That said, I would like for you to keep your ears open all weekend and Monday for the double talk. I’ve reached the stage where this kind of stuff is entertaining to me, and you may as well do your best to enjoy it, too.

So my assignment is this: listen for the cliches and how they are applied to individual teams. It make for great fun. Here’s some things to look for:

If “Last 12″ doesn’t matter, listen for the number of times “the way they played in the conference tournament” is used. Let’s use Georgia Tech as the example. I’ve read many places and will be listening tomorrow for the “the win over North Carolina propelled them into the tournament, and the win over Maryland cemented it.”

That would be the #85 RPI North Carolina who went 4-12 in its last 16 games, and the Maryland team that lost, at home, to William & Mary.

And while we’re talking about the ACC and the Pugs, let’s put Virginia Tech and the Pugs next to each other. This one is the “who you play and where you play them” criteria:

RPI: VT (57), WM (58)

Record: VT (23-11), WM (21-10)

OOC record and SOS: VT 13-1 (#98); WM 7-3 (#13)

Road record: VT (6-5); WM (10-6)

Record, top 50: VT (3-4); WM (3-3)

Best wins: VT (home Clemson, home Wake); WM (at Maryland, at Wake, Richmond).

Best OOC wins: VT (Seton Hall-neutral, home Georgia); WM (see above).

And so that I’m not accused of picking on the ACC, let’s look at Minnesota here. The Gophers have been written off for three weeks. You’re telling me they are now in conversation due to one win over Michigan State who was without a star player?

Minnesota has an RPI of 73 and is 3-7 in road games. Just digest that and we’ll move on.

***

Next is the ye new “eyeball test.” If that is in effect, Wake Forest should be lucky to be chosen for a Wake Forest intrasquad scrimmage. They looked horrid and disinterested this past month.

Any of the SEC bubble teams are a bad choice. They define mediocre. If we’re going “body of work,” then Mississippi State’s losses to Rider and Western Kentucky have to come into play.

That’s it–I’m off to enjoy basketball. Just keep your ears open, laugh, and remember today’s reason why we have it better:

There’s no need to convince the world it isn’t seeing what it actually sees. We’re too smart for that.

***

As for the whole attendance argument, here’s what I believe firmly: a mid major conference does not have the zest it takes to capture the casual, walk up fan. These people just don’t exist in numbers, and this is a far more important point than agreeing to it.

The tournament has become an event in Richmond. Restaurant owners, bar owners, etc. all know it and reap the benefits. Not only does the city get involved and contribute money, so does the Virginia tourism department.

Just because the population base of the home city quadruples, it doesn’t strictly correlate to a greater walk up crowd. In fact, I’d argue your walk up crowd would be less. In these cities with pro sports and a multitude of other diversions, a mid major basketball tournament wouldn’t be much more than a calendar listing.

It’s the same non-attention fight Northeastern faces in Boston, Hofstra in New York, Drexel in Philadelphia. “I’m bringing the rest of the teams you don’t care about” isn’t exactly a crowd-drawing theme. This in turn devalues any sponsorship deal.

Or, let me put it this way to commentor Erik’s point. The top CAA teams in attendance this season: ODU, VCU, Mason, JMU, William & Mary, and UNCW. Towson, etc. doesn’t draw to its own home games–what makes you think they’d draw for the tournament?

Why would you move a tournament–one that is economic lifeblood–farther from that fan base?

MasonScott commented probably the most constructive idea I’ve heard: perhaps have the conference put up the money for a student bus to help alleviate the financial burden of getting fans to Richmond.

Monarch–I think you are probably dead on the mark with Scope being the only true alternative, in terms of facility. I wonder about getting away from the I-95 corridor for everybody, but that’s a level of detail not worth the discussion. My next statement is the one that frustrates people, but here’s where it belongs:

I’ll stipulate we will move the CAA tournament to Scope. Now, I need you to get after the city to offer Scope at a discounted rental rate, throw in cash, and whip the local businesses into the action. As I mentioned, picking the venue is step 1 of a 15 step process.

