Next year's regionals ...... Birmingham and Spokane?

[Vowelguy]

Birmingham is a good location. Home to no one but within a 6 hour drive of almost every ACC and SEC team. Should have no problem getting fans.

In contrast to Spokane, which is not even a direct flight from almost anywhere.

 

[Vowelguy]

It is indeed considerate and prescient of the NCAA to institute more limited travel for west coast teams in the tournament during a difficult time when most programs out west will be adapting to a rigorous travel schedule that requires multiple trips across the country. /s

lol, those teams made that choice to go to far flung conferences to get more money. Increased travel was their choice.

And these sites were set before the PAC fell apart.

 

[Lorcan]

lol, those teams made that choice to go to far flung conferences to get more money. Increased travel was their choice.

And these sites were set before the PAC fell apart.

I was mainly being sarcastic in those last few moments, hence the /S at the end of my post -- but thanks!

 

[Centerstream]

Nope it happened in a nearby town. If they go back to a 4 region model there is less demand for hotel space in a city, which in turn means they are less likely to have to reach to find hotel space and accidently place people in a less than desirable location.

But a town near to a campus during the first 2 rounds which is unaffected by the number of regional sites.
Apples and oranges.

 

[Ladeeeeda]

But a town near to a campus during the first 2 rounds which is unaffected by the number of regional sites.
Apples and oranges.

Huh? I'm not clear on why this is apples and oranges. The problem is that no one thought to avoid having a team stay in that town. Now a regional will be in the same area. If I'm a program, I want the organizers to make sure no one has to experience that town or another one like it if something goes wrong with availability of accommodations. This is exactly the type of thing that happens because no one thought about it.
My problem is with the lack of forethought and hasty decision-making. This could be a problem in a lot of places, but in particular in smaller/mid sized cities.

 

[Blueballer]

They'll never go back to 4 sites I'm sure. It's always about the money and it must save them a ton of money if they can funnel 2 regions through one city and arena. And you know ESPN loves it because they don't have to spread their broadcasting resources out either.

 

[triaddukefan]

I don't have a real problem with Birmingham, Spokane has been a fixture for years on both the men's and women's side and they generally do well in regards to crowds. I do have a problem the following year with Fort Worth and Sacramento. Two sites west of the Mississippi River is a bit much. Sacramento and a eastern city like.... Greensboro. Fort Worth and a eastern city like..... Greensboro. That would have been my preference.

 

[Vowelguy]

Huh? I'm not clear on why this is apples and oranges. The problem is that no one thought to avoid having a team stay in that town. Now a regional will be in the same area. If I'm a program, I want the organizers to make sure no one has to experience that town or another one like it if something goes wrong with availability of accommodations. This is exactly the type of thing that happens because no one thought about it.
My problem is with the lack of forethought and hasty decision-making. This could be a problem in a lot of places, but in particular in smaller/mid sized cities.

As part of their bid to host the regionals, I'm sure that the site has to ensure that it has sufficient hotel rooms and that they are set aside well in advance. The men's opening rounds in Spokane went off without a hitch as far as we know with 8 teams. I dont see why a women's regional with 8 teams would be any different.

The complication this year was that Gonzaga was ranked high enough to host and there were not enough rooms nearby, so they had to put some teams further away. The alternative would've been to move the host to the #5 seed (Utah).

 

[southie]

I don't have a real problem with Birmingham, Spokane has been a fixture for years on both the men's and women's side and they generally do well in regards to crowds. I do have a problem the following year with Fort Worth and Sacramento. Two sites west of the Mississippi River is a bit much. Sacramento and a eastern city like.... Greensboro. Fort Worth and a eastern city like..... Greensboro. That would have been my preference.

No, it isn't. East of the Mississippi cities have already had regionals in 2 consecutive years. The Central and Mountain time zones have had zero so far.

The issue is the northwest cities having regionals in 3 consecutive years.

 

[Vowelguy]

No, it isn't. East of the Mississippi cities have already had regionals in 2 consecutive years.

Yes it is.
If half of the population or D1 universities were located west of the MS, then that would be a useful demarcation line. But they’re not. Not even close.

