|
 |  |
|
AD PARTNERS
|  |
Reactions Opinions split on playing early rounds at neutral sites
Posted: Wednesday March 22, 2000 05:07 PM
CNNSI.com asked users to submit their thoughts on moving the first and second rounds of the NCAA tournament to neutral sites. Fans are split are whether the move should be made. A collection of some of the most interesting responses follows:
No, They should not be moved to neutral sites. For some reason women's basketball STILL has not caught on like it should ALL over. Yes, you do have a few places where they have LARGE crowds but overall you really don't see that. I think it would cut down on attendance and the NCAA would not make the money that they would like..
No I don't think they should just yet -- I think the women need their fans sadly enough because obviously their games aren't even selling out -- when they're winning tremendously -- an that's when the site is not neutral -- I'm speaking from the view of an ISU Cyclones fan where we play at Hilton which is one the best fan-based -- record setting crowds in the nation -- and even we're not selling out -- so I don't think it'd be a good idea just yet -- maybe next year.
I do not think that next year's games should be played on neutral sites. The reason that they should not be played on neutral sites is because the teams that are really good, like Tennessee, UConn, and La. Tech, earned the right to play at home again in front of their fans. They played so good through the year, and not getting the reward for their good play through the season, it is not fair, to them or for the fans. They get energy from their fans and it is just not fair if they don't get the reward for their good play, IT IS NOT FAIR.
Yes the games should be played on a neutral site. Just look at the men's tournament there are always upsets and that is what fans want to see the underdogs winning. Also the team that is ranked higher should be better than the other team so they already have one advantage it just makes it that much harder for a lower ranked team to win. I hope the NCAA decides to do this it will make the women's tournament much more exciting.
I think the NCAA is crazy to want to move the first and second round games to neutral sites. Attendance would drop and teams would be playing in nearly empty arenas. Do not go to neutral sites until you can sell out the third and fourth rounds. When you can do that than go to neutral sites.
The NCAA tournament should be moved to neutral sites. This would be fairer to all the teams. The top 16 are already considered the best in the country & should not be given an additional advantage of playing on their home court. Also, if you win on your own court, the win doesn't seem to be as big since you do have the crowd advantage. By playing at neutral sites, they will prove that they truly are the best.
I think the games should NOT be moved to neutral sites because if a team works hard and has a good record, they get rewarded by playing in there home town where all there supporters are. The fans come to watch there home team play not their opponents. If it is played in neutral sites there might not be as many people at the games also the players might not feel well respected or maybe even rewarded. I am a basketball player myself and I love to play at home in front of my friends and family also my fans who come and watch the games. I hate traveling to other gyms away from home because there is know one there to watch you. I hope It can stay the way it is already.
If it's not broke don't fix it. Is the concern is that the top 16 teams made it past the first round last year? Why is that a bad thing? On campus games have an excitement level that is not found on so called "neutral sites". Besides, you have more students at campus sites. Student/fans make for a better atmosphere.
I think the decision to move to neutral sites is at best a hasty one. While the argument can be made that moving the 1st and 2nd rounds to a "neutral" site will be beneficial to all teams, the problem remains that the NCAA is hard pressed to find fans that will go to the "home" sites of the current system. While fans certainly will attend at such venues as Connecticut, Tennessee, Texas Tech and Iowa State. Teams such as Duke, North Carolina, Penn State and Michigan, are hard pressed to get 2,000 fans to attend NCAA games on their home floors. I find it hard to believe that fans will travel to neutral sites when they won't attend home sites. The NCAA is already pressured enough to get fans to the Regional Sites, that pressure will grow exponentially with neutral site 1st and 2nd round games.
Men's and Women's NCAA tournaments should be the same even with regards the neutral site issue. Not having "neutral" sites in the Women's NCAA tournament gives unfair advantages to the "home" court team as it is done now.
As a strong supporter of the St. Joseph's women's basketball team, I watched as they were barely eliminated by Duke in last years 2nd round on Duke's home court. Its very intimidating to play in front of the Cameron crazies. If this game had been played at a neutral site the Hawks and not the Blue Devils may have been in the Final Four last year.
No the 1st and 2nd round games of the NCAA should not be moved to neutral sites. If you are a top 4 seed you have deserved the right to play at home. Look at my Lady Vols for example, every year of the NCAA tournament (Tennessee and La. tech are the only teams to make it to the NCAA every year) the Lady Vols have been a top four seed and are undefeated at home in the tourney. If you are among the nations top 16 teams you deserve two more home games.
It is the best news for the overall women's bb game. Programs that have played the last 10 or 15 consecutive years at home in the NCAA tournament have had huge advantages over the other 290 or so programs -- in all areas. It's about time some fairness enters the women's basketball picture -- giving other programs an equal shot at becoming a national champion. It's been a long time coming. Good job NCAA.
I think a lot of people are overestimating how popular the women's game has gotten. Look at how the men's attendance has dropped since the men can't host anymore. It would be much more fair to have neutral sites, but who wants to play to crowds of 500 fans?
I think that the 1st and 2nd round games should be moved to neutral sites as soon as possible, because even though I'm a student at UConn and shouldn't be complaining, there is a certain unfairness to the lesser ranked teams when they play on the home court of the highest ranked teams in the nation. And is it just me, or did all of the teams who hosted the 1st and 2nd rounds last year go on to the Sweet 16?
| ||||||||||||||||||||