Sponsorship dollars is not as simple as asking for money. Just because the tournament moves to a big city, it doesn’t mean a sponsor will imediately sign up and provide big(ger) dollars. This isn’t 1998. Those kinds of discretionary income don’t exist.

I just need somebody to give me an argument that makes sense.

And so we’re clear in this entire discussion, I do believe the conference needs to go out of its way to ingratiate itself with the geographically outlying schools and their cities. I’m saying the conference tournament is not that means.

***

EDIT: as soon as I hit send I saw Ryan’s last comment in the original post In Defense of Richmond. Well done, Ryan, and I give you the same challenge I gave Monarch above:

Now that we’ve decided it’s a good idea to move it and we have the venue and a sound set of assumptions that we can all buy into, let’s get to work. Somebody go get the city council, somebody get the venue people, somebody get the sponsors, and somebody go get all the other folks.

All I’m saying is our great plan, no matter how much sense it makes, doesn’t mean the people that have to write the checks agree.

Richmond writes the checks.

The argument is as tired as it is silly. Every year many people talk about removing the CAA tournament from Richmond, and some media member decides it’s his job to refute the masses. This year it’s the Yeagerbomber, the Jamaican Patriot hater, the CAA frontman, The Sultan of the CAA South, Michael Litos himself who took the time. And I appreciate that with him comes a unique perspective, that of access and yet independence. He chose to disagree with my previous thoughts on the matter, and so he’s clearly completely wrong in everything that he said, except for the parts that were correct.

I know home court advantage when I see it. Because of this, I’m aware that VCU has a crazy homecourt advantage when playing on the CarMax Floor in the Verizon Wireless arena at the Seigel Center on Captain Planet Earth. I also know that VCU doesn’t appear to have a huge statistical advantage at the Richmond Colesium, just as Drexel doesn’t at the Palestra despite their fans traveling from four blocks away, or Northeastern playing at Agganis. So I don’t believe that being close to somewhere gives you home court advantage. But I do believe that being accessible to somewhere makes the tournament much more convenient for fan bases on both on a fiscal and time basis. It gives local schools an opportunity to shout from the rooftops that they’re a part of division 1, they can be a big fish in any size pond, and look how important they are on the college basketball scene. In competitive markets it is a chance to showcase a league that might not otherwise be seen by local officials and alumni, a chance to grow fan support at programs that don’t already sell out regularly. You don’t need to worry about homefield advantage on the court, but I don’t think anyone can deny that local programs can and will benefit from the tournament.

Quoting Mr. Litos:

“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.”

OK, but let’s follow that. What is the opportunity cost of having the tournament in the #61 media market instead of the #21? Sure, it’s cheaper for the tourney to advertise in Richmond… But it’s also cheaper for sponsors to advertise in Richmond. I am no specialist when it comes to advertising cost, but I think it’s a safe bet that a city such as Baltimore would demand additional sponsorship dollars for the league. The branding and national appeal you spoke of? The same TV networks will carry the games, and if nothing else MASN or Comcast might just pickup an additional round since a local game for them will be cheaper to produce. Furthermore, do you think the Army, Amtrak, or Aeropostale wouldn’t find advertising in Baltimore just as favorable if not moreso than advertising in Richmond?

As a matter of fact, the only economic argument against leaving Richmond, short of the cities bids (which I will touch on later) is ticket sales. They say that a little over 42,000 people were at the 6 sessions in Richmond this past weekend, no doubt assisted by the home team playing on Friday afternoon, usually an empty session. That’s approximately 7,000 people per session. Michael Litos says that 4,000 VCU fans would travel to Baltimore. Let’s take that down for purposes of realism and say that 3,000 fans travel. And 2,000 fans from Mason make the 59 mile drive, similar to the ODU fans drive to Richmond. That’s 5000 fans. The CAA mandates that each school buys a minimum number of tickets. I’m unsure of the number, but again lets err to the lower side… call it 100 tickets. So the other 10 schools have to buy 1,000 tickets combined. That’s 6,000 fans. So in order to make up the difference between Richmond and Baltimore, the CAA would need to draw an extra 1,000 fans per session from: The local Baltimore community. And the additional ODU, Drexel, Towson, UD, Hofstra, and NU fans beyond the 100 tickets that the schools are mandated to buy. Oh and the vastly increased alumni bases in the Baltimore/Washington area. All of this is rough numbers, the point is, how sure are we that ticket sales would decrease that monumentally by moving to a school that is within a 4 hour drive of 9 CAA member institutions (Richmond is within a 4 hour drive of 8 CAA schools). Everyone makes the assumption, but where is the evidence?