 

[southie]

Yes it is.
If half of the population or D1 universities were located west of the MS, then that would be a useful demarcation line. But they’re not. Not even close.

I didn't realize it was a population contest. Oh, it's not. Otherwise, Portland and Spokane would never have been selected to host.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

They should do an outdoor court at Legion Field.

Papa's in the house!

 

[Magy Cannon]

Stay away from the coasts. Ft. Worth, Detroit, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Charlotte, St. Louis - all places with airline hubs and fans within driving distance.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

As part of their bid to host the regionals, I'm sure that the site has to ensure that it has sufficient hotel rooms and that they are set aside well in advance. The men's opening rounds in Spokane went off without a hitch as far as we know with 8 teams. I dont see why a women's regional with 8 teams would be any different.

The complication this year was that Gonzaga was ranked high enough to host and there were not enough rooms nearby, so they had to put some teams further away. The alternative would've been to move the host to the #5 seed (Utah).

Yes - and actually the hotels were at the outer edge of acceptable on NCAA rules, apparently, hotels need to be within 30 minutes of the arena, as you know teams playing in Storrs are (at times) staying in Hartford. All specified in the "bid" that every potential host (including Gonzaga, I suspect and definitely including Arizona since this is all before they play games) had to put together months before. Unlike other situations, it isn't a financial bid, it is a bid that they can meet all the requirements the NCAA has to host - capacity, hotels, practice facilities, media facilities, etc.

 

[ConnMotors]

My daughter told me that they don’t teach geography in schools anymore. That’s sad because that was my favorite subject. The last time that I checked interstate I70-I80 ran basically through the center of the United States as well as the Mississippi River splitting east from west. Use those guidelines and you get four sections.

If the NCAA is going to leave the tournament set with two locations then they should divide the four sections biyearly. There are countless cities or schools that can host and have a successful tournament. The northeast is loaded with places that would draw fans. You have Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington DC. If you head west towards the river there are plenty more. Columbus, Indianapolis, Chicago just to name a few.

The southeast is stacked with the Tobacco School area, Charlotte, Nashville, Charleston, Orlando, Tampa, New Orleans, Atlanta. I believe that all of these areas would draw.

The Northwest isn’t loaded like the other areas of the country. However, there is still Seattle, Portland, Salt Lake City, Denver, Kansas City just to name a few.

The Southwest is loaded with various locations in California and Texas, Phoenix, Oklahoma City.

All places listed have direct flights basically from everywhere. So there is no need to play in Spokane, Birmingham or Roswell New Mexico

 

[southie]

Stay away from the coasts. Ft. Worth, Detroit, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Charlotte, St. Louis - all places with airline hubs and fans within driving distance.

I mean, I've thought about hub cities. Most of those have NBA teams and the arenas aren't always available. Folks say that hotels in those cities can be expensive; not sure if that's a consideration when compared to non-NBA cities.

 

[Vowelguy]

I didn't realize it was a population contest. Oh, it’s not.

Its not a time zone contest either.

 

[Vowelguy]

My daughter told me that they don’t teach geography in schools anymore. That’s sad because that was my favorite subject. The last time that I checked interstate I70-I80 ran basically through the center of the United States as well as the Mississippi River splitting east from west. Use those guidelines and you get four sections.

If the NCAA is going to leave the tournament set with two locations then they should divide the four sections biyearly. There are countless cities or schools that can host and have a successful tournament. The northeast is loaded with places that would draw fans. You have Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington DC. If you head west towards the river there are plenty more. Columbus, Indianapolis, Chicago just to name a few.

The southeast is stacked with the Tobacco School area, Charlotte, Nashville, Charleston, Orlando, Tampa, New Orleans, Atlanta. I believe that all of these areas would draw.

The Northwest isn’t loaded like the other areas of the country. However, there is still Seattle, Portland, Salt Lake City, Denver, Kansas City just to name a few.

The Southwest is loaded with various locations in California and Texas, Phoenix, Oklahoma City.

All places listed have direct flights basically from everywhere. So there is no need to play in Spokane, Birmingham or Roswell New Mexico

Big northeastern cities can be problematic as they are expensive (hotels), and I’m not sure how interested their arenas are in hosting. Every arena probably has a ticket price minimum that they need to make it worth their while. For big cities it is likely pretty high, higher than what WCBB fans will generally pay.

