University of Kentucky Men's Basketball -- 7th Edition

[Assembly Hall]

Originally Posted by dabvu2498

Cincinnati doesn't have a suitable venue. The downtown arena isn't fit for a big-time game. It's kinda gross, actually.

Cleveland and Lousiville would be the only choices for neutral sites.

Indianapolis????????

[dabvu2498]

Originally Posted by Assembly Hall

Indianapolis????????

Meh. Kentucky and Ohio State playing in Indianapolis? Meh.

[RiverRat13]

This isn't a knock on UK or any school in particular but since it has come up in this thread... college games should be played on college campuses. The trend of playing big match-ups on a neutral floor is alarming to me and I'd imagine also to season ticket holders.

[Scrap Irony]

Originally Posted by RiverRat13

This isn't a knock on UK or any school in particular but since it has come up in this thread... college games should be played on college campuses. The trend of playing big match-ups on a neutral floor is alarming to me and I'd imagine also to season ticket holders.

Playing on neutral floors helps better prepare teams for the NCAA tournament-- which is kinda the point of it all. As a coach, you do your best for your kids, not for the university's perceived state of mind. Neutral sites also tend to help financially those programs that typically sell out home dates and also gives a national TV and recruiting boost, especially if those neutral games are in a recruit's backyard.

Having said that, I think keeping all college games on campus would have been a great idea. However, it's long since gone. It went the way of the Dodo when big money reared its head. The NCAA (and her parent universities) are chasing billions and obviously care not a whit about education or helping young people.

[RiverRat13]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

Playing on neutral floors helps better prepare teams for the NCAA tournament-- which is kinda the point of it all. As a coach, you do your best for your kids, not for the university's perceived state of mind.

I think the adversity of playing on another team's home floor better prepares a team (i.e. toughens them up) than a neutral site game.

I don't see how a neutral floor helps TV ratings. I don't think more people would have turned into UNC at UK had it been played in Nashville, Charlotte, or Louisville. The recruiting argument holds some weight although coaches could certainly just schedule a home-and-home with a team in a particular area they would like to recruit. I like the early tournaments (Great Alaska, Preseason NIT) but I'm just not a fan of moving more and more games off campuses.

[WVRed]

Originally Posted by RiverRat13

I think the adversity of playing on another team's home floor better prepares a team (i.e. toughens them up) than a neutral site game.

I don't see how a neutral floor helps TV ratings. I don't think more people would have turned into UNC at UK had it been played in Nashville, Charlotte, or Louisville. The recruiting argument holds some weight although coaches could certainly just schedule a home-and-home with a team in a particular area they would like to recruit. I like the early tournaments (Great Alaska, Preseason NIT) but I'm just not a fan of moving more and more games off campuses.

Yes and no. I see your point on playing in a hostile environment, but playing in a NBA or NFL arena does so much more for getting a team ready for tournament time.

Lucas Oil Stadium seats 70,000. Rupp seats 23,500 and Assembly Hall seats 17,500. Just by the sheer size of playing in a NFL stadium is equally as intimidating, and it prepares teams for March when the regional sites and the Final Four will likely be played in massive arenas anyways.

Not to mention the attraction of recruits. I'd like to see some of these out of conference games set up in NBA arenas. The kids who come to Kentucky are coming to get exposure and get prepared to play in the NBA, so why not give these kids the experience of playing in a NBA venue?

[Scrap Irony]

Originally Posted by RiverRat13

I think the adversity of playing on another team's home floor better prepares a team (i.e. toughens them up) than a neutral site game.

I don't see how a neutral floor helps TV ratings. I don't think more people would have turned into UNC at UK had it been played in Nashville, Charlotte, or Louisville. The recruiting argument holds some weight although coaches could certainly just schedule a home-and-home with a team in a particular area they would like to recruit. I like the early tournaments (Great Alaska, Preseason NIT) but I'm just not a fan of moving more and more games off campuses.

There are no home games in the tourney and neutral site games are often played in large arenas. Both of those trump any perceived "toughness" gained by being spit on, cursed at, and generally abused by fans of opposing teams. You get enough of that in conference rivalry games.