I won’t take the time to get into the Richmond Colesium vs 99% of other buildings on the East Coast, or in Port Au Prince. What I will speak to is that the city of Richmond is playing the same way the CAA is right now. They aren’t investing in doing things right, and as a result they aren’t able to keep pace with their competitors. The Richmond Braves realized this and left town, and if God hear’s my prayers, the CAA will do the same.

Once again quoting Mr. Litos:

“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.”

I’ll leave that alone, because no one with half a brain will argue the point that Inner Harbor is a more attractive tourist destination. And the Amtrak thing? It’s a great idea. Except have two northeast corridor trains, one from Boston and one from Newport News ODU, W&M, VCU, and Mason all on one, and NU, HU, DU, UD all on the other. How great would both of those trains be? In the words of Dick somebody, Rivalry City Baby! Especially if they can make one of the cars of the train a “family unfriendly” car. The only rule of fight club car, is no talking about fight club car.

In the end, the main reason not to move to Baltimore is becuase it’s harder. You need to put the legwork in to find new sponsors, you need to writeup new contracts and work with new people. Could you put on just as good of an event in a more tourist friendly city then Richmond? I believe you could. And I’m speaking out about this because I think that complacency should be fought every step of the way. When I asked one of the powers that be about bids, he said that if you want a city to bid, go after the city. He made it clear that the league simply had no interest in aggressively pursueing bids past sending out Requests for Proposals. I believe that when the “AE4″ joined the league, in order to save the CAA autobid, it was anticipated that the CAA would put some effort into returning that assistance. That effort that has seemed drastically understated since day one, especially when they spend money on commercials advertising the number of championships held inside the state of Virginia. That advertisement comes across as foolish, arrogant and out of touch in the northern media markets.

In these times no one can afford to get hosed financially, especially at a fundraiser like the tourney. However, if someone is willing to put the legwork in and do it right, I believe that there is every indication that the tourney can be successful in the Charm City, and increase exposure to the conference in an area that is vastly under served at the present time. All this while exposing the coaches, players, and school donors with vastly improved facilities. I feel that it’s high time that member institutions demand that CAA officials earn their salaries by taking a true, thorough look at other options such as Baltimore.

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.

Sleep would be nice, but that’s for another day. Right now I need to figure out who this Gerald Lee guy is. I hear he’s pretty good.

So we’ve been buried with that, as I chose to add another team this year. We’ll get to regular CAA programming tomorrow, which includes postseason info, and why it’s stupid to take the CAA tournament out of Richmond.

Until then, I highly suggest getting a copy of the Blue Ribbon postseason guide. Here’s why: you can read the three-inch box in USA Today with nothing but stats, or you can read 1,500 words on all 65 teams.

The tournament edition features a season wrap-up and tournament outlook and a full page of statistics and tournament history. There’s blank brackets and predictions.

Reserve your copy now here or call 1-877-807-4857 from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Monday through Friday.

Congrats to Old Dominion–it isn’t easy to be predicted first, finish first, and then win the tournament.

We’ll catch up later today, but as for now enjoy the highlight reel from last night:

Seven of the last eight CAA tournaments have been won by the #1 seed. The only holdout: 2008, when #3 George Mason beat #5 William & Mary.

Last night, William & Mary didn’t have a double-figures scorer in its victory over Northeastern. The Pugs were led by Danny Sumner’s eight points (”Congratulations Danny,” said David Schneider in last night’s press conference.)

