Attendance: UConn drew about 65% of capacity in Ft Worth region | The Boneyard

Attendance: UConn drew about 65% of capacity in Ft Worth region

Husky fanatic

Husky fanatic

Joined
Apr 6, 2016
Messages
1,889
Reaction Score
7,639
UConn drew about 65% of capacity in Ft Worth region. UCLA drew 52% of capacity in Sacramento region which was essentially a home game. After their game was over about 2K plus headed for the exits. If Women’s basketball is so popular why isn’t attendance better? Is it the two region format? Having been to the 4 regional site tournaments at least UConn’s region was packed!
 
Husky fanatic said:
UConn drew about 65% of capacity in Ft Worth region. UCLA drew 52% of capacity in Sacramento region which was essentially a home game. After their game was over about 2K plus headed for the exits. If Women’s basketball is so popular why isn’t attendance better? Is it the two region format? Having been to the 4 regional site tournaments at least UConn’s region was packed!
Expand ...
Someone, somewhere, said that both "regionals" were SOLD OUT. Sure didn't look like it, but if the NCAA got their money, all is good.
 
Husky fanatic said:
UConn drew about 65% of capacity in Ft Worth region. UCLA drew 52% of capacity in Sacramento region which was essentially a home game. After their game was over about 2K plus headed for the exits. If Women’s basketball is so popular why isn’t attendance better? Is it the two region format? Having been to the 4 regional site tournaments at least UConn’s region was packed!
Expand ...
Too far of a travel. In the past, when the regionals were, well, more regional (Bridgeport, for example) the attendance was better because of proximity to UConn's base. Alot of people either can't afford or don't have the time to take a 3 hr plus flight to Texas, so mostly local UConn fans are attending.
 
Husky fanatic said:
UConn drew about 65% of capacity in Ft Worth region. UCLA drew 52% of capacity in Sacramento region which was essentially a home game. After their game was over about 2K plus headed for the exits. If Women’s basketball is so popular why isn’t attendance better? Is it the two region format? Having been to the 4 regional site tournaments at least UConn’s region was packed!
Expand ...
Sacramento is almost 400 miles from LA, like driving from Storrs to Washington DC
 
.-.
Sorry, but there are 4 teams on each day at these super regional sites, so lets not make this about one team at each site.

The 'local' team on Fri in Ft Worth was Vandy 700, ND 900, UNC 1100 and Uconn 1500 = 4200 aggregate miles.

The local team in Sacramento was UCLA at 200, Minn 1000, LSU 1800, Duke 2300 = 5300 aggregate miles

So, unsurprisingly Ft. Worth being a little further east was a much closer trip for the 4 schools headed there if you can call 1050 miles 'close.' But considering the distances, that the two venues were within a 100 attendees is fine - the % of capacity is meaningless to me unless one got to close to 100%

Today's distances:
TX 100, KY 800, Louisville 800, Mich 1000 = 2700 miles
OK 1300, TCU 1400, SC 2300, VA 2300 = 7300 miles
So overall Sacramento aggregate is 12600 miles - 1575/team; and the nearer venue Fort Worth is 6900, or 863/team.

Any west coast venue the NCAA committee has ever chosen for a regional has always involved the longest travel distances for teams by a wide margin. And to chose to do so for a 'super regional' just exacerbates the issue to the point of the ridiculous. 6 of the 7 longest distances traveled are to Sacramento, and 7 of 10. Of the S16 teams there are 12 east of the Mississippi, and 3 between TX and OK in the central time zone - leaving a lone western/mountain time zone school. And this is pretty standard fare. And the 'upsets' would have shift one school for the east of the Mississippi to the central TZ in Iowa vs. VA.

There was the famous year where 2 of 4 FF teams were Pac10, and there have been two 1 seeds from the West Coast once or twice, but even in those years the majority of teams in the S16 were still East of the Miss River. And lucky for us, we now have super conferences that robbed the Pac10 out of existence and those WC schools are now spread between conferences so they wouldn't be precluded from a regional based on conference alliance as often.

For Super Regionals the only sensible locations are one East coast and one Midwest/Central TZ. And if you chose northern for 1 and southern for the other, even better - you may have a few schools with 1000 mile trips, but the majority will be significantly shorter - with luck and planning an average around 500. If we ever get back to 4 regional sites maybe you occasionally place one in the western/mountain TZ.
 
I asked Claude AI to build a map showing where the schools in the women’s Sweet Sixteen are located. Please note, Duke is on top of UNC so it looks like there are only 15 locations

IMG_4965.jpeg
IMG_4967.jpeg
 
Remember cities have to step up and bid to be either 2 or 4 region sites, the ncaa does not proactively seek out the cities.

Also the ncaa is 99% concerned with ticket sales, not the actual attendance at the game. This doesn't look great on TV, but if someone buys a ticket and chooses not to attend, the NCAA is still happy.
 
.-.
ucmiami2 said:
Sorry, but there are 4 teams on each day at these super regional sites, so lets not make this about one team at each site.

The 'local' team on Fri in Ft Worth was Vandy 700, ND 900, UNC 1100 and Uconn 1500 = 4200 aggregate miles.

