|
Post by grokamok on Sept 22, 2009 16:26:55 GMT -5
To those who might fall into the trap of becoming ACC apologists, noting that there isn't a venue for the Duke/UNC invitational portion of the NCAA Tournament this year, please remember...
In 19 of the 25 years since the field expanded to 64 (later, 65) teams, a venue in the state of North Carolina has hosted a portion of the men's NCAA Basketball Tournament. In four of these years, two venues in the state played host. No other state comes close. To add to this, Charlotte, Greensboro, Winston-Salem & Raleigh, though certainly home courts for Carolina teams from a tournament perspective, are not the proper home courts for UNC/Duke, and, thus, these teams are allowed to play there (unlike Georgetown at the Verizon Center, Syracuse at the Carrier Dome, Louisville at Freedom Hall/Louisville Arena or Kentucky at Rupp Arena). Though not included in the above totals, Atlanta, home to ACC-member Georgia Tech, has hosted an additional 15 times, and much closer Richmond and Greenville, SC have each hosted once.
1985 - (Atlanta) 1986 - Greensboro, Charlotte (Atlanta) 1987 - Charlotte (Atlanta) 1988 - Chapel Hill (Atlanta) 1989 - Greensboro (Atlanta) 1990 - (Atlanta, Richmond) 1991 - Charlotte (Atlanta) 1992 - Greensboro (Atlanta) 1993 - Winston-Salem, Charlotte 1994 - Charlotte 1995 - 1996 - (Atlanta) 1997 - Winston-Salem, Charlotte 1998 - Greensboro (Atlanta) 1999 - Charlotte 2000 - Winston-Salem 2001 - Greensboro (Atlanta) 2002 - (Greenville, Atlanta) 2003 - 2004 - Raleigh (Atlanta) 2005 - Charlotte 2006 - Greensboro (Atlanta) 2007 - Winston-Salem (Atlanta) 2008 - Raleigh, Charlotte 2009 - Greensboro (future) 2010 - (future) 2011 - Charlotte (future) 2012 - Greensboro (Atlanta) (future) 2013 - (East Regional TBD)
Prior to the 64-team format, at least one North Carolina venue hosted NCAA tournament games all the way back to 1973. Over the history of the NCAA tournament, the state far outpaces its nearest competitors:
221—North Carolina, 1951-2009 160—Missouri, 1940-2009 154—New York, 1943-2005 150—California, 1939-2008 149—Texas, 1957-2008 138—Utah, 1960-2006 133—Ohio, 1957-2009 126—Kentucky, 1955-2007 119—Indiana, 1940-2009 91—Kansas, 1953-94
When considering Missouri & New York, recall that 83 games were played in Municipal Auditorium (Kansas City, MO) prior to 1965 and 71 games were played at MSG (New York, NY) prior to 1962. In the modern era, North Carolina has dominated as an NCAA location by a far wider margin.
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Sept 22, 2009 19:47:08 GMT -5
To those who might fall into the trap of becoming ACC apologists, noting that there isn't a venue for the Duke/UNC invitational portion of the NCAA Tournament this year, please remember... In 19 of the 25 years since the field expanded to 64 (later, 65) teams, a venue in the state of North Carolina has hosted a portion of the men's NCAA Basketball Tournament. In four of these years, two venues in the state played host. No other state comes close. It's not a conspiracy. The state of North Carolina has four NCAA caliber venues in Raleigh, Charlotte, Greensboro, and Winston-Salem--all reasonably sized cities with ample hotels and pleasant March weather. Not many other states can make the above claims. Plus, all four of those cities have a track record of embracing the NCAA Tournament and providing a quality atmosphere for visiting fans--face it, the state of North Carolina likes its college basketball. When I was in Raleigh in 2008 I went into a Barnes & Noble and they had a table display up front with books about the history of UNC, Duke, and college basketball in general. Was it up because of the Tournament? Probably. Would it have still been up in May? Probably. And yes, the fact that four ACC teams (really, just Duke and UNC if we're being honest) have fans in state helps I'm sure. If UNC and/or Duke are in town, you're guaranteed a sell-out in 15 minutes. Contrast that with the NCAA sites in the state of Florida, which frequently look 2/3 empty because they get the Misc. Etc. pairings (quick--name a team that played in Miami last year*). But the NCAA isn't doing it to do a favor for Coach K or Roy. It's a business decision...they want exciting venues, and full arenas.
