Jump to content
Head Coach Openings 2024 ×
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $2,716 of $3,600 target

Forget Seeding ... how about NEUTRAL SITE Regional and Semi-States please!


Recommended Posts

On 10/9/2020 at 2:38 PM, Indiana Fan said:

How about places like Ball State, Butler, IU, Purdue? Depending on if those schools have games on that weekend or what their stipulations would be. I am a supporter of neutral site Regional and Semi State games. Makes it feel like a bigger deal and if the IHSAA really wants an "equal" playing ground then this is it.

There could be a significant cost to do this.  There's usually several playoff games at Baylor's stadium every year.  I can tell you there's only been two or three 4A teams play there, the rest are 5A & 6A.  One 4A team (a friend's son's school) might not do it again because of cost.  The other 4A is a perennial deep playoff/state champ powerhouse whose program has super deep pockets.  The balance are large schools with more to spend.  Might be a fun experience for them and maybe a nice idea for the big boys, but I can't see many 4A, or any classes below, wanting to cough up that kind of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Duke of Denham said:

In the example, North Judson would have played LCC at Logansport.  It’s a nice field don’t get me wrong, but it ain’t the Brickie Bowl.  The facility at North Judson is significantly bigger with more space for additional seating.  The home and away stands are just as big.  When Judson hosts a regional they typically bring in additional stands for the endzones   Also, to drive to Logansport on a bus isn’t that much shorter of a distance than to just drive to Lafayette.  I would know I drive it all the time.  Hosting a regional or semi state also means an influx of revenue for your town for that evening.  Fast food, restaurants and bars all see the windfall of additional people in town for a few hours.  All that revenue should go to a bigger town and not help either school?  I might be a homer, but from an economic standpoint it’s a terrible idea.  Why should some other town receive the benefits of the success of some school 45 minutes away? 

Yep, I get that. I'm not so bullish on turf for the regionals being a requirement. Heck not sure I like having it be a mandate at all. I do however favor the neutral sites for regionals & semi states. I could handle not having neutral sites for regionals. Your example with my reasoning would have had it at Twin Lakes or North White depending on the size of the venues. Guessing Twin Lakes may have more seating but I could be wrong and definitely not sure how it compares to NJSP seating. I do know that I wouldn't want it to be played at LCC's field. It looks like a baseball diamond turned into a football field 😆.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hhpatriot04 said:

Basketball makes it work. Are all the regional and semistate hosts at schools which would feed into those rounds? For instance, Washington hosts a 3A basketball regional, but it's the same regional they would play in if they win sectional.

 

5 hours ago, Basementbias said:

I wonder if it's not happened yet where a school would host but have their team at another site. I'm guessing that the IHSAA made it so that the schools hosting are only hosting their class or their class and another.

Frankfort has hosted a 1A boys basketball regional while playing in a 3A regional at another site (Greencastle).  

Richmond was supposed to host a semi-state several years ago but they were not allowed to play at their home site.  So they gave up the semi-state and Southport hosted while Richmond played at Seymour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will NEVER be neutral site regional and semistate playoffs because the IHSAA needs to make money and making both teams travel will limit the amount of people who will attend. 

Why make 2 teams travel when only one has to.?

 

And who will pay the neutral site to host.  No neutral school is doing it for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oldunclemark said:

There will NEVER be neutral site regional and semistate playoffs because the IHSAA needs to make money and making both teams travel will limit the amount of people who will attend. 

Why make 2 teams travel when only one has to.?

 

And who will pay the neutral site to host.  No neutral school is doing it for free.

So, you think neutral sites designed to roughly equalize travel for both teams will result in lower attendance? I daresay there is a responsible opposing viewpoint. 

Schools that host tournament games are reimbursed their expenses even if their team is playing in the game. That’s no barrier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

There will NEVER be neutral site regional and semistate playoffs because the IHSAA needs to make money and making both teams travel will limit the amount of people who will attend. 

Why make 2 teams travel when only one has to.?

 

And who will pay the neutral site to host.  No neutral school is doing it for free.

I would never say never.  There are so many non fans who attend games once their teams are eliminated that I wouldn't worry about crowds.  In the later rounds, everyone is on the bandwagon, no matter where the game is played.

I think the neutral site could benefit from concession sales.  That should cover any of their expenses in hosting a game or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

There will NEVER be neutral site regional and semistate playoffs because the IHSAA needs to make money and making both teams travel will limit the amount of people who will attend. 

Why make 2 teams travel when only one has to.?

 

And who will pay the neutral site to host.  No neutral school is doing it for free.

Your claims assume that there are no other models to use as an example. 

1. If you use the IHSAA state basketball tournament as the example, EVERY round of the tournament is played at neutral sites. 

2. The hosting school keeps 100% of the concession revenue, which at a packed facility, which is hosting 4 schools rather than 2 is a considerable amount. 

