Past net receipts of regional hosts
All figures in dollars, only includes hosts post-1999:
Arizona State:
2000: 58,377
2002: 46,956*
2003: 52,849
2005: 42,393*
Arkansas:
1999: 123,077
2004: 249,802
2006: 243,317
Florida State:
1999: 42,087*
2000: 41,638*
2001: 53,211
2002: 60,659
2003: 75,503
2004: 71,428
2005: 85,889
Long Beach State:
2003: 43,047*
2005: 66,448
Mississippi:
2004: 91,645
2005: 131,692
2006: 150,540
Noth Carolina:
2006: 43,207*
Rice:
2001: 111,993
2002: 84,211
2003: 97,862
2004: 145,179
2006: 115,178
South Carolina:
2000: 113,586
2001: 120,372
2002: 105,403
2004: 145,295
Texas:
2002: 188,718
2003: 177,168
2004: 182,358
2005: 203,759
2006: 195,269
Texas A&M:
1999: 149,275
2003: 154,289
Virginia:
2004: 31,831**
2006: 34,231**
Wichita State:
1999: 139,013
2002: 175,327
As for the Cajuns?
Louisiana:
2000: 78,377
*-team did not meet current $50,000 minimum guarantee
**-team did not meet previous $35,000 minimum guarantee
Re: Past net receipts of regional hosts
UL bid $150,000 for the 2007 Host site this year. In talking to some of the people in the athletic dept, winning the tournament would have probably secured the regional. Losing in the finals put us on the bubble...and needless to say...gave the site to Wichita State. I think it was unfair...but selection committees normally are.
Re: Past net receipts of regional hosts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTG
UL bid $150,000 for the 2007 Host site this year. In talking to some of the people in the athletic dept, winning the tournament would have probably secured the regional. Losing in the finals put us on the bubble...and needless to say...gave the site to Wichita State. I think it was unfair...but selection committees normally are.
Just to be clear ... bid amount is not the same as net receipts. Also, there were some very aggressive bids this year. There were many well above $150K. However, $150K was a solid bid and was not a factor in the candidacy for a host regional.
As for winning the tournament final ... I study this stuff hard, look at the trends, trade info with many people in the know, and was in the conference media call. I am not at all convinced that the committee was ready to give the Cajuns a host regional and #1 seed in the event of that final win over UNO. It may have happened, it may not have. They may have been just a traveling #1 seed. But there were two criteria that were necessary to be met here ...
1) The Committee had to be convinced that the Cajuns were a #1 seed. This did not happen as they were not willing to send the Cajuns to Wichita as a #1 seed.
2) The next criteria would have been to really separate themselves from Wichita State as a #1 seed (more than #1 above). I think this would have had to happen in order for them to earn a host bid over Wichita State (A&M is a different question). They separated themselves in my mind, as I think the data points in the WSU - UL debate I provided make clear. Templeton also had no answer for these points in the media conference call. I think they needed to separate themselves in order to take away the second precious midwest regional they really wanted.
I am not at all convinced that beating UNO would have met criteria #2 above. I do think it would have met #1.
Brian
Re: Past net receipts of regional hosts
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneGolfin
_ Just to be clear ... bid amount is not the same as net receipts. Also, there were some very aggressive bids this year. There were many well above $150K. However, $150K was a solid bid and was not a factor in the candidacy for a host regional.
As for winning the tournament final ... I study this stuff hard, look at the trends, trade info with many people in the know, and was in the conference media call. I am not at all convinced that the committee was ready to give the Cajuns a host regional and #1 seed in the event of that final win over UNO. It may have happened, it may not have. They may have been just a traveling #1 seed. But there were two criteria that were necessary to be met here ...
1) The Committee had to be convinced that the Cajuns were a #1 seed. This did not happen as they were not willing to send the Cajuns to Wichita as a #1 seed.
2) The next criteria would have been to really separate themselves from Wichita State as a #1 seed (more than #1 above). I think this would have had to happen in order for them to earn a host bid over Wichita State (A&M is a different question). They separated themselves in my mind, as I think the data points in the WSU - UL debate I provided make clear. Templeton also had no answer for these points in the media conference call. I think they needed to separate themselves in order to take away the second precious midwest regional they really wanted.
I am not at all convinced that beating UNO would have met criteria #2 above. I do think it would have met #1.
Brian _
I understand...
Very good information.
Thanks for sharing.
BTG
Re: Past net receipts of regional hosts
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneGolfin
_ Just to be clear ... bid amount is not the same as net receipts. Also, there were some very aggressive bids this year. There were many well above $150K. However, $150K was a solid bid and was not a factor in the candidacy for a host regional.
As for winning the tournament final ... I study this stuff hard, look at the trends, trade info with many people in the know, and was in the conference media call. I am not at all convinced that the committee was ready to give the Cajuns a host regional and #1 seed in the event of that final win over UNO. It may have happened, it may not have. They may have been just a traveling #1 seed. But there were two criteria that were necessary to be met here ...
1) The Committee had to be convinced that the Cajuns were a #1 seed. This did not happen as they were not willing to send the Cajuns to Wichita as a #1 seed.
2) The next criteria would have been to really separate themselves from Wichita State as a #1 seed (more than #1 above). I think this would have had to happen in order for them to earn a host bid over Wichita State (A&M is a different question). They separated themselves in my mind, as I think the data points in the WSU - UL debate I provided make clear. Templeton also had no answer for these points in the media conference call. I think they needed to separate themselves in order to take away the second precious midwest regional they really wanted.
I am not at all convinced that beating UNO would have met criteria #2 above. I do think it would have met #1.
Brian _
Here's the POV from a person who does not study this stuff at all.
Somebody seems to get the short end of the stick in the NCAA basketball and baseball tournament selection process every year. It looks like it was our turn here (contrary to e.g. the Cajun women's basketball selection).
Uneaux had some impressive wins this season. They were the #2 seed in the SBC (6th or 7th ranked conference) tourney and rightfully so. Uneaux is no slouch and it was not like the Cajuns lost to a bottom rung team that had a "flash in the pan" run in the tournament.
Here's hoping Uneaux does well in their regional and further proves up the above.
Re: Past net receipts of regional hosts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DestinCajun
Here's the POV from a person who does not study this stuff at all.
Somebody seems to get the short end of the stick in the NCAA basketball and baseball tournament selection process every year. It looks like it was our turn here (contrary to e.g. the Cajun women's basketball selection).
Uneaux had some impressive wins this season. They were the #2 seed in the SBC (6th or 7th ranked conference) tourney and rightfully so. Uneaux is no slouch and it was not like the Cajuns lost to a bottom rung team that had a "flash in the pan" run in the tournament.
Here's hoping Uneaux does well in their regional and further proves up the above.
Yes, I think we got the short stick this season. Although not like we did last season nor like College of Charleston did this season.
It should be noted that the Cajuns were the beneficiaries of a regional in 2000. If you use the same criteria in 2000 and 2007, the Cajuns did not deserve to host in 2000. Of course, we are all elated that we did.
As for the regional in Wichita, I do not think the selection committee did the Shockers any favors with respect to the regional field. Any one of those four teams can win that regional. I think it is the most competitive regional top to bottom.
Brian
