|
Post by Coyote Fan on Mar 13, 2018 18:17:25 GMT -6
Yeah, if you want to sit behind the basket in the upper deck. Stick to bashing us on the bunny board. I hate to say it but I don’t have a ton of sympathy for our bretheren here. I’ve sat in the upper bowl and it isn’t as bad as people make it out to be. Making noise for your team from the corner or upper bowl still reverberates through the arena. We as fans need to stop acting like if we don’t get front row parking and front row seats yadda yadda yadda that we just won’t go. How is that helping? So many people talk about the wussification of America, and most of it I don’t buy into. But this constant playing the victim stuff when it comes to the SLT is getting old. Either you want to come support your team or you don’t. I’ve seen many of those State fans in close seats. Let’s just say a whole lot of them might not be at the games in 5 years. So keep paying attention to what comes available and hopefully other fans can slowly infiltrate them. There is also no guarantee they are allowed to renew for another 2 years either. The SF Sports Authority may choose to open it up for everyone. If that happens, you better jump on it or quit whining. On the flip side, I have no time when State fans want to denigrate ANY other fan base for only going to their own games. Excuse me, but if I buy an all session pass and only want to attend USD games, that is my prerogative. I’m gonna hang in the hospitality room with friends until about 10 minutes before game time and then go back after the game. I’ve seen those comments (maybe not here but plenty of places, may have been Argus live chats) and I dismiss them as erroneous on all counts. The Premier Center is a very nice arena with good site lines overall and was built logically. With that said there is absolutely no comparison between the upper deck seats and the lower level between the baselines. No comparison. In the upper deck people simply don't get into the game as much as those sitting closer to the action. The depth perception is skewed from the upper deck and it is hard to see whether a shot is online or not. Basketball is not a good sport to watch from far away. Due to the nosebleed seats and the facts that I was sitting around 90% Jacks fans for two years in a row I will likely opt for the cozy confines of the living room next time around. This season was one too many years of Jacks domination for my liking. The tourney has become much more about dispair than joy and why not save the 120 bucks at least until there is a good chance that the Coyotes can win the tourney.
|
|
|
Post by sdyotefan on Mar 13, 2018 18:29:01 GMT -6
RPI by itself is worthless as long as you win the 3 games at the tournament. You can be 0-30, win the 3 and go to the "big dance" (which is highly overrated in my opinion with mid-majors being basically ignored, teams getting all excited about going and never winning a single game, a 16 seed has never beaten a 1 seed, etc). The system is based on MONEY--both tournament and TV and it should be improved but won't be--because of MONEY and HYPE!!!
|
|
|
Post by elcoyote on Mar 13, 2018 19:08:08 GMT -6
Yeah, if you want to sit behind the basket in the upper deck. Stick to bashing us on the bunny board. I hate to say it but I don’t have a ton of sympathy for our bretheren here. I’ve sat in the upper bowl and it isn’t as bad as people make it out to be. Making noise for your team from the corner or upper bowl still reverberates through the arena. We as fans need to stop acting like if we don’t get front row parking and front row seats yadda yadda yadda that we just won’t go. How is that helping? So many people talk about the wussification of America, and most of it I don’t buy into. But this constant playing the victim stuff when it comes to the SLT is getting old. Either you want to come support your team or you don’t. I’ve seen many of those State fans in close seats. Let’s just say a whole lot of them might not be at the games in 5 years. So keep paying attention to what comes available and hopefully other fans can slowly infiltrate them. There is also no guarantee they are allowed to renew for another 2 years either. The SF Sports Authority may choose to open it up for everyone. If that happens, you better jump on it or quit whining. On the flip side, I have no time when State fans want to denigrate ANY other fan base for only going to their own games. Excuse me, but if I buy an all session pass and only want to attend USD games, that is my prerogative. I’m gonna hang in the hospitality room with friends until about 10 minutes before game time and then go back after the game. I’ve seen those comments (maybe not here but plenty of places, may have been Argus live chats) and I dismiss them as erroneous on all counts. My tickets are in the upper deck, but they are in the first row and right at midcourt so a person really gets an interesting perspective and view of the game, although you might want a seat belt if you're afraid of heights. One game I gave my tickets to someone who didn't have any and, in turn, was given two in the USD section in the corner and I thought they were horrible. I would much rather sit up top. In my opinion the one thing about the upper deck is that you do feel somewhat removed from the action and crowd intensity of the lower bowl, kind of like you're watching on TV. There is an very interesting idea that someone floated about seating over on the WIU board, something he referred to as virtual seating or something like that where when a person bought a pass they were guaranteed a seat for every game, but it might not be the same seat. Preference for premium seats in the lower bowl would go to tickets holders from participating schools in that particular game. Obviously in a game involving Ft. Wayne and maybe a Denver there wouldn't be much demand and fans of other teams would be able to fill in. He explains it pretty well. Anyway, Western has been in the conference the longest, has seen a lot of changes and has a lot of interesting ideas on this thread. Check it out if you're so inclined. It's listed under Summit Tourney or something similar. I'm too lazy to look and link.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Mar 13, 2018 19:59:22 GMT -6
RPI by itself is worthless as long as you win the 3 games at the tournament. You can be 0-30, win the 3 and go to the "big dance" (which is highly overrated in my opinion with mid-majors being basically ignored, teams getting all excited about going and never winning a single game, a 16 seed has never beaten a 1 seed, etc). The system is based on MONEY--both tournament and TV and it should be improved but won't be--because of MONEY and HYPE!!! Good points, but that doesn't explain why the women's NCAA tournament hasn't switched to a better and more predictive metric. That Tournament isn't much about money or hype, just exposure, and reputation. There isn't even a payout, like in the men's tournament.