3. Both teams travel because each team earned the right to play at that level and there should not be some type of home field advantage. 

4. There is a strong argument that attendance would/could be greater if each team has a similar distance to travel.  Plus you add in the interest of fans whose teams are no longer playing, that will want to attend the games between two high level teams.

There are plenty of benefits to playing neutral site games.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, eschnur66 said:

1. If you use the IHSAA state basketball tournament as the example, EVERY round of the tournament is played at neutral sites. 

I attended twenty or so years, pre-class basketball, of sectionals at Memorial Gymnasium in Kokomo.   I would call that venue, while certainly one of Indiana's basketball palaces,  anything but "neutral".  From the allocation of tickets to the officiating..................

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Muda69 said:

I attended twenty or so years, pre-class basketball, of sectionals at Memorial Gymnasium in Kokomo.   I would call that venue, while certainly one of Indiana's basketball palaces,  anything but "neutral".  From the allocation of tickets to the officiating..................

 

Touche ... There are certainly exceptions, and most of those are at the sectional level.  Beyond the sectional, sites are "mostly" completely neutral.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

There will NEVER be neutral site regional and semistate playoffs because the IHSAA needs to make money and making both teams travel will limit the amount of people who will attend. 

Why make 2 teams travel when only one has to.?

 

And who will pay the neutral site to host.  No neutral school is doing it for free.

Hosting school keeps 100% of concession profits, which for bigger schools with large crowds could be substantial.

IHSAA gets half of the gate, the other half goes to the host school.  I believe the two schools playing also might pony up a little cash to the host, IIRC.

If your schools fans are "true" fans, IMHO they will travel well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bonecrusher said:

Hosting school keeps 100% of concession profits, which for bigger schools with large crowds could be substantial.

IHSAA gets half of the gate, the other half goes to the host school.  I believe the two schools playing also might pony up a little cash to the host, IIRC.

If your schools fans are "true" fans, IMHO they will travel well.

True fans or stupid fans.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/13/2020 at 4:43 PM, Bobref said:

So, you think neutral sites designed to roughly equalize travel for both teams will result in lower attendance? I daresay there is a responsible opposing viewpoint. 

Schools that host tournament games are reimbursed their expenses even if their team is playing in the game. That’s no barrier.

Why would a nuetral site host? . The only reason to host is if you are playing.   The reimbursement does not always cover expenses, its my understanding. No one is volunteering to host a football playoff game. 

 And, trust me, many fans do not go to anything other than home games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Bonecrusher said:

Hosting school keeps 100% of concession profits, which for bigger schools with large crowds could be substantial.

IHSAA gets half of the gate, the other half goes to the host school.  I believe the two schools playing also might pony up a little cash to the host, IIRC.

If your schools fans are "true" fans, IMHO they will travel well.

B-Man. Many fans only go to home games. Its always been that way. Older fans, Kids. Some cant go to the game if they cant walk to the game because they cant drive.. 

And when its 45 degrees...lots of fans arent 'true fans'

...........Schools are not going to pay a neutral host to play away from home. If the 'home' school  split profits with the IHSAA (I've never heard that), why would they pay to play away from home?  

The IHSAA owns the state tournament. Why would they not want one team to be at home and sell out the building?

 

I was at Lowell at New Prairie a few years back. They played the regional the day after a 6-inch snowstorm.

The home grandstand was packed because old Russ Radtke and his boys were out shoveling the field them selves that morning. That does not happen at a neutral site.

You need a home team for a football playoff game in November.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, eschnur66 said:

Your claims assume that there are no other models to use as an example. 

1. If you use the IHSAA state basketball tournament as the example, EVERY round of the tournament is played at neutral sites. 

2. The hosting school keeps 100% of the concession revenue, which at a packed facility, which is hosting 4 schools rather than 2 is a considerable amount. 

3. Both teams travel because each team earned the right to play at that level and there should not be some type of home field advantage. 

4. There is a strong argument that attendance would/could be greater if each team has a similar distance to travel.  Plus you add in the interest of fans whose teams are no longer playing, that will want to attend the games between two high level teams.

There are plenty of benefits to playing neutral site games.

You cannot use the basketball tournament as an example. 2 different sports.  Basketball concessions take in far more than football, its my understanding.   Always.

   I guarantee you that many, many home fans are not going to semistate game on the road at night outdoors in November. 

 

You dont want playoff games in front of 1/3 filled large stadiums when a place like Pioneer would be packed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

Why would a nuetral site host? . The only reason to host is if you are playing.   The reimbursement does not always cover expenses, its my understanding. No one is volunteering to host a football playoff game. 

 And, trust me, many fans do not go to anything other than home games. 

 

34 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

B-Man. Many fans only go to home games. Its always been that way. Older fans, Kids. Some cant go to the game if they cant walk to the game because they cant drive.. 