The local team in Sacramento was UCLA at 200, Minn 1000, LSU 1800, Duke 2300 = 5300 aggregate miles

So, unsurprisingly Ft. Worth being a little further east was a much closer trip for the 4 schools headed there if you can call 1050 miles 'close.' But considering the distances, that the two venues were within a 100 attendees is fine - the % of capacity is meaningless to me unless one got to close to 100%

Today's distances:
TX 100, KY 800, Louisville 800, Mich 1000 = 2700 miles
OK 1300, TCU 1400, SC 2300, VA 2300 = 7300 miles
So overall Sacramento aggregate is 12600 miles - 1575/team; and the nearer venue Fort Worth is 6900, or 863/team.

Any west coast venue the NCAA committee has ever chosen for a regional has always involved the longest travel distances for teams by a wide margin. And to chose to do so for a 'super regional' just exacerbates the issue to the point of the ridiculous. 6 of the 7 longest distances traveled are to Sacramento, and 7 of 10. Of the S16 teams there are 12 east of the Mississippi, and 3 between TX and OK in the central time zone - leaving a lone western/mountain time zone school. And this is pretty standard fare. And the 'upsets' would have shift one school for the east of the Mississippi to the central TZ in Iowa vs. VA.

There was the famous year where 2 of 4 FF teams were Pac10, and there have been two 1 seeds from the West Coast once or twice, but even in those years the majority of teams in the S16 were still East of the Miss River. And lucky for us, we now have super conferences that robbed the Pac10 out of existence and those WC schools are now spread between conferences so they wouldn't be precluded from a regional based on conference alliance as often.

For Super Regionals the only sensible locations are one East coast and one Midwest/Central TZ. And if you chose northern for 1 and southern for the other, even better - you may have a few schools with 1000 mile trips, but the majority will be significantly shorter - with luck and planning an average around 500. If we ever get back to 4 regional sites maybe you occasionally place one in the western/mountain TZ.
Expand ...
1774723079593.jpeg
 
.-.
packwrap said:
Remember cities have to step up and bid to be either 2 or 4 region sites, the ncaa does not proactively seek out the cities.

Also the ncaa is 99% concerned with ticket sales, not the actual attendance at the game. This doesn't look great on TV, but if someone buys a ticket and chooses not to attend, the NCAA is still happy.
Expand ...
Yes, the NCAA puts the regional/final 4 sites out to bid, but they are the ones selecting, and they are responsible for the integrity of the competition and answer to the Universities in their membership. This may not be the men's size money maker, but it is still a money maker and any difference in the bids is likely to be off-set by travel expenses incurred. I am sure they had bids from all over the country and they screwed up royally, and get to listen to Geno ridicule them (again!)
 
Charliebball said:
35% - 40% full to me in that picture........how is that even possible with quality teams playing
Expand ...

OGS.

I've been to several northeastern regionals, as well as second rounds in Gampel. A significant portion of UConn fans won't attend earlier games by other teams and will pile out after the UConn game if the other teams are playing later.

1774729312582.png


This indeed seems strange to those who grew up attending college tournaments in MSG (e.g., NIT, Holiday Festival, Milk Fund) where none of "our" teams were playing—simply for the unadulterated enjoyment of watching quality teams play our favorite team sport. Or intently watching the men's NCAAT in grungy bars or at home on flickering TVs with newspaper brackets Scotch taped on our refrigerators.
 
.-.
Well, as they did for yesterday, they only list attendance for one game, so Ft Worth maxed out at 11,197 for a home game for Texas, and the fans must have streamed in during the second half of the early game, though I suspect there were a number exiting as well. Good number for a regional, and they get at least that for a regular 4 team regional located in TX or SC or anywhere in the NE, or TN, probably Indiana, KY, or Chicago, or Louisiana, and they did it in Iowa even when the local team failed to make it.
 
Gael said:
OGS.

I've been to several northeastern regionals, as well as second rounds in Gampel. A significant portion of UConn fans won't attend earlier games by other teams and will pile out after the UConn game if the other teams are playing later.

View attachment 118843

This indeed seems strange to those who grew up attending college tournaments in MSG (e.g., NIT, Holiday Festival, Milk Fund) where none of "our" teams were playing—simply for the unadulterated enjoyment of watching quality teams play our favorite team sport. Or intently watching the men's NCAAT in grungy bars or at home on flickering TVs with newspaper brackets Scotch taped on our refrigerators.
Expand ...
I was disappointed in the attendance at Gampel for the second game and really wonder why the UConn game wasn't scheduled second. It seems more likely that Husky fans would filter in for at least the latter half of the second game than would stick around when UConn plays first. I think I recall wondering about this for another opening round.

Anyone know if the NCAA has a policy on which games is played first?
 
JMO. There are UCONN fans, spectator UCONN fans ( the ones that leave just after the third quarter begins ) because, why stay for 15 minutes on an early Monday evening when your team is playing amazing basketball and the game is obviously won, and women’s basketball fans that stay and cheer every young student athlete for the pure pleasure of watching their favorite game. It doesn’t matter what time the game is, it is always the same. I’ll get off my soapbox now.
 
cabbie191 said:
I was disappointed in the attendance at Gampel for the second game
Expand ...

In my experience, UConn fans don't necessarily fill Gampel even for UConn's first and second round games. Here is the 2014 second round game in Gampel, featuring the 40-0 national champion UConn team that went wire-to-wire as #1 in the AP poll. Gampel was only about 75% full as KML pulled down her 10th rebound for a triple double. (My photos.)

1774746244114.png
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,149
Messages
4,554,900
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom