03-11-2013, 09:02 PM
I must say, this discussion has been the best that I've seen about the game, at a high level and not devolving into just cheering for our team and the players. That's what I appreciate in this group, even if some of you don't see the absolute truth (as I see it ;-). But what else would I expect from people that are mostly Stanford grads.
I'm glad the tournament did ok in Seattle. Did anyone on this board go to see the games? How was it there?
From the TV pictures, it looked like maybe 2000-3000 people in attendance for the final. I certainly don't think it was the nearly 4000 that was listed in the stats. No attendance listed on our first game, but the later game was listed as 5500 in attendance. The section behind one basket, behind the band, had approximately 20 people in it (just before half time) in the first 21 rows. Hey, at least the Cardinal gets to see the stands filled with red (chairs). The semis list an unbelievable attendance of nearly 7000, but when I look at the the crowd at one end-zone and one side (during replay of Amber's drive, at 16:15 in the first), I'd say it looks considerably less. Maybe 2500-3000. I guess they count the people whose teams aren't playing and aren't there in the "attendance".
I guess that's a lot better than they were getting in L.A.
Of course, Larry Scott declared it a success and they're discussing making it permanent. (Why do I feel this is from a post-dated release that was prepared prior to the actual tournament?) I would like to point out that you don't yet know that they got the "crowds" because the tournament was a novelty, or the "crowds" were down because they haven't established a fan base. I think the "crowds" may actually depend more upon the current airfare from the bay area.
I know we had the tournament for a number of years in San Jose. To be honest, I don't really remember whether SJ had more people in the stands (I think so, but then I went to the Stanford games, not some team from the north vs some team from the south). But I don't like the idea of giving one or two teams a permanent advantage in the tournament. Not to mention the embarrassment to the league if attendance falls and the league is stuck with a long term commitment, as happened with LA (but maybe it never fell there but was always low).
----
I thought about the meaning of the tournament to the Stanford players as it turned out, versus what their mental state would be if we had breezed through it. I suspect they have more of a feeling of accomplishment, having come from behind to win. I don't know that their confidence is any better (I would think there would be more "We can be beat" dark thoughts lurking), but I guess if they come up against this in the NCAA tourney, they may handle it better than otherwise. I suspect it means we are less likely to get surprised early in the tourney by a team with a good plan, and some sort of issue with the team.
I wish the PAC-12 tournament was Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday, so you don't have that 3 (or 4!) day straight run. College age kids should be able to handle the exertion, but the extra day would surely be a blessing for injuries. In NCAAs, you have at most 2 games in any 5 day span, so the conference tournament is more intensity in a short time.
---
Re DST.... I hope that the coaching staff told the team, "Don't change anything in your habits; don't change your clocks until Sunday night. Just know the game is at 4PM PST and be ready to play all out then."  I really doubt the DST change had any effect on the team.
It is too bad that once you get to tournament time, your whole season can be lost by a bug sweeping through the team. I can't see any way to avoid that, so you just have to stay well.
I'm glad the tournament did ok in Seattle. Did anyone on this board go to see the games? How was it there?
From the TV pictures, it looked like maybe 2000-3000 people in attendance for the final. I certainly don't think it was the nearly 4000 that was listed in the stats. No attendance listed on our first game, but the later game was listed as 5500 in attendance. The section behind one basket, behind the band, had approximately 20 people in it (just before half time) in the first 21 rows. Hey, at least the Cardinal gets to see the stands filled with red (chairs). The semis list an unbelievable attendance of nearly 7000, but when I look at the the crowd at one end-zone and one side (during replay of Amber's drive, at 16:15 in the first), I'd say it looks considerably less. Maybe 2500-3000. I guess they count the people whose teams aren't playing and aren't there in the "attendance".
I guess that's a lot better than they were getting in L.A.
Of course, Larry Scott declared it a success and they're discussing making it permanent. (Why do I feel this is from a post-dated release that was prepared prior to the actual tournament?) I would like to point out that you don't yet know that they got the "crowds" because the tournament was a novelty, or the "crowds" were down because they haven't established a fan base. I think the "crowds" may actually depend more upon the current airfare from the bay area.
I know we had the tournament for a number of years in San Jose. To be honest, I don't really remember whether SJ had more people in the stands (I think so, but then I went to the Stanford games, not some team from the north vs some team from the south). But I don't like the idea of giving one or two teams a permanent advantage in the tournament. Not to mention the embarrassment to the league if attendance falls and the league is stuck with a long term commitment, as happened with LA (but maybe it never fell there but was always low).
----
I thought about the meaning of the tournament to the Stanford players as it turned out, versus what their mental state would be if we had breezed through it. I suspect they have more of a feeling of accomplishment, having come from behind to win. I don't know that their confidence is any better (I would think there would be more "We can be beat" dark thoughts lurking), but I guess if they come up against this in the NCAA tourney, they may handle it better than otherwise. I suspect it means we are less likely to get surprised early in the tourney by a team with a good plan, and some sort of issue with the team.
I wish the PAC-12 tournament was Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday, so you don't have that 3 (or 4!) day straight run. College age kids should be able to handle the exertion, but the extra day would surely be a blessing for injuries. In NCAAs, you have at most 2 games in any 5 day span, so the conference tournament is more intensity in a short time.
---
Re DST.... I hope that the coaching staff told the team, "Don't change anything in your habits; don't change your clocks until Sunday night. Just know the game is at 4PM PST and be ready to play all out then."  I really doubt the DST change had any effect on the team.
It is too bad that once you get to tournament time, your whole season can be lost by a bug sweeping through the team. I can't see any way to avoid that, so you just have to stay well.



