The argument is as tired as it is silly. We hear it every March, and this year it began in December: move the CAA Tournament out of Richmond.
That would be a stupid thing to do.
Let’s get this unassailable fact out from the get-go: other than NCAA tournament credits, there is no bigger revenue generator for the CAA than the men’s basketball postseason tournament. This money goes to support all sports at all schools. Therefore, the number one goal of the CAA tournament is to make money. The NCAA admits it, and so should we.
For the CAA tournament, that revenue not only comes from ticket sales, but a guarantee received from the city and the sponsorship opportunities that revolve around the tournament (Virginia 529, Army, etc.). A key fact that you may not know: the CAA is a non-profit group, meaning when it does well financially, that means more money is sent back to the member schools at the end of the year.
It would be incredibly irresponsible in any business to risk your second largest asset for reasons that fall short of “monumental opportunity.” Your largest assets must be protected. Nobody has ever presented to me reasons that come close to that mark for the CAA and its tournament location.
Do you really think the AD at Your School is going to risk the second biggest revenue generator without a darn certain reason that the revenue is protected or will be enhanced? These people have jobs and bosses and performance evaluations, too.
Now, let’s get past the money thing, kind of, and address the main arguments I hear to move it. I’d be happy to address others at any point.
VCU has a homecourt advantage.
Well, duh. We’ve crippled each other with the back and forth of home court versus home city. VCU has no home court advantage in the sense that it doesn’t step on the floor of the Richmond Coliseum any more than any other team.
However, VCU carries a tremendous home city advantage that manifests itself with the large crowds due to home city, and due to the geographical advantage of being able to buy up spare tickets from teams that lose as the tournament progresses.
That is undeniable and not trivial.
But here’s the thing with that. Move it to Norfolk and it’s no different, only replace VCU with ODU. DeeCee, it’s Mason. Baltimore, it’s Towson. Philly, it’s Drexel. Unless you move the tournament to someplace like Des Moines, you haven’t solved the core problem of somebody playing close to home.
Leadership rule #1 states: do what’s best for the collective group you are charged with leading. Richmond allows for a tremendous Virginia Advantage: VCU, JMU, W&M, Mason, Towson, and Old Dominion can all travel with roughly two hours. That’s half the conference. When it won, UNCW “traveled well.”
I also wonder if VCU was, say, Towson, if everybody would be up in arms as much. And that brings me to a side note.
It is clearly an advantage to have loud home fans, but teams have to perform. VCU did not build a big lead on Old Dominion because of the large crowd. They buildt a big lead on Old Dominion because they pressed and made steals and hit threes.
Likewise, the crowd didn’t bring ODU back. The Monarchs won that game because they switched to a zone VCU never figured out, and Gerald Lee won the MVP award on the strength of his second half performance.
In eight of the last nine years, the #1 seed has won the CAA tournament. The lone year was 2008 when Mason as a three seed beat five seed William & Mary. Eight of nine.
Want more? Since 1990, the #1 seed has reached the CAA championship game 17 times out of 21 tournaments. The #1 seed has a 12-5 record in those 17 games.
As for VCU, the Rams have reached the championship game six times and are 4-2 in those games. All four times VCU won the championship it was the #1 seed (1996, 2004, 2007 and 2009). VCU was the #3 seed in 2002 and lost to #1 UNCW and were the #2 seed in 2005 and lost to #1 Old Dominion. (We can all agree on what a great basketball game that was.)
VCU has a 20-4 record when playing lower seeds in the tournament and are 3-7 when facing higher-seeded teams.
Yes, the location makes it tougher on the northern (and southern) schools. But there’s one correlation I keep going back to: Northeastern used to bring about 25 fans. Then, they started winning. This year, they had two full student busses and about 500 fans. Hofstra’s numbers in 2006 were far greater than this year. Everybody was pleased to see the turnout for William & Mary. On the other side, UNCW used to bring several thousand fans, and now a UNCW game is church-like.
Common theme: win games and the people will show. That includes VCU.
Now, let’s say we do move the tournament. Call it The Palestra in Philly. You bet your bippy that VCUs 8,000 fans becomes about 4,000 fans. (Don’t argue specific numbers—this is an abstraction.) Old Dominion travels by half as well.
In fact, the 42,000+ that were in Richmond this past week is cut by half, which cuts the vibe you felt all weekend by tenfold. If you were there, you felt it. You know it was impressive, and made it that much more fun.
Take a gander at some of these other tournaments. I did, taking special note of the crowd and the feel. The Summit and Sun Belt finals looked downright awful and boring.
You’re telling me it’s smart to move the tourney, lose the money, lose the branding/national appeal, lose the attendance, losr the vibe, and jeopardize funding of other, non-revenue sports, all in the name of appeasing 200 Hofstra fans and 100 Drexel fans? Or in the name of a vocal minority who want better restaurants?
