03-18-2013, 11:47 AM
Actually, one rumor I've heard is that the reason they haven't announced the sites for next year is that they're going to try to move back to the top 16 hosting the first two rounds, where possible. Normally, the sites for next year would've been announced by now. Trying to deal with the issues of pre-determined host sites without a local draw (Colombus may be one this year; Notre Dame will probably get sent there, but probably won't draw a brobdingnagian crowd), and also with the inherent problem of lower-seeded teams being given a brobdingnagian advantage against teams who have earned an advantage throughout the season. This year, nearly half of the sites will have a lower seed hosting or no host. Offhand, Iowa City, Spokane, Baton Rouge, Lubbock and Queens are sites where the hosts have no realistic shot at being top-4 seeds, and Boulder, Newark DE, College Park and Louisville are iffy (as in, the host is either on the 4 or 5 line, or in the case of Colorado, may be given a procedural bump up from a 6 seed to a 5 to make the bracket work).
It's especially a bummer because other Pac-12 and West Coast sites rarely or never get their act together to bid for a hosting slot, with the exceptions of Stanford and the Zags. If Gonzaga gets to both host a sub-regional AND feed into the Spokane regional again (as a projected 11 seed), I'd cry foul if I was the #3 sent there (as UCLA was a couple of years ago).
VG
It's especially a bummer because other Pac-12 and West Coast sites rarely or never get their act together to bid for a hosting slot, with the exceptions of Stanford and the Zags. If Gonzaga gets to both host a sub-regional AND feed into the Spokane regional again (as a projected 11 seed), I'd cry foul if I was the #3 sent there (as UCLA was a couple of years ago).
VG
