best chance to host a regional. It also meant that a coach could focus more on his team and less on the politics of where the regionals would be held.
Secondly, it was assumed that if a host had nine months to prepare then they would do an exceptional job selling tickets, promoting and managing the event. Obviously this has not happened with the exception of Nebraska and a good but not great crowd at Penn State.
I would not blame the NCAA for this, but rather the institutions involved. Women's basketball struggled a little when it first went to predetermined sites but within a few years they grew significantly.
Stanford and Texas A&M sent a message that there only interest in this event was if their own teams were playing in it. They wanted it for tactical reasons, not because they were on a mission to be great hosts or to promote women's sports or women's volleyball.
Historically, the most consistent volleyball venues for tournament competition have been in the upper Midwest (with the exception of Hawaii). Championships in Madison, Indianapolis, Minneapolis and next year in Omaha have all done well. This is not because of great volleyball communities, or even great volleyball programs, it is because many of the Midwestern Big 10 and Big 12 schools not only have the resources to put on and promote an event, they have a culture that values hosting and making sure that other people from other areas of the country enjoy the event.
It would be hard to imagine such programs as UCLA, USC, USCB, SDSU or many other programs on the East Coast ever putting out much effort to make a volleyball event a great success if their own program wasn't involved or didn't stand to gain something from it. The west coast in particular plays great volleyball but historically they are lousy hosts.
Where the NCAA has made mistakes in the past is taking a missionary attitude with locations like, Richmond, Cleveland, Maryland, with the idea that we could somehow spread our enthusiasm for the sport by bringing our premier event to evangelize the region. It would be like taking the super bowl to Bangladesh.
Our national championship needs to be staged in a way that it is consistently sold out, and run by people who care whether or not the teams, the fans, and the volleyball community experience a great event. That would happen in Omaha. That would happen in Hawaii. It might happen in some other Midwest cities for a shorter term (The twin cities for example). But if you want to keep our sport a marginal sport in terms of exposure and recruiting the best athletes to play it, then keep rotating the championship to cities who value it for the same reasons they might want a furniture convention.
Moving to predetermined sites is a necessary if painful step in becoming a more organized sport. Unfortunately some institutions in their lack of passion for the event have made it more painful then necessary. Predetermined regional sites should not be awarded unless the host institution guarantees a minimum of 5000 fans in attendance for each night. (not just tickets sold). Then let's see who wants to host.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Dec 10, 2005 17:18:42 GMT -5
That won't happen with pre-selected regional sites. At least not until more than 1-2 teams can average that many fans on a regular basis for their home matches.
Over the past 3, with 12 different pre-selected regional sites, how many of those sites have had back to back nights of even close to 5,000 fans?
Perhaps Hawaii and now likely Omaha.
Minnesota didn't do it last year, even though they had a pretty good overall turnout and some great 5 game matches.
I don't think Washington did it last year, though they might have been close.
Did Green Bay do it last year?
I know LBSU did do it in 2003 and State College, Palo Alto, and College Station haven't come close to doing it this year.
|
|
|
Post by GatorVball on Dec 10, 2005 17:22:37 GMT -5
San Antonio is really hoping Nebraska advances. If they don't, it may be the most poorly attended final 4 ever.
|
|
|
Post by ugopher on Dec 10, 2005 17:29:29 GMT -5
If I remember correctly, the attendance numbers last year in Mpls were a joke. Seats were difficult to find both nights but the NCAA didn't count the band or people on the pass lists. As a result attendance figures were under reported.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Dec 10, 2005 17:32:30 GMT -5
If I remember correctly, the attendance numbers last year in Mpls were a joke. Seats were difficult to find both nights but the NCAA didn't count the band or people on the pass lists. As a result attendance figures were under reported. Which makes it strange that they do appear to be counting those at the much lower attended sites this year.
|
|
|
Post by beachman on Dec 10, 2005 17:32:48 GMT -5
Let's just say if there were ever any discussions about Omaha as a permanent host, those discussions just got alot more serious. The Nebraska friday attendance may end up being double of what the other 3 where on both nights. Yikes! Makes you wonder whether the NCAA set this up from the beginning. Actually, I'm not saying the "NCAA" planned this; perhaps some influential member in the NCAA planned this. Design the brackets and host sites (notice how Hawaii was conspicuously left off?) for all the rounds such that: 1. Omaha gets the largest attendance; and 2. Other sites get piss-poor attendance. Then, they can take the figures and say, "See, I told you we should make Omaha the permanent site!" Yes...all the sites were just patsies in this scam. NOT GONNA HAPPEN WOLFIE!
|
|
|
Post by beachman on Dec 10, 2005 17:34:47 GMT -5
Until Collegiate Women's VB gets there own version of the WNBA, making comparisons between volleyball and women's basketball is FUTILE!
|
|
|
Post by beachman on Dec 10, 2005 18:12:35 GMT -5
San Antonio is really hoping Nebraska advances. If they don't, it may be the most poorly attended final 4 ever. Never, ever, underestimate the importance of the teams attending.....last year between U$C and Stanford, we knew that any chance of the sell out that we had planned on was gonna be tough!
|
|