It isn’t what you gain, it’s what you lose. It’s called opportunity cost.
Rotating the location has been brought up. Seems decent on the surface, but at the mid major level traction is a very important concept. We don’t have a ton of transient or casual fans.
The CAA has that very important traction in Richmond. You need a home, and place that is familiar for people—fans, teams, administrators, etc. Fans are more likely to return once they have a lay of the land and establish their patterns.
Where was last year’s ACC tournament held? This year’s? Next year’s? The year after that? That’s my other point. You know where you’re going, when you’re going, where you’ll stay, eat, etc. That is very important. If you have an expectation based on history, you’re more likely to return and enjoy—do the things you liked, and eliminate those you didn’t.
I think what people are failing to see is that just because something is slanted towards one team/city, that doesn’t mean it’s the wrong answer. I also think most of the angst isn’t that the advantage exists, it’s that the advantage doesn’t slant their way.
The Richmond Coliseum is a dump, and there’s nothing to do in Richmond.
Okay, you got me with the dump thing. That building needs major help or a wrecking ball. But can we all agree it’s the right size?
I’ve lived in Richmond since 1986 (sans two years), and the “nothing to do” line is baloney. I’d also argue you don’t need as much to do as you think.
If you’re a student or young adult, there’s a sports bar on site at the Marriott complete with basketball fans eager to do the fan thing. You know, the banter you saw and participated in this year.
Shockoe Bottom and that whole club scene is close by, as are middle of the road places like Captial Ale House. For the older or family set, there’s a Children’s Museum, Science Museum, Lewis Ginter Botanical Gardens, malls, movies, golf, etc.
Shoot, getting here is easy. The Richmond airport is as difficult to navigate as second grade math, and the train station dumps you eight blocks from the Coliseum. Comparatively speaking, hotels are pretty darned cheap.
I’d argue what you want is an agreeable meal, a cold beer, a decent wine list, and good company, preferably those who talk basketball. That’s what you get. If you’re going out to two restaurants/bars, does matter if there are 15 or 50 to choose from?
A friend told me a story that galvanizes this: A group of eight went to a restaurant fairly close to the Coliseum. (Immediate seating with a large group on weekend night–unrealized bonus.) Unsolicited, the server asked if they were in town for the tournament.
They said yes, and the server/manager said it’s a great event, but they can’t really capitalize on it because most of the people who go aren’t going to drop a ton of money on dinner with so much basketball going on.
My friend said that the local businesses and restaurants all asked if they were in town for the tournament. They knew about the tournament as fans from schools visited those places during the tourney.
So inasmuch as you being familiar with Richmond, Richmond becomes familiar with you. And that increases your experience.
It’s also this: yes, there are cities with better restaurants, more to do, nicer faclilities, etc. But (1) do you access—really access—all that stuff, or is it nice to talk about? (2) Does it make your arena/basketball experience (you know, the reason you are there) any better?
I’d say marginally. Think about what you are sacrificing for a “better building.” Richmond has what you want. I think there’s a difference in what you say you want to do and what you actually do.
Every year people have a venue answer based on nothing but geography. Nobody has ever put in the time to give a complete answer. “Baltimore’s inner harbor is better because it has better restaurants, a better bar scene, and a better venue.” Congratulations, you are 10% complete.
It’s like the transition from assistant coach to head coach. The difference in making suggestions and making decisions is a lot greater than moving three seats down on the bench. Finding the right place for the CAA tournament is far bigger than picking a building.
***
All that said, commentor Metsox, an all around good guy and smart guy, brings up a very salient point. If the conference truly wishes to embrace this Boston to Atlanta thing, they are going to have to do a better job marketing themselves in cities like Philadelphia.
I agree. The schools certainly need to do their share, but I believe the conference’s job is to make it easy for for them.
Metsox is also right in that it is a mistake to not try to make things better. That accepting things as they are and trying to make the same things just percentage points better is a losing strategy. We are in a world where tomorrow’s version of today is terribly shortsighted and lazy.
All I’m saying is that the conference tournament is not where that needs to occur. How do you defend yourself if it were to fail and Your School’s baseball or lacrosse or women’s basketball were on the chopping block?
Perhaps some of the crazy ideas you read here aren’t as crazy as they appear. Put a preseason conference kickoff in Philadelphia. Dump Bracketbusters and put everybody in one place for Feb 20 and Feb 23 games. Heck they could all ride the trains down together and we’d have a CAAravan that winds up in Richmond.
If indeed Richmond is the great money-maker—and it is—then take some of that money and create something college basketball has not seen. There is an answer, and it takes guts.
Taking the tournament out of Richmond isn’t that answer. At the mid major level, economics takes on a heightened importance.
I close with this: Jerry Beach of Defiantly Dutch was one of the naysayers. He wrote frequently of southern bias and of the pain of the Virginia league.
Then, he came here and experienced it.