And when its 45 degrees...lots of fans arent 'true fans'

...........Schools are not going to pay a neutral host to play away from home. If the 'home' school  split profits with the IHSAA (I've never heard that), why would they pay to play away from home?  

The IHSAA owns the state tournament. Why would they not want one team to be at home and sell out the building?

 

I was at Lowell at New Prairie a few years back. They played the regional the day after a 6-inch snowstorm.

The home grandstand was packed because old Russ Radtke and his boys were out shoveling the field them selves that morning. That does not happen at a neutral site.

You need a home team for a football playoff game in November.

 

29 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

You cannot use the basketball tournament as an example. 2 different sports.  Basketball concessions take in far more than football, its my understanding.   Always.

   I guarantee you that many, many home fans are not going to semistate game on the road at night outdoors in November. 

Your guarantees notwithstanding, and putting aside the whole issue of the advantage for the home team and whether that is fair or unfair, your entire case is built on the proposition that neutral site games attract fewer, not more, fans. Other than your sincerely held belief, do you have any support for that proposition? Because the prevalence of neutral site games in other states seems to suggest otherwise.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bobref said:

 

 

Your guarantees notwithstanding, and putting aside the whole issue of the advantage for the home team and whether that is fair or unfair, your entire case is built on the proposition that neutral site games attract fewer, not more, fans. Other than your sincerely held belief, do you have any support for that proposition? Because the prevalence of neutral site games in other states seems to suggest otherwise.

You are asking me to prove that neutral site games playoff games in November in Indiana would draw less but there are not (and have never been) any neutral site playoff games in November in this part of the state so I cant do that.. You've got me there. My case is built on my experience. I only know Indiana and I know how people get to games. They drive or they walk. You eliminate the walk ups if you play at a neutral site and many kids cant drive. They dont go. Its that simple.

100-year old folks (like me) in towns like Lowell and Crown Point go to the home games but not the road games. Some just cant get to road games. Some dont drive at night in bad weather. Some work Friday and cant get to road games at all. 

Do you accept that bad weather diminishes night time travel, especially by teenagers and old people?   That's my experience. I've been to regional games in Elkhart County involving teams from Lake County going back 20-30 years,. Crown Point and Lowell (which have very strong home followings) brought a fraction of their fan base to work night games in November .  Everybody does. 

Take my word for it. Neutral site playoff games would lower attendance from what would otherwise have been the 'home' team at November night games.  The IHSAA cant afford that so they would never consider this on a regular basis.

And never is a long, long time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

You are asking me to prove that neutral site games playoff games in November in Indiana would draw less but there are not (and have never been) any neutral site playoff games in November in this part of the state so I cant do that.. You've got me there. My case is built on my experience. I only know Indiana and I know how people get to games. They drive or they walk. You eliminate the walk ups if you play at a neutral site and many kids cant drive. They dont go. Its that simple.

100-year old folks (like me) in towns like Lowell and Crown Point go to the home games but not the road games. Some just cant get to road games. Some dont drive at night in bad weather. Some work Friday and cant get to road games at all. 

Do you accept that bad weather diminishes night time travel, especially by teenagers and old people?   That's my experience. I've been to regional games in Elkhart County involving teams from Lake County going back 20-30 years,. Crown Point and Lowell (which have very strong home followings) brought a fraction of their fan base to work night games in November .  Everybody does. 

Take my word for it. Neutral site playoff games would lower attendance from what would otherwise have been the 'home' team at November night games.  The IHSAA cant afford that so they would never consider this on a regular basis.

And never is a long, long time.

You have some good points here to consider. And while you can’t back up with unavailable statistics, others can’t prove otherwise.  Or maybe they have the proof. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet, many other states have used neutral sites in the upper levels of their playoffs, and somehow manage to draw big crowds outdoors in November. I guess Hoosiers are just different. What works other places cannot work here. We’re our own little world, I guess. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone has their own opinion, and they're all right, because it's just an opinion.

I think people would travel.  You don't always have to play on a Friday night.  There are Saturday during the day and night options available as well.  You could play 3-4 games on a Saturday.  That would probably help the host school make some concession money.

I know fans who won't drive 3 blocks in bad weather to sit out in the rain or cold, so using weather as an excuse doesn't really hold up.  There are also many schools I've visited where kids would have to walk 10 miles on country roads to get to the field, so a lot of schools don't have walkability.

Good points from both sides.  I would like to see it attempted.  You can't say it won't work if you don't at least give it a shot.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

No sir. Every school I have ever been to has kids who walk to the game because they are too young to drive..  Its high school

You should probably get out of the big city sometime, see what life is like in the heartland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I absolutely agree with this idea. It's absolutely ridiculous that a team with a dominating record or that has had a great season has to go to an opponent with a lesser record or a worse season's home field for a playoff game. The best teams should have earned the right to play at home in Sectional and then have neutral sites in the Regional and Semi-State.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...