First, has any thought been given to a season ending radio show with the Coach, staff, and even some players, like Will, Vaughn, and Todd, to talk about the
past season and the upcoming year?
Second, since we had a brief discussion recently about the HL tournament, I thought I'd offer up some options and see how the fans feel.
A. Keep the tournament as it is, that is with 3 vs 10, 4 vs 9, etc. with teams 1 and 2 having byes for two rounds. Round 2 would be played at the court of the higher seeds. Round 3 would be played at #1's court. The finals would be played at the court of the higher remaining seed.
B. Keep the tournament largely as it is, but consider some options.
1. Play the first two rounds at the home courts of the higher remaining seeds. The semis would be played at the court of # 1. The finals would be played at the court of the higher remaining seed.
2. Play the first 3 rounds at the home courts of the higher remaining seeds. The finals would then be played at the court of the higher remaing seed.
3. Have the bottom 4 teams play a first round with 7 hosting 10 and 8 hosting 9. The second round would pit, for example, 1 vs 8, 2 vs7, 3 vs 6, and 4 vs 5. These games could be hosted at #1's campus, or, to improve the gate, at the higher seeds courts.
The next round, for example, would have 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3. Again, the sites in this example, could either be at #1's campus, or at the courts of 1 and 2.
The finals would be at the site of the highest remaining seed.
C. Play all the games at a common neutral site in one of the above formats. I like this coming together aspect, but I'm afraid the gate would suffer. You could either give 1 and 2 two byes and follow the earlier format, or have the bottom 4 teams play the first round to get down to the final 8. The "common" site could move from year to year, or be fixed.
Personally, I like option B3 the best. First, the opening round weeds out 2 of the weaker teams based upon the previous HL season. That is likely to be a non-TV round. That means the top 6 teams all receive a first round bye as this weeding-out takes place. This matching of the 4 lower seeds generates interest within the HL, because there is no guarantee that the home teams will win. Their odds of winning may be over 50%, but probably not as much as when #3 plays #10, etc.
This means that 1 and 2 do not get 2 byes, which is fine by me. It means the top 6 teams get extra rest before their opening games in round 2. IF these games get on TV sometime in the future, the HL will be showcasing their top 6 teams, all of which will have been rested. I think giving the teams a first round bye AND home court advantage for as long as they survive is reward enough for a successful season. Giving teams 1 and 2 two byes is just too much of an edge, to the point that some of the anticipation of a tournament is removed IMO.
Personally, I like playing all the games at the home courts of the higher teams, right up to the finals, but I could see the logic of playing the semis at the court of #1. By playing the games at the higher seeds, however, the teams are rewarded for finishing higher throughout the tournament. The gate from these games will be enhanced I'm sure, versus playing subsequent rounds at #1. The HL as a whole can benefit from the greater revenue.
Thank you for indulging me in my musings.
Second, since we had a brief discussion recently about the HL tournament, I thought I'd offer up some options and see how the fans feel.
A. Keep the tournament as it is, that is with 3 vs 10, 4 vs 9, etc. with teams 1 and 2 having byes for two rounds. Round 2 would be played at the court of the higher seeds. Round 3 would be played at #1's court. The finals would be played at the court of the higher remaining seed.
B. Keep the tournament largely as it is, but consider some options.
1. Play the first two rounds at the home courts of the higher remaining seeds. The semis would be played at the court of # 1. The finals would be played at the court of the higher remaining seed.
2. Play the first 3 rounds at the home courts of the higher remaining seeds. The finals would then be played at the court of the higher remaing seed.
3. Have the bottom 4 teams play a first round with 7 hosting 10 and 8 hosting 9. The second round would pit, for example, 1 vs 8, 2 vs7, 3 vs 6, and 4 vs 5. These games could be hosted at #1's campus, or, to improve the gate, at the higher seeds courts.
The next round, for example, would have 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3. Again, the sites in this example, could either be at #1's campus, or at the courts of 1 and 2.
The finals would be at the site of the highest remaining seed.
C. Play all the games at a common neutral site in one of the above formats. I like this coming together aspect, but I'm afraid the gate would suffer. You could either give 1 and 2 two byes and follow the earlier format, or have the bottom 4 teams play the first round to get down to the final 8. The "common" site could move from year to year, or be fixed.
Personally, I like option B3 the best. First, the opening round weeds out 2 of the weaker teams based upon the previous HL season. That is likely to be a non-TV round. That means the top 6 teams all receive a first round bye as this weeding-out takes place. This matching of the 4 lower seeds generates interest within the HL, because there is no guarantee that the home teams will win. Their odds of winning may be over 50%, but probably not as much as when #3 plays #10, etc.
This means that 1 and 2 do not get 2 byes, which is fine by me. It means the top 6 teams get extra rest before their opening games in round 2. IF these games get on TV sometime in the future, the HL will be showcasing their top 6 teams, all of which will have been rested. I think giving the teams a first round bye AND home court advantage for as long as they survive is reward enough for a successful season. Giving teams 1 and 2 two byes is just too much of an edge, to the point that some of the anticipation of a tournament is removed IMO.
Personally, I like playing all the games at the home courts of the higher teams, right up to the finals, but I could see the logic of playing the semis at the court of #1. By playing the games at the higher seeds, however, the teams are rewarded for finishing higher throughout the tournament. The gate from these games will be enhanced I'm sure, versus playing subsequent rounds at #1. The HL as a whole can benefit from the greater revenue.
Thank you for indulging me in my musings.
If that is
not the real way to describe those that live in Indy,,, it should be.
