One thing that I don't understand about Men's March Madness

#1

volbound1700

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
8,681
Likes
12,096
#1
Why don't the higher seeds get to play at home like the Women do for first two rounds? I would think it is a stronger reward for a team's performance during the regular season.
 
#4
#4
Exactly...take for example UT.
NCAA and the schools get more cash and exposure from sitting 60k in Indy versus like 15k in TBA.

The first two rounds are in arenas…at least recently. The dome comes at the FF. The capacity of Gainbridge Fieldhouse is 20k.

If UK, Kansas, UT, etc. were hosts then it wouldn’t be an issue. But teams like Duke and Auburn would obviously not be able to sell as many tickets.
 
#5
#5
Better TV viewership (also $$$$). Playing at neutral sites creates more exciting games and more upsets, which is what makes March Madness compelling for the average non-partisan viewer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNgradmom
#10
#10
No one would show up to women’s games in first rounds, that’s why
If you like pure basketball, defense, and playing below the rim, the women’s game has it all.
I like defensive struggles in all sports.
I’d take a 6 to 3 football game, a 1-0 baseball game and a 45-50 basketball game any day.
120-109 NBA games suck because they are to lazy to defend. Just make a highlight reel with 3 pointers and dunks with the defender running the other direction.
 
#14
#14
Why don't the higher seeds get to play at home like the Women do for first two rounds? I would think it is a stronger reward for a team's performance during the regular season.

They are having talks about making women's just like Men's with neutral sites throughout. There is the problem that some women's programs don't travel well so it may be a few years off. May never happen if the $$$ denominator doesn't work out.
 
#15
#15
Ugh... you don't think Kentucky fans would show up for games in Lexington or UNC fans in Chapel Hill?
The question was why do women get home games in the NCAA tournament but not the men. My answer was if the women were not at home then very few fans would travel to games away. Obviously if the men had rounds at home the gyms would be sold out!
READ your question in order to understand my original answer!
 
  • Like
Reactions: volbound1700
#17
#17
The question was why do women get home games in the NCAA tournament but not the men. My answer was if the women were not at home then very few fans would travel to games away. Obviously if the men had rounds at home the gyms would be sold out!
READ your question in order to understand my original answer!

Got it, it wasn't explained very well.

Why is the NBA playoffs played at home arenas as well? NCAA Men's Basketball is the only major playoff system that is 100% neutral. Even Baseball has its early rounds at home fields.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNgradmom
#19
#19
Got it, it wasn't explained very well.

Why is the NBA playoffs played at home arenas as well? NCAA Men's Basketball is the only major playoff system that is 100% neutral. Even Baseball has its early rounds at home fields.

Because they play a series, not one game.

Also not true, the FBS playoffs are 100% neutral as of now. If they expand to 8-12 teams I can see the opening round being hosted by the higher seed.
 
#20
#20
Ugh... you don't think Kentucky fans would show up for games in Lexington or UNC fans in Chapel Hill?

I think you are misunderstanding the argument. As a matter of fact, I'm sure you are. There have been several posts attempting to explain but there still appears to be some confusion on your part.

The issue is not on the mens side.
 
#21
#21
The men don't need gimmicks. That's why.
I look at it as rewarding a good season, not a gimmick. Yes you’d have lower attendance but a lot of those early rounds aren’t full arenas anyway and TV viewership is where the money lies. Division II does it. They also have certain regions already slated to play each other based on geography once you get to the Sweet 16. I like their setup better than Division I.
 
#22
#22
I look at it as rewarding a good season, not a gimmick. Yes you’d have lower attendance but a lot of those early rounds aren’t full arenas anyway and TV viewership is where the money lies. Division II does it. They also have certain regions already slated to play each other based on geography once you get to the Sweet 16. I like their setup better than Division I.

It's an attendance gimmick. The way it's done now generates more excitement. It's funny how when a team takes an L the excuses and alternative ideas start coming out how to prevent this in the future. Just my opinion. Those other leagues can't draw good enough crowds so they must do it that way. Even the television ratings are low for those games. Nobody wants to see South Carolina women jump out to a 42-2 lead over Howard. Much of the product is garbage.
 
#23
#23
It's an attendance gimmick. The way it's done now generates more excitement. It's funny how when a team takes an L the excuses and alternative ideas start coming out how to prevent this in the future.
For me it has nothing to do with UT. I think it would be cool for the top 4 seeds to host. I love the idea of getting games on campuses.
 
#24
#24
For me it has nothing to do with UT. I think it would be cool for the top 4 seeds to host. I love the idea of getting games on campuses.

Then you lessen the chances of upsets by giving a team a home game. This tournament needs to be as neutral as possible. Neutral fans able to attend is one of the advantages of the underdog. Your idea is 4 teams. The next person wants the top 8. That seeding process is subjective anyway.
 
Last edited:

VN Store



Back
Top