TV decisions are often based on geography and "big" regular -season games, a la Maui, Alaska, Mohegan, and Puerto Rico Tournaments. Too, you have games played at MSG and often elsewhere early in the season that ensure national games on either ESPN or one of the four free channel networks. The bigger the stage, the more likely it's televised over a larger section of the country.

For example, two years ago, Kentucky went to Portland to play at the Rose Garden versus the University of Portland. That game was picked up by ESPN and broadcast as its game of the week. If that game is in Lexington or at the Chiles Center, it doesn't get TV outside of the Big Blue Network or perhaps Fox Sports South.

[RiverRat13]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

For example, two years ago, Kentucky went to Portland to play at the Rose Garden versus the University of Portland. That game was picked up by ESPN and broadcast as its game of the week. If that game is in Lexington or at the Chiles Center, it doesn't get TV outside of the Big Blue Network or perhaps Fox Sports South.

I don't buy this. That game was picked up because it was the only decent game at 10:30 PM EST. If the game is on Portland's campus, it gets picked up. ESPN jumped at the chance to get Kentucky on at that late of an hour, not because of the venue.

[cumberlandreds]

Originally Posted by RiverRat13

I don't buy this. That game was picked up because it was the only decent game at 10:30 PM EST. If the game is on Portland's campus, it gets picked up. ESPN jumped at the chance to get Kentucky on at that late of an hour, not because of the venue.

No, it would have never been picked up by ESPN if it was on Portlands campus. Because UK would have never played them unless it was played at the Rose Garden.

[RiverRat13]

Originally Posted by cumberlandreds

No, it would have never been picked up by ESPN if it was on Portlands campus. Because UK would have never played them unless it was played at the Rose Garden.

True.

[cumberlandreds]

Originally Posted by RiverRat13

True.

The only two mid major type teams I have ever known UK to play on their home courts was Ohio and Canisius. Both were opening new arenas IIRC and wanted UK as their opponent. UK obliged and gave them a loss to christen their new arena.

[Assembly Hall]

Originally Posted by dabvu2498

Meh. Kentucky and Ohio State playing in Indianapolis? Meh.

LOL. It was just a thought. Where is the "hiding under a chair" smilie? I could use that right about now!

[Revering4Blue]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a requirement that any NCAA Tournament Venue must host a regular season NCAA game during said season?

That may explain certain neutral floor regular season matchups.

As for IU/UK, forget the home-and-home series if that's what it takes. Louisville is the perfect venue for IU/UK, at least IMO.

[Assembly Hall]

Originally Posted by Revering4Blue

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a requirement that any NCAA Tournament Venue must host a regular season NCAA game during said season?

That may explain certain neutral floor regular season matchups.

As for IU/UK, forget the home-and-home series if that's what it takes. Louisville is the perfect venue for IU/UK, at least IMO.

I dont know about that Revering. But I dont really think it has anything to do with neutral site match-ups period. It comes down to money and coaches afraid of losing. I remember the year after IU got beat by Maryland for the championship, they matched up in the challenge. Maryland refused to play at Assembly. The game was moved to Indy. Duke refused to play at Illinois one time in the challenge and the game was moved to Chicago. And there are other instances where it is just about revenue. In the IU/UK match-up they knew they could fill the dome. 60,000 seats split down the middle. A lot of cash flowing there.

I am with ya on your last part. Louisville is perfect. We need some cooler heads to just Git-R-Done. I really think this rivalry was the best in college basketball from the mid 70's until the early 90's. I know I am biased, but I will be pissed if it comes to an end.

On another note. Here in Indiana they started a crossroads tournament. This past year IU played Notre Dame and Purdue played Butler(Moving to the A-10 BTW). I think that would be great for an alternative solution for IU/UK's impasse. The border challenge. Louisville and UK matched up against IU and Purdue/Notre Dame. I am placing my ticket order right now!!!!!!!!!

[WMR]

Cats going to the White House on Friday...

Recruiting is dragging on right now... Still hopeful we add 2 players. Bennett and Lyons would probably be my first choice at this point. Apparently Lyons is down to UK and Zona. He can fill it up.