Tony Shaver used this fact to say that his bunch is probably not as talented as Old Dominion, but he likes their ability to play as a team. After Sumner, five players scored six or seven points against the Huskies.

One of those players was Quinn McDowell, who has been blanketed in his two Richmond games. The conference’s leading three-point gunner has scored 16 total points on 1-6 shooting from beyond the arc. Prior to getting off teh bus in Richmond, McDowell had not been held to less than double figures points in back-to-back games this season. Keep an eye on that.

The ODU winning scenario played out on February 3. The Monarchs pounded the glass, winning the battle 48-25 and reeling in 23 offensive rebounds. When the Monarchs play ping pong on the offensive glass, they don’t lose. Plus, ODU shot 40% from the field and took care of the basketball (11 turnovers).

We stated it before but it bears repeating: once Old Dominion gets the ball to its post player, it’s too late. Gerald Lee is too skilled and Frank Hassell too workmanlike. Somebody is shooting from close, and the other guys are crashing the boards.

Look at it this way: when was the last time you can remember ODU successfully throwing a pass on the block, and then it came back out for an open three? It wasn’t this weekend. You’d think Old Dominion would fire away at will from the arc, with the double teaming and focus inside. But they don’t. Perhaps a conference-worst 30.1% from three is why. This is further testament to ODUs interior strength.

You have to make life difficult for the ODU guards–make their passes difficult–or you are toast. It will interesting to see how this plays out tonight. Brian Mull pointed out during the Northeastern game that on many possessions, William & Mary had four players operating around the foul line and key. The Pugs were giving away the baseline in order to stop the dribble drives and outside shots.

How W&Ms nasty combination zone, man-to-man, matchup zone defense alters ODUs offensive flow is what I’m watching. (Wasn’t there an amoeba defense somebody ran at one point? I’ll have to look that up.) This is of course, after rebounding.

In the January meeting, The Pugs held their own on the backboards. ODU won the battle only 40-32 and grabbed just 14 offensive rebounds. ODU shot about the same percentage from the field in each game, but the Monarchs took 60 field goals and 18 free throws in the blowout, and 55 shots and 11 free throws in the close game. That may not seem like much, but a 40%FG and 75%FT accuracy would net ODU another 12 points.

The Pugs also hit 10 threes in that game.

Tony Shaver won’t mince words: they have to shoot the three well to win. We all know that. In fact, ODU underscores the importance of that. The Monarchs hit three threes against VCU, two of which won’t be forgotten: we’re talking to you Marsharee Neely and Ben Finney. But there was teh VCU bombs that kept them in it, and David Schneider’s only bucket last night.

Hanging tough early is also important. As we’ve mentioned, more than one coach told me this year the problem with playing The Pugs is that they come out of the locker room and play harder. You get just a smidgen fatigued, lose a tiny bit of focus, and a Pug is backdoor for a layup. Or gets just enough daylight for a three.

I have to wonder if the Monarchs will start a little starstruck, which helps keep W&M close early. Then, a little late fatigue. This is the ultimate goober “game-within-a-game” stuff.

And I note: if ODU gets running early and beating up the glass, all that is off the board.

The two teams played twice during the regular season.

Old Dominion 58, @W&M 55 (1/23)

@Old Dominion 61, W&M 42 (2/3)

• William & Mary has defeated 10 of the other 11 CAA teams this season. The lone holdout: Old Dominion.
• ODU outrebounded W&M 88-57 in the two games.
• W&M 15-55 threes in the two games.
• W&M has three players who were contributors n the 2008 final. ODU last played in the CAA finals in 2005.
• Unknown weapon: Frank Hassell was a combined 10-11 from the field and made all six free throws in the regular season meetings.
• Both teams take care of the basketball: ODU leads the conference in assist-to-turnover ratio (1.31/1), and W&M leads in turnover rate (16.8%). ODU forces the most turnovers in the conference (14.1)
• W&M is a prolific three shooting team, and ODU was second in the conference in three point FG defense (30.7%).