|
|
|
Post by grokamok on Sept 22, 2009 19:59:40 GMT -5
It's not a conspiracy. The state of North Carolina has four NCAA caliber venues in Raleigh, Charlotte, Greensboro, and Winston-Salem--all reasonably sized cities with ample hotels and pleasant March weather. All four of those cities have a track record of embracing the NCAA Tournament and providing a quality atmosphere for visiting fans--face it, North Carolina likes its college basketball. And yes, the fact that four ACC teams (really, just Duke and UNC if we're being honest) have fans in state helps I'm sure. If UNC and/or Duke are in town, you're guaranteed a sell-out in 15 minutes. Contrast that with the NCAA sites in the state of Florida, which frequently look 2/3 empty because they get the Misc. Etc. pairings (quick--name a team that played in Miami last year*). But the NCAA isn't doing it to do a favor for Coach K or Roy. It's a business decision...they want exciting venues, and full arenas. Compare the population and number of D-I teams in North Carolina to those of the northeast corridor. Then compare the number of NCAA games played in these areas. Does North Carolina get more than its share? Have UNC and Duke gotten to play more "home" games in the tournament than similarly-seeded teams, as a result? Yes to both, and by a long shot. Sure, it's a business decision, but let's not suggest that we shouldn't note the inherent bias of that decision.
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Sept 22, 2009 21:30:04 GMT -5
Compare the population and number of D-I teams in North Carolina to those of the northeast corridor. Then compare the number of NCAA games played in these areas. Does North Carolina get more than its share? Have UNC and Duke gotten to play more "home" games in the tournament than similarly-seeded teams, as a result? Yes to both, and by a long shot. Sure, it's a business decision, but let's not suggest that we shouldn't note the inherent bias of that decision. The state of North Carolina gets "more than its share" of NCAA 1st/2nd round sites, no argument from me on this point. In the same manner, the states of California and Florida get more than their share of Super Bowls. The NCAA and NFL have criteria when considering host cities, and it so happens a disproportionate number of cities/venues in those states meet the criteria. Now to be fair, the NFL criteria for the Super Bowl must factor in weather (sorry, East Rutherford!) where the NCAA can hold the tournament in colder cities. And the "home court advantage" plays out frequently in college basketball, what with the recent development of the pod system, whereas a NFL team has yet to play in a Super Bowl in their home stadium. I may be wrong here, but my informed guess is that in a given year, the NCAA tries to spread the 1st/2nd round venues around the country geographically--two each generally in the east, south, midwest, and west. They take bids from cities around the country for each cycle of venues, and they assign based on what arenas are attractive, what cities would provide a good experience and ample hotels, etc. They're certainly not trying to give teams from a certain area or conference a competitive advantage, but it might play out that way. One thing that helps North Carolina, again, is that W-S, Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greensboro for my money are all model cities for an NCAA experience, and I guarantee they bid every single time when NCAA slots are up. And think about it--north of NC there aren't any venues until the Verizon Center...south of NC there's the Georgia Dome but that's really a S16/F4 venue and Phillips Arena doesn't seem to be in play, so you're really talking Jacksonville. If you want an mid-east coast venue for the NCAA, it's really North Carolina or bust. The state of North Carolina itself may not have the "population" you want, but the mid-Atlantic sure does. One caveat--even with the pod system, the NCAA Fairy doesn't just hand you a home-state bid. North Carolina earned theirs by being a 1 seed in 2007-2009, but Duke in 2007 got sent to Buffalo as a six seed while we went to Winston Salem as the 2, and in 2008 we took the second Raleigh pod away from Duke by being one peg higher on the 2 seed ladder. (Now, giving a 10-seed a home state game in the second round, that I do have a problem with.) I won't deny teams from North Carolina (or Ohio--seems like Dayton, Columbus, or one of the Kentucky cities hosts every year) have a sweet deal. They're going to get a leg up playing in their home state and have more chances to do so. By the same token, USC and UCLA will feel at home in the Rose Bowl, LSU the Sugar Bowl, and Miami the Orange Bowl. It's just a fact of life...but I don't think the NCAA consciously (or unconsciously) is stacking the deck in favor of certain teams...just my opinion, feel free to disagree on that. It's getting a little better for the northeasterners though. Pittsburgh now has a NCAA ready venue, Wash D.C., Buffalo, and Philly are in heavy rotation, Boston is a legit Regional Final destination, ditto Newark/NYC, the NCAA went back to Providence. For 2010-2013, there is one 1st/2nd and one Reg Final in the northeast each year...so at least there's that.