|
|
|
Post by sdyotefan on Mar 13, 2018 21:36:22 GMT -6
kiyoat--I believe in the age of equality (or attempts at equality) I don't think the NCAA wants a men's tournament with one format and the women's with a different set of criteria. In either case P5s would still get favorable treatment because of name/hype value vs mid-majors.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Mar 14, 2018 5:31:40 GMT -6
kiyoat--I believe in the age of equality (or attempts at equality) I don't think the NCAA wants a men's tournament with one format and the women's with a different set of criteria. In either case P5s would still get favorable treatment because of name/hype value vs mid-majors. Not to be a contrarian, but if the men's and women's teams strive for using the same criteria, why do they have different game rules? I wish the men would use quarters instead of halfs, for example. The WNIT uses an average of 6 or more ratings systems. When I tried to simulate that, throwing out the top and bottom scores for each team, guess which score was almost always the outlier I was throwing out?..... The RPI is dumb, and easily manipulated by just having a tough schedule. Obviously you have to win games, too, but if the metric they used was better, the only "strategy " would be : to be a good team.
|
|
|
Post by sdyotefan on Mar 14, 2018 5:45:55 GMT -6
kiyoat--I agree with your points. My main points are about the emphasis for mid majors to just win a league tournament to go dancing since at large bids are very unlikely for mid majors because they're competing with P5s for those bids.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Mar 14, 2018 10:02:24 GMT -6
at ESPN Graham Hays picked South Dakota as the biggest snub from the Women's tourney. If the analysts are starting to recognize that cannot hurt going forward.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Mar 14, 2018 21:59:15 GMT -6
So for the men's tournament we have gone from having 2 play in games (and yes I am calling them play in games) to 4 play in games. IMO a good idea for both the men's and women's tournament is to give the automatic bids to the regular season champs but still have the conference tourney and if the winner is not the regular season champ than they can be one of the teams that plays on the Tuesday or Wednesday play in games. That would give the regular season more meaning but still give the conference tourney's extreme importance. I would think that would be a win-win for general fairness and from a revenue stand point. A few more butts in the seats for regular season games and a few more play in games for more revenue as well for the NCAA tourney. I think the general feeling here is that the regular season is kind of meaningless so this idea helps the cause of giving meaning to a regular season champ who most would agree is the most worthy team from a mid major conference to go to the tourney.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Mar 15, 2018 8:19:56 GMT -6
www.womensnit.com/tournament-central.htmlLooks like the WNIT site has links for live stats and live streams; including WIU/CSU. I'm sure it's the same as live streams from team websites, but who knows? Nice that they include those links.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Mar 15, 2018 15:11:48 GMT -6
Attendance for the first three WNIT games yesterday:
Jacksonville @ UCF : -------493 (UCF averages 3k-4k home attendance) 14% St. Joseph's @ Seton Hall : 281 (Seton Hall averages 1k) 28% Southern @ Alabama : -----294 (Bama averages 2-3k) 12%
I'm hoping we muster more than 13% of our normal attendance (that would be around 260). I think we will. And the deeper we go in the tournament, history says that number gradually gets bigger.
Also: Bama is hosting UCF in round 2. This is despite the fact that UCF has a higher RPI, composite ranking, average attendance, and first round attendance. Those are all supposedly factors in who gets the home game. I think the reality is that the higher bid trumps everything.
|
|
|
Post by elcoyote on Mar 15, 2018 15:40:14 GMT -6
Maybe with the men's team being done there's extra money in the budget to bid. After the Northern Colorado fiasco a few seasons ago, if we would happen to win and Colorado State triumphs, I don't hold much hope for a second round home matchup. Seems to be my recollection that the tourney headquarters is in Ft. Collins.
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Mar 15, 2018 15:41:10 GMT -6
I'm sure the bid is everything unless personal interest gets in the way (see our trip to Northern Colorado a few years back).
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Mar 15, 2018 15:44:59 GMT -6
Maybe with the men's team being done there's extra money in the budget to bid. After the Northern Colorado fiasco a few seasons ago, if we would happen to win and Colorado State triumphs, I don't hold much hope for a second round home matchup. Seems to be my recollection that the tourney headquarters is in Ft. Collins. It is in Fort Collins, and I recall their CEO being a Northern Colorado grad. We'll never get CSU on our court.
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Mar 15, 2018 17:57:38 GMT -6
If the Coyotes do play Colorado State I like the chances of the Coyotes winning in Fort Collins better than I like the chances of CSU winning in Vermillion.
|
|