Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2006 8:19:07 GMT -5
First and foremost, before I rant, I do not think Omaha should be a permanent site for the tourney. The NCAA would only make it signifcantly harder for the Huskers to get there. Do I think the Huskers will make it this year? No.
Having said that I fail to understand why people are not ok with giving the University of Nebraska and the city of Omaha a fair shake in putting on a classy event. Are you worried that it will be a success?? I'm not sure that 15,000 people will attend the finals if Nebraska would not be playing but I can tell you it'll be a higher paid attendance than at I bet any other final four since Wisconsin had it or a year when Hawaii hosted it. I've attended several final fours now and attended the AVCA conventions surrounding it. Most people do not spend $400-$500 for a convention they are not going to attend. The convention is indoors. College coaches who get things paid for are looking to relax and network. Yeah we'd all love to be on the sandy Hawaii beaches every winter but who the hell can afford that year after year?? I liked someone's idea of the rotating FF between a set number of cities.
Let's face it, the NCAA wants to make money on this and why shouldn't they?
I've also said that if Nebraska baseball became a regular fixture in the CWS and actually won some games that the CWS would not remain in Omaha very long. No worries on that, Mike Anderson got rid of several of their promising players this summer due to rule violations. I fear another disappointing season for the Husker bats.
Give the city of Omaha a chance to strut it's stuff and then and only then make a judgement as to it's success. Some of you are just plain scared that it's going to be not just a success but a smashing success!!! Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by ugopher on Oct 17, 2006 8:24:31 GMT -5
I'm also not in favor of putting the Final 4 in Omaha permanently. However, a more thoughtful approach to selecting sites should be made. Don't put it in places that have little volleyball interest. Until the sport grows some more, put it in places where there are volleyball fans. And don't put it in a dome which is totally unsuited for volleyball or in a second tier arena. If you go to Dallas use the Mavericks or Stars facilities, not Reunion Arena. If come to the Twin Cities use the Xcel or Target Centers, not the Dome.
|
|
|
Post by StanfordFan on Oct 17, 2006 9:30:00 GMT -5
I have no problem with Omaha strutting its stuff. I hope the NCAAs are fully attended this year, with or without NE. Just don't want it there every year. Two reasons: (1) NE is enough of a powerhouse that I do think it will have essentially a home court advantage. NE fans will travel anywhere, but it's a helluva lot easier when it's down the street; (2) call me selfish, but coming from LA, I just don't see myself making it up to NE on a regular basis for the finals. And I don't think I'm the only one that would be in that situation. I might, however, venture down to SD, Sacramento, Bay Area, Nevada, etc. First and foremost, before I rant, I do not think Omaha should be a permanent site for the tourney. The NCAA would only make it signifcantly harder for the Huskers to get there. Do I think the Huskers will make it this year? No. Having said that I fail to understand why people are not ok with giving the University of Nebraska and the city of Omaha a fair shake in putting on a classy event. Are you worried that it will be a success?? I'm not sure that 15,000 people will attend the finals if Nebraska would not be playing but I can tell you it'll be a higher paid attendance than at I bet any other final four since Wisconsin had it or a year when Hawaii hosted it. I've attended several final fours now and attended the AVCA conventions surrounding it. Most people do not spend $400-$500 for a convention they are not going to attend. The convention is indoors. College coaches who get things paid for are looking to relax and network. Yeah we'd all love to be on the sandy Hawaii beaches every winter but who the hell can afford that year after year?? I liked someone's idea of the rotating FF between a set number of cities. Let's face it, the NCAA wants to make money on this and why shouldn't they? I've also said that if Nebraska baseball became a regular fixture in the CWS and actually won some games that the CWS would not remain in Omaha very long. No worries on that, Mike Anderson got rid of several of their promising players this summer due to rule violations. I fear another disappointing season for the Husker bats. Give the city of Omaha a chance to strut it's stuff and then and only then make a judgement as to it's success. Some of you are just plain scared that it's going to be not just a success but a smashing success!!! Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Oct 17, 2006 12:41:18 GMT -5
I'm also not in favor of putting the Final 4 in Omaha permanently. However, a more thoughtful approach to selecting sites should be made. Don't put it in places that have little volleyball interest. Until the sport grows some more, put it in places where there are volleyball fans. And don't put it in a dome which is totally unsuited for volleyball or in a second tier arena. If you go to Dallas use the Mavericks or Stars facilities, not Reunion Arena. If come to the Twin Cities use the Xcel or Target Centers, not the Dome. I have no problem if it's at a decent facility. The FF is going to be held in the middle of the NBA/NHL season, and there's a lot more money to be made from a single pro sports event than from a volleyball FF. Rental cost is probably a factor too, and some of the new arenas are pricey. I'm not sure what was the deal with the Alamodome, but I believe it mostly sits empty during December. The real question is whether or not the NCAA can afford a first-class facility that is also in high demand for other events. My guess is that San Antonio was willing to put up a cut-rate deal that isn't likely at most newer NBA arenas. Frankly Arco Arena in Sacramento was built on the cheap and looks that way. I guess the Kings were willing to tweak their schedule around the FF, but I wouldn't expect every NBA team to be so accomodating about their own arena.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2006 12:48:51 GMT -5
Maybe they could rotate the tournament site around Nebraska? Omaha, Lincoln, North Platte, Gandy...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2006 12:52:23 GMT -5
Maybe they could rotate the tournament site around Nebraska? Omaha, Lincoln, North Platte, Gandy... Don't forget Funk. Home of the infamous Funk University. Ya know?? Funk U?? :-)
|
|
|
Post by bucky415 on Oct 17, 2006 12:59:28 GMT -5
I have heard that the Qwest Center is a very nice facility.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2006 13:02:46 GMT -5
It is. Nothing that much different than a 100 other such facilities, but better than most past sites.