|
|
|
Post by grokamok on Sept 23, 2009 15:05:03 GMT -5
The state of North Carolina gets "more than its share" of NCAA 1st/2nd round sites, no argument from me on this point. In the same manner, the states of California and Florida get more than their share of Super Bowls. The NCAA and NFL have criteria when considering host cities, and it so happens a disproportionate number of cities/venues in those states meet the criteria. Now to be fair, the NFL criteria for the Super Bowl must factor in weather (sorry, East Rutherford!) where the NCAA can hold the tournament in colder cities. And the "home court advantage" plays out frequently in college basketball, what with the recent development of the pod system, whereas a NFL team has yet to play in a Super Bowl in their home stadium. I may be wrong here, but my informed guess is that in a given year, the NCAA tries to spread the 1st/2nd round venues around the country geographically--two each generally in the east, south, midwest, and west. They take bids from cities around the country for each cycle of venues, and they assign based on what arenas are attractive, what cities would provide a good experience and ample hotels, etc. They're certainly not trying to give teams from a certain area or conference a competitive advantage, but it might play out that way. We seem to be in violent agreement, here, with your point being that the "more than their share" use of North Carolina venues by the NCAA is a credible business decision, and my point being that this results in a measurable bias in favor of North Carolina teams (and, specifically, in favor of UNC/Duke) that likely results in a better performance within the tournament than they would otherwise have. One thing that helps North Carolina, again, is that W-S, Raleigh, Charlotte, and Greensboro for my money are all model cities for an NCAA experience, and I guarantee they bid every single time when NCAA slots are up. And think about it--north of NC there aren't any venues until the Verizon Center...south of NC there's the Georgia Dome but that's really a S16/F4 venue and Phillips Arena doesn't seem to be in play, so you're really talking Jacksonville. If you want an mid-east coast venue for the NCAA, it's really North Carolina or bust. The state of North Carolina itself may not have the "population" you want, but the mid-Atlantic sure does. Greensboro: 23,500 Chapel Hill: 21,750 (Gee, I wonder why this one wouldn't be used regularly -- could it be because UNC wouldn't be able to play there and that Duke might not like playing on its biggest rival's home court?) Raleigh: 19,722 Charlotte: 18,500 Winston-Salem: 14,665 All of the capacities for the above are current basketball capacities; much smaller facilities in these cities/towns were being disproportionately used in the 70s-90s when the population differential between the Northeast and Southeast was considerably more pronounced and when facilities of at least the same size were widely available in the Northeast. Again, it is about proportional representation and home-court advantage in an event that should be staged as neutrally as possible. Though I think much more analysis could be done than is given, here's an article making a similar point: www.cbssports.com/columns/story/11514477Add Villanova and North Carolina for the 2009 tournament. Surprise, surprise -- Duke & UNC are listed three times; the only other team listed more than once is UCLA. One caveat--even with the pod system, the NCAA Fairy doesn't just hand you a home-state bid. North Carolina earned theirs by being a 1 seed in 2007-2009, but Duke in 2007 got sent to Buffalo as a six seed while we went to Winston Salem as the 2, and in 2008 we took the second Raleigh pod away from Duke by being one peg higher on the 2 seed ladder. (Now, giving a 10-seed a home state game in the second round, that I do have a problem with.) I won't deny teams from North Carolina (or Ohio--seems like Dayton, Columbus, or one of the Kentucky cities hosts every year) have a sweet deal. They're going to get a leg up playing in their home state and have more chances to do so. By the same token, USC and UCLA will feel at home in the Rose Bowl, LSU the Sugar Bowl, and Miami the Orange Bowl. It's just a fact of life...but I don't think the NCAA consciously (or unconsciously) is stacking the deck in favor of certain teams...just my opinion, feel free to disagree on that. It's getting a little better for the northeasterners though. Pittsburgh now has a NCAA ready venue, Wash D.C., Buffalo, and Philly are in heavy rotation, Boston is a legit Regional Final destination, ditto Newark/NYC, the NCAA went back to Providence. For 2010-2013, there is one 1st/2nd and one Reg Final in the northeast each year...so at least there's that. I agree about the home-court (and under-seeded) 10-seed (go figure). The point, again, is that, if you want to find out who is the best team in a single-elimination tournament, you have to choose venues and position teams in areas that will not provide de-facto home games (at least in the first rounds, where such arrangements are possible). As long as home-court advantage is provided to top-four seeds and North Carolina venues are disproportionately favored, the system will result in a bias for Carolina teams. Discount their tournament performance accordingly.
