Homegames for Kentucky/Gonzaga
- Thread starter makeachange
- Start date
This topic is stupid, has been mentioned a bazillion times, and needs to be dropped. Considering every round of the NCAA tournament is played in a pretty major city, there are a gazillion D1 basketball schools, and the NCAA wants good attendance, this is how it is going to be, and how it has pretty much always been. Gonzaga was pretty much the same distance Iowa is from the Target Center, Bradley Center, United Center, St. Louis and Kansas City. Would you have considered those "home" games for Iowa?
If Iowa had an incredibly great regular season beyond all expectations in 2016 and wound up in Des Moines, I'm sure you would feel it was unfair for Iowa to get to play there.
Just forgetting about Duke playing in Charlotte? It happens. It's the way things are now. There's always going to be SOME team playing close to home. Should it be an 11 seed like Dayton or someone that really earned it over the course of the year?
No. Their draw was a crock of shite and Im glad they lost. An 11 seed playing their first game at home then going to Columbus OH?
I have no problem with 1 and 1 and 2 seeds being assigned to the region in which they are played , What I have a problem with is sending any seed out of their region for basically a home game,, if they wanted to give Gonzaga that type of advantage make them a 2 seed in the West region, Seattle should be a West region site NOT A SOUTH region site,
if IA was assigned to the West region and Gonzaga was assigned to the West region, that would have been different.
it really simple when a team is assigned a region Let them play games in that region. they after all assigned to specific regions for a REASON.
Kentucky is playing at a different level it would not matter where they play. they are college BB version of the NY Yankees, that have fans all over the country, and like the Yankees you either love them or you hate them there really is no in between.
years ago the regions were divided like this
East region
Mideast region
Midwest region
West region
maybe they need to go back type of geographical assignments and have the games sites assigned as such.
if IA was assigned to the West region and Gonzaga was assigned to the West region, that would have been different.
it really simple when a team is assigned a region Let them play games in that region. they after all assigned to specific regions for a REASON.
Kentucky is playing at a different level it would not matter where they play. they are college BB version of the NY Yankees, that have fans all over the country, and like the Yankees you either love them or you hate them there really is no in between.
years ago the regions were divided like this
East region
Mideast region
Midwest region
West region
maybe they need to go back type of geographical assignments and have the games sites assigned as such.
The system is fine. They do a good job of dividing up the regions. Now can we do something about pathetic refs.
Piss and moan 2222. Drop it and move on. It's been like this for a long time now, it will continue to be this way.
This is the way it's always been... But I don't like it.
Who are the blue bloods these days? Kentucky & Duke? Ok, so let's be sure to have a site in Lexington or Louisville, and Charlotte or Greensboro every single year. And no, we can't put those sites at the bottom half of the bracket where the 2,3, 6, 7, etc. seeds play - no, it's ALWAYS the part of the bracket where the #1 seeds will play. That's very convenient, isn't it? It's not enough for these teams to play in their home region.. It always has to be in their home state.
If UK and Duke/UNC totally dropped off the map, would they keep using those same sites for the #1 seeds in the East & Midwest?
People say that playing close to home is their "reward" for having a great season. No, the #1 seed is their reward for having a great season. Why punish the #8/9 seeds by having to play the #1 seed on essentially their home court, just because they aren't as talented?
I'd rather see teams get sent to other regions so that it's actually a neutral court, but I can wish in one hand and.. It isn't going to change. It's not fair, but it isn't going to change.
This post was edited on 3/23 11:11 AM by TampaHawkfan
Who are the blue bloods these days? Kentucky & Duke? Ok, so let's be sure to have a site in Lexington or Louisville, and Charlotte or Greensboro every single year. And no, we can't put those sites at the bottom half of the bracket where the 2,3, 6, 7, etc. seeds play - no, it's ALWAYS the part of the bracket where the #1 seeds will play. That's very convenient, isn't it? It's not enough for these teams to play in their home region.. It always has to be in their home state.
If UK and Duke/UNC totally dropped off the map, would they keep using those same sites for the #1 seeds in the East & Midwest?
People say that playing close to home is their "reward" for having a great season. No, the #1 seed is their reward for having a great season. Why punish the #8/9 seeds by having to play the #1 seed on essentially their home court, just because they aren't as talented?
I'd rather see teams get sent to other regions so that it's actually a neutral court, but I can wish in one hand and.. It isn't going to change. It's not fair, but it isn't going to change.
This post was edited on 3/23 11:11 AM by TampaHawkfan
It's too bad this happens. It has bitten ISU on the butt more times than I'd like to recall. But I'll recall, anyway.
Putting aside the self-immolations against Hampton and UAB, the last five times the Cyclones have been eliminated from the NCAA were:
2000 -- Michigan State (eventual champ) at Auburn Hills
2005 -- North Carolina (eventual champ) at Charlotte
2012 -- Kentucky (eventual champ) at Louisville
2013 -- Ohio State at Cincinnati
2014 -- UConn (eventual champ) at New York City.
Three of those five games went down to the wire. It isn't unreasonable to think that had they been played in Omaha, Kansas City, Minneapolis or even Chicago, ISU would have won.
No excuse for UAB, though.
Putting aside the self-immolations against Hampton and UAB, the last five times the Cyclones have been eliminated from the NCAA were:
2000 -- Michigan State (eventual champ) at Auburn Hills
2005 -- North Carolina (eventual champ) at Charlotte
2012 -- Kentucky (eventual champ) at Louisville
2013 -- Ohio State at Cincinnati
2014 -- UConn (eventual champ) at New York City.
Three of those five games went down to the wire. It isn't unreasonable to think that had they been played in Omaha, Kansas City, Minneapolis or even Chicago, ISU would have won.
No excuse for UAB, though.
The fact that the state of NC hosts games 3 out of 4 years is what gets me. Everything else I'm fine with.
I like the fact that if you have a great season, you get to play closer to home. Sure, some teams can end up getting the shaft, such as a higher seed playing lower seed, in lower seed's home state, but it's never been a perfect deal.
Finally, Iowa would have been closer to home, had they defeated Penn State. We don't have much reason to complain, IMO.
Finally, Iowa would have been closer to home, had they defeated Penn State. We don't have much reason to complain, IMO.
They are assigned to regions to try and even out the field more. Like giving best 1 seed kentucky easiest 2 seed kansas and lowest 1 seed Wisc the toughest 2 in Arizona. As to where the first 2 games are played who really cares if the game is played not in that part of the country named after their region. All the committee cares is the sweet 16 and elite games are played in that part of the country. It's just a name. Look at the womens tourney to make sure fans come now give top 4 seeds home games and Iowa is in the Oklahoma City region. Oh my god we didn't play the first 2 games in OKC what a crime.
You do realize they have had east, midwest, south or southeast and west since field went to 64 team.
Thank goodness you aren't on the selection committee