It's a nice complex, too, for conventioneers, with the convention center in the same building and the hotel across the street -- if you had the foresight to make a reservation. It's soldout now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2006 13:03:22 GMT -5
Parking's pretty good, too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2006 13:03:56 GMT -5
There are several quality hotels within walking or sledding distance from the Qwest.
|
|
|
Post by ugopher on Oct 17, 2006 13:10:10 GMT -5
And don't put it in a dome which is totally unsuited for volleyball or in a second tier arena. If you go to Dallas use the Mavericks or Stars facilities, not Reunion Arena. If come to the Twin Cities use the Xcel or Target Centers, not the Dome. I have no problem if it's at a decent facility. The FF is going to be held in the middle of the NBA/NHL season, and there's a lot more money to be made from a single pro sports event than from a volleyball FF. Rental cost is probably a factor too, and some of the new arenas are pricey. I'm not sure what was the deal with the Alamodome, but I believe it mostly sits empty during December. The real question is whether or not the NCAA can afford a first-class facility that is also in high demand for other events. My guess is that San Antonio was willing to put up a cut-rate deal that isn't likely at most newer NBA arenas. Frankly Arco Arena in Sacramento was built on the cheap and looks that way. I guess the Kings were willing to tweak their schedule around the FF, but I wouldn't expect every NBA team to be so accomodating about their own arena. I would be fine with a decent facility. But at Long Beach seats were broken and the facility, to me, seemed run down. Same with Dallas, it just seemed like a run down facility. At San Antonio I seem to remember a higher up saying it was great that the tourney was being played in a dome as it meant that volleyball was seen as a factor. BS. A dome should never be used as a volleyball or basketball arena. Seats are too far from the court and when they curtain off have the facility to create the "cozy" feeling all the sound is lost.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2006 13:12:12 GMT -5
I could live with the Long Beach facility's age. But who wants to be 100 yards away from the court?
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Oct 17, 2006 13:21:41 GMT -5
I'd say that Arco Arena is not really up to the standards of most NBA arenas. It was built at the cost of $40 million at a time when other NBA arenas were being built for $100+ million. The seating is comparable to what one might find at a college gym. It primarily uses lightweight hard-shell stadium-style seats without cushioning. The concessions are sub-par.
It's not a first-class facility by any stretch. However - I think it's still fine for a volleyball FF. Certainly better than Long Beach Arena. That place felt like and old decrepit movie theater with a new paint job on the walls.
|
|
|
Post by SaltNPepper on Oct 17, 2006 13:30:04 GMT -5
Maybe they could rotate the tournament site around Nebraska? Omaha, Lincoln, North Platte, Gandy... Finally, someone's got the right idea. Actually, I don't know if it's ever been discussed in this context, but Nebraska has been a perennial Top 25 teams since the early 80's and have made it to nine Final 4's in the past. I haven't went back to count, but they've made it to the Elite 8 several other time, like maybe another 4 or so - just guessing now, but my point is this. With all that success in the past how many other Final Four's have been held prior to this year in Nebraska? ZERO! ZIP! NADA! Everyone on this board seems to be worried about an unfair advantage that the Huskers would have in Omaha. That's fine, but that's no different than an unfair advantage when it's been held in the L.A. or Bay Area of California - or in Hawaii in the past or in the future in Florida. IF the Huskers would have any advantage if they make it to Omaha, all I can say is, "It's about time!" I look at 2006 and 2008 as nothing more than the Huskers trying to get caught up with just about everyone else. If they can successfully host this event with a great turnout and a top notch event for volleyball, I see no reason why they shouldn't be considered (along with the other successful programs that have excellent attendance) sometime again in the next 3 or 4 years following 2008.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2006 13:31:31 GMT -5
Point for SnP!
|
|