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Sept 23, 2009 23:07:25 GMT -5
Two quick points since I don't want to veer the thread off any more, and grokamok and I aren't event really disagreeing much:
1. I think two more likely reasons that Chapel Hill isn't a NCAA site any more are (1) UNC isn't interested in bidding to be the host institution; (2) even if they did, Chapel Hill isn't nearly as attractive a host city for the NCAA as the four other NC cities in rotation. IDK exactly what the host city requirements are, but remember Chapel Hill is only near Durham...I bet these days the NCAA would be reluctant to use an on-campus venue, no matter how big, that isn't itself physically located in a bigger city, for fan-access reasons*.
(*But how awesome would it be if there were a NCAA basketball sub-regional on your campus?)
2. Most of the time, the "home court" advantage a highly seeded team like UNC gets in the 1st/2nd rounds is irrelevant, b/c they would've destroyed their opponents no matter what (always an exception once in a while--Nova vs. American this year comes to mind). What we should be talking about instead is when a team gets a home-state advantage in the Regional Finals (Sweet 16/Elite 8), because those games are generally more evenly matched and a home crowd can make a difference--see UNC vs. Louisville in Charlotte in 2008 and especially Illinois vs. Arizona in Chicago in 2005.
|
|
Gold Hoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by Gold Hoya on Sept 24, 2009 8:04:49 GMT -5
What we should be talking about instead is when a team gets a home-state advantage in the Regional Finals (Sweet 16/Elite 8), because those games are generally more evenly matched and a home crowd can make a difference--see UNC vs. Louisville in Charlotte in 2008 and especially Illinois vs. Arizona in Chicago in 2005. It doesn't always work out - see Memphis vs. Texas in Houston, 2008. (Of course the dome isn't exactly comparable to the dingy, how-did-the-NCAA-ever-decide-on-this Allstate Arena). And don't forget George Mason vs. U-Conn. in 2006 on your list!
|
|
|
Post by grokamok on Sept 24, 2009 8:33:47 GMT -5
Two quick points since I don't want to veer the thread off any more, and grokamok and I aren't event really disagreeing much: 1. I think two more likely reasons that Chapel Hill isn't a NCAA site any more are (1) UNC isn't interested in bidding to be the host institution; (2) even if they did, Chapel Hill isn't nearly as attractive a host city for the NCAA as the four other NC cities in rotation. IDK exactly what the host city requirements are, but remember Chapel Hill is only near Durham...I bet these days the NCAA would be reluctant to use an on-campus venue, no matter how big, that isn't itself physically located in a bigger city, for fan-access reasons*. (*But how awesome would it be if there were a NCAA basketball sub-regional on your campus?) 2. Most of the time, the "home court" advantage a highly seeded team like UNC gets in the 1st/2nd rounds is irrelevant, b/c they would've destroyed their opponents no matter what (always an exception once in a while--Nova vs. American this year comes to mind). What we should be talking about instead is when a team gets a home-state advantage in the Regional Finals (Sweet 16/Elite 8), because those games are generally more evenly matched and a home crowd can make a difference--see UNC vs. Louisville in Charlotte in 2008 and especially Illinois vs. Arizona in Chicago in 2005. 1. Chapel Hill is part of the Research Triangle population center, is served by a larger regional airport about 15 minutes away (only Charlotte would have better access by air), is all of 7 miles from Durham, has plenty of hotel space nearby (hosting many large conferences), and is, along with the Dean Dome, pretty fan-access-friendly. Two thousand more tickets would be available than in nearby Raleigh, seven thousand more than in fairly-close Winston-Salem. 2. Home court advantage works at all levels of a tournament; it makes an upset in the early rounds that much less likely, just as in later rounds. The problem with regional placement is that there are only four, instead of eight, venues from which to choose, and that the participants are unknown (though relatively predictable by seeding), in contrast to sub-regional placement. It is, therefore, harder to ensure that no team is granted a home-court advantage. Any team getting such an advantage is given an undue bias in determining a champion (or in reviewing unadjusted tournament performance).