If youre going to split the country into 4 regions, it should be based on something other than land area.

The Southeast provides the majority of quality programs and likely the majority of fans but consistently gets underrepresented in hosting.

 

[triaddukefan]

Big northeastern cities can be problematic as they are expensive (hotels), and I’m not sure how interested their arenas are in hosting. Every arena probably has a ticket price minimum that they need to make it worth their while. For big cities it is likely pretty high, higher than what WCBB fans will generally pay.

If youre going to split the country into 4 regions, it should be based on something other than land area.

The Southeast provides the majority of quality programs and likely the majority of fans but consistently gets underrepresented in hosting.

Another problem with big NE cities is there arenas are home to both NBA and NHL franchises.

 

[GCKSFN4L]

These regional sites has everything to do with money and securing decent crowds. 4 sites requires twice as much of an investment in securing a venue for a total of 3 games with a wasted day in between games.


This 2 site setup ensures 6 games in 4 consecutive days. Twice as many fans at one spot will likely ensure bigger overall crowds and if an upset happens on day 1 there's more fanbases to rely on to fill in the seats.

I don't think the 2 sites is ideal but I don't hate it. As WBB gains more attention the more bids will come for more accessible locations. If the attendance at these sites proves successful, I can see the 4 sites returning.

I have also seen suggestions that the Women's tournament should share sites with the men and I hope that never happens. I believe the audience of the two are different and the men's fans will likely drive the price up of WBB games and accommodations.

 

[nwhoopfan]

The Northwest isn’t loaded like the other areas of the country. However, there is still Seattle, Portland, Salt Lake City, Denver, Kansas City just to name a few.

Wait, you were just complaining about geography. Some of those are awfully far south and/or east for being in the Northwest.

 

[Ladeeeeda]

Looks like changing formats and sites may be on the table for 2025

NCAA: Women's tourney may see changes in 2025

Lynn Holzman, the head of the NCAA women's basketball tournament, is pushing to review potential changes to the event's format this summer, a year sooner than planned, telling ESPN that there's been enough data reported about the growth of the sport.

www.espn.com

 

[Vowelguy]

Looks like changing formats and sites may be on the table for 2025

NCAA: Women's tourney may see changes in 2025

Lynn Holzman, the head of the NCAA women's basketball tournament, is pushing to review potential changes to the event's format this summer, a year sooner than planned, telling ESPN that there's been enough data reported about the growth of the sport.

www.espn.com

Aka, let's take a thing that's going great and screw it up by making unnecessary changes such as ending home court advantages for the first 2 rounds.

 

[MSSportsGuy]

The NCAA tried the neutral early round matchups years back and the teams largely played to empty arenas and will again if the change is made. The game has grown significantly since then but it would be a mistake to do this.

Two host cities rather than four for the regionals makes sense and appears to have worked well. That being said it would be good to see some major cities bid to host these games and see how things go.

It's encouraging the NCAA wants to capitalize on the increasing popularity of the game but I'd like to see how the crowds and numbers look next year once Clark is in the W.

 

[BRS24]

Aka, let's take a thing that's going great and screw it up by making unnecessary changes such as ending home court advantages for the first 2 rounds.

The NCAA tried the neutral early round matchups years back and the teams largely played to empty arenas and will again if the change is made. The game has grown significantly since then but it would be a mistake to do this.

Two host cities rather than four for the regionals makes sense and appears to have worked well. That being said it would be good to see some major cities bid to host these games and see how things go.

It's encouraging the NCAA wants to capitalize on the increasing popularity of the game but I'd like to see how the crowds and numbers look next year once Clark is in the W.

Both good points. IMHO the women's game should stay at host sites for first two rounds, then go back to 4 regionals that have decent travel options, plenty of hotels, and a modicum of WBB support. As much as some folks cry about advantage of a host school in 1-2 rounds, it brings out the crowds more so that a neutral site. I like that they are looking at the impact of other events (MBB etc) in the same area of host schools, as the Spokane/Idaho thing seemed to be a mess.