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Sept 24, 2009 8:59:54 GMT -5
FL's probably right, they've probably just never put in a bid for the Dean dome. Because UNC knows they couldn't play there, why take away their home court advantage by using up the NC site on a place they can't play.
|
|
|
Post by grokamok on Sept 24, 2009 9:23:57 GMT -5
FL's probably right, they've probably just never put in a bid for the Dean dome. Because UNC knows they couldn't play there, why take away their home court advantage by using up the NC site on a place they can't play. Precisely my point above. In my immediately-prior post, I was simply pointing out that they keep the Dean Dome out of play despite its being a superior facility. That is, they are going out of their way to ensure the availability of home court advantage. The Dean Dome was used in its third season (1988). Both Duke and UNC were 2-seeds, but UNC was sent out west because they weren't allowed to play at home (though Duke, despite having one more loss and an easier out-of-conference schedule, had beaten UNC three times that season, including the ACC Tournament Final, and probably would have gotten the home-court nod anyway). Duke sailed through the first two rounds in Chapel Hill before squeaking by 11-seed URI in East Rutherford and beating Temple to get to the Final Four. UNC, though also sailing through the first two rounds in Salt Lake City, was locked into a 1 vs 2 match-up with Arizona in Seattle, and was trounced. They never offered the Dean Dome for the NCAA Tournament again.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Sept 24, 2009 9:39:15 GMT -5
Are any other venues in the DC area satisfactory sites for NCAA 1st and second rounds? Patriot center? Comcast center? Would be nice for us to have a group of local sites on rotation for us. Of course their are enough duke and UNC fans in the area that it wouldn't be that big of a disadvantage to them.
|
|
tlphoya
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 431
|
Post by tlphoya on Sept 24, 2009 11:20:36 GMT -5
Are any other venues in the DC area satisfactory sites for NCAA 1st and second rounds? Patriot center? Comcast center? Would be nice for us to have a group of local sites on rotation for us. Of course their are enough duke and UNC fans in the area that it wouldn't be that big of a disadvantage to them. Richmond has hosted 1st/2nd rounds before. Without looking anything up I know in 1996 when Iverson was here, but I don't know if they've hosted since.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on Sept 24, 2009 16:22:34 GMT -5
Are any other venues in the DC area satisfactory sites for NCAA 1st and second rounds? Patriot center? Comcast center? Would be nice for us to have a group of local sites on rotation for us. Of course their are enough duke and UNC fans in the area that it wouldn't be that big of a disadvantage to them. I assume GU would much prefer the revenue associated with being the host school at the Phone Booth than we'd care about the quasi-home court advantage we'd enjoy at a suburban venue. There is money involved, right? We're not just doing this out of the goodness of our hearts??
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Sept 24, 2009 16:37:48 GMT -5
well yes but no site hosts every year. they rotate so it'd be nice on the years we're not hosting to have a venue close to home that might afford us a bit more of a home court advantage.
|
|
FLHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Proud Member of Generation Burton
Posts: 4,544
|
Post by FLHoya on Sept 24, 2009 18:28:33 GMT -5
Are any other venues in the DC area satisfactory sites for NCAA 1st and second rounds? Patriot center? Comcast center? Would be nice for us to have a group of local sites on rotation for us. Of course their are enough duke and UNC fans in the area that it wouldn't be that big of a disadvantage to them. The Comcast Center is actually a good analogy to the Dean Dome when it comes to the NCAAs. College Park actually has a more illustrious NCAA history than Chapel Hill...Cole Field House hosted the Final Four in 1966 (the Texas Western-Kentucky one) and 1970. Both the Comcast Center and Dean Dome on paper would easily fit the NCAA criteria for a NCAA venue, and you could probably get away with the hotel rule by counting Washington, DC/Durham for each. But let's say either school was interested in bidding (I don't think either is anyway, but for argument's sake). If you're the NCAA these days, you're not choosing the college gym in the suburb of a bigger city, which is probably on campus and doesn't have a ton of parking, and the in-and-out on local roads/highways isn't as easy... ...when you're almost guaranteed to be getting a bid from another venue nearby like Verizon Center or [pick a regular NC venue], which is ACTUALLY IN a bigger city, closer to hotels, either right off a highway with lots of parking or downtown on a public transportation system. As for the DC area, I'd bet the Patriot Center at 10k is too small, Richmond's arena is too old/not nice enough, Norfolk and Baltimore don't strike me as NCAA tournament cities. Really, the nicest arena in the tri-state area may well be the John Paul Jones Arena in Charlottesville, which seats a very tidy 15k or so and looks fantastic...but again, why make people fly to Charlottesville when you'll always have a bid from the DC, Raleigh, or Charlotte? I think for the foreseeable future as GU fans, we're stuck on the rotation between Philly/Pitt and North Carolina, assuming we're good enough to earn a local game in a given year. Charlottesville does bring up an interesting question though: Let's say money/travel isn't a concern and you could go to GU's NCAA games every year. Which type of city would you rather visit for the tournament 1st/2nd rounds: the big metropolis (Philly, Chicago, Denver, etc.), the medium-sized city (Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Columbus, Oklahoma City), the modest-sized city (Winston-Salem, Dayton), or the college town (Charlottesville, Chapel Hill)? There is money involved, right? We're not just doing this out of the goodness of our hearts?? There's money involved.
|
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Sept 25, 2009 9:31:22 GMT -5
Are any other venues in the DC area satisfactory sites for NCAA 1st and second rounds? Patriot center? Comcast center? Would be nice for us to have a group of local sites on rotation for us. Of course their are enough duke and UNC fans in the area that it wouldn't be that big of a disadvantage to them. I assume GU would much prefer the revenue associated with being the host school at the Phone Booth than we'd care about the quasi-home court advantage we'd enjoy at a suburban venue. There is money involved, right? We're not just doing this out of the goodness of our hearts?? Right, but I wonder how much money flows to GU, as merely a tenant of the Verizon Center? Yes, they are the "hosts," but how much can Georgetown really be making for that administrative function? I wonder if Pollin gives them any break on rent for bringing in the additional revenue. Furthermore, I wonder whether there is really a ton of revenue in it for the arenas? After all, it is only 2 or 3 sessions, they must split ticket revenue with the NCAA, they have to cover all of their advertising, and they don't even get to sell beer in the arena. Seems to me it is the local hotels and restaurants that stand to profit the most from having the tournament in town. Which brings me to another point: the decision of the NCAA to sell the television rights to their games for hundreds millions of dollars and have those rights supported by all kinds of advertising (including from beer companies), sell their tickets for $50 plus, then to pretend that the NCAA tournament is some ultra-pure amateur endeavor for college kids who are too young drink is just bizarre. Might as well make more money on it by selling the ad space and opening up the taps.
|
|
|
Post by Coast2CoastHoya on Sept 25, 2009 9:51:16 GMT -5
Three things:
1. Boise State is the best place to watch NCAA Tourney hoops that I've ever seen, hands down. Great arena, great fans, fun town.
2. It was pretty easy getting tix to Rds 1 and 2 at the Booth last year; I think I got my application in right on the deadline and still got 8 seats. Get on it earlier, obviously, if you want better seats.
3. Going to the full slate of Rd 1 and 2 games is a lot of hoops. I was burned out by the end, despite watching #15 Belmont almost knock off #2 Dook and THEN seeing WVU actually do it.
|
|
kghoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,998
|
Post by kghoya on Sept 25, 2009 12:38:08 GMT -5
I guess it's cool that Verizon will be hosting NCAA Tournament games again but it doesn't really do much for me since I always follow the Hoyas to their venue.
|
|
kellycpcm
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 318
|
Post by kellycpcm on Sept 25, 2009 15:35:43 GMT -5
KG, me too, it's much better to watch the Hoyas on their road to April goodness.
|
|
|
Post by Coast2CoastHoya on Sept 26, 2009 10:51:42 GMT -5
Having done it both ways now, I have to agree with KG and kelly. SO much more fun watching the Hoyas.
|
|