The NCAA News - News and Features

The NCAA News -- October 25, 1999

To be (pre)determined?

BY GARY T. BROWN
STAFF WRITER

"I've been one of the lucky few to participate in a final on a campus site and, honestly, I don't think anything can match that kind of an atmosphere, even if the crowd is against you."

Those words are from Bentley College women's basketball coach Barbara Stevens, who has taken her Falcons into Division II Women's Basketball Championship finals at hostile on-campus environments as well as at neutral sites. Though she has had success at both kinds of venues, Stevens will take a huge hostile crowd over a smaller, less enthusiastic one any time.

That's a choice, or at least a potential scenario, that has faced many a sports committee. Several championships, particularly in Divisions II and III, have relied upon on-campus crowds rooting the home team to make for an exciting atmosphere at the finals. But in order to grow the event, most committees believe that at some point the championship has to leave the nest, so to speak, to a predetermined site in order to provide both a level playing field and to spread the exposure. The risk, of course, is not getting the same kind of draw at a neutral site and thus taking away from the fervor and excitement that a raucous, packed house can provide.

"Certainly if there's an institution near a predetermined site that makes the field then it's an advantage for attendance," said Melanie Heitman-Nelson, assistant commissioner of the North Central Intercollegiate Athletic Conference and chair of the Division II Women's Basketball Committee. "On the other hand, at a campus site if the host institution is eliminated early in the Elite Eight then your attendance could suffer. There are chances you take with either option."

Determining what makes for the best championship experience is at the heart of a committee's decision to stay on campus or go to a neutral site. But are student-athletes best served with a big crowd and intense atmosphere or with an equal opportunity to win the event?

Some claim that anything but a predetermined, neutral site dampens the latter. In fact, so many Division II women's basketball coaches said so that the committee felt compelled to investigate a predetermined site.

After 10 years of campus crowds, the championship moved to Pine Bluff, Arkansas, for the 1998 season. Despite the community's efforts to raise the hype, the Women's Elite Eight suffered its lowest attendance for the final since 1990 and the second lowest of all time.

Of the eight-team field, only Arkansas Tech University was anything close to a "local" school, and the Golden Suns were ousted in the opening round. A total of 2,624 showed up for the final, a far cry from previous final-game crowds that had eclipsed 7,000 at campus sites.

Chicken or the egg?

The appeal of a neutral site has been the main attraction for the committee.

"We've been at a predetermined site for only two years," said Amy Frankenstein, NCAA assistant director of championships. "The attendance is nowhere near what it was when it was on campus, but the committee has felt that there's a distinct advantage to a host institution when the event is on-campus. The committee has taken the position that it wanted to put a little more neutrality in the tournament."

Tom Jacobs, senior assistant director of championships, said committees often are faced with the chicken-and-egg syndrome when considering moving from a campus site to a predetermined site.

"Do you wait until you have a significant amount of interest from people who approach you saying they'd like to host, or do you just decide you're going to do it and then start soliciting bids?" Jacobs said. "That's hard to determine."

Jacobs said from an administrative standpoint, the predetermined site allows the sports committee and the local organizing committee sometimes more than a full year to work out any logistical kinks and make sure that the facility is in top shape for the event. Jacobs said that is the top priority for championships administrators -- to ensure that the players have the best possible place to show their stuff.

"When you think of the student-athlete experience, the best experience student-athletes can have is playing in a top-notch facility in front of a packed house," Jacobs said. "Does that mean going to a nonpredetermined site where you're going to be on the campus of one of the participants, which in most cases ensures a pretty big crowd as long as the home team is still participating? But if that team gets eliminated, then sometimes the crowds aren't so good. Suddenly then, the atmosphere for the championship game isn't as great as it could have been."

Jacobs also said that a predetermined site can enhance the student-athlete experience in ways other than attendance. He said the time allotted to marketing and promoting the event and staging site visits to work out the bugs can do as much for participating teams as filling the house -- and if the event is promoted properly, more often than not the house will be full.

Advantages and disadvantages

All Division I championships have gone to predetermined sites, some that are determined years in advance and others that are determined with just a few months' notice. There are three nonpredetermined-site championships in Division II and six in Division III. The Division II men's and women's soccer championships committees have talked about a common predetermined site that would pair up with the Division I soccer championships for a festival-type weekend, much like in men's lacrosse, but talks haven't advanced to the proposal stage. And Division III softball actually rotates between campus and predetermined sites, playing in Salem, Virginia, every other year.

"But this past year," said Frankenstein, who helps administer the event, "attendance was larger than it's ever been because it was at Wisconsin-Eau Claire and they won some games."

But opponents of campus sites say the host has too much of an advantage and that the neutral site is the only way to ensure an equitable championship experience.

Not everybody agrees, however. Amy Ruley, women's basketball coach at North Dakota State University, says that hosting sometimes isn't the advantage that some believe it to be. And she has data to support her claim. Of the 10 Division II Women's Basketball Championships held on campus sites, only five hosts have won the title.

"It's tough to be the host," she said. "I don't know if it's as big of an advantage as people believe it to be. There's a lot of pressure when you're the host that you don't really anticipate until you're in it."

Ruley also said the players lose that travel experience and consequently the feel of the championship event. There is no reception at the airport, no welcoming committee and no change of pace from the regular class schedule or campus routine.

The best of both worlds would appear to be a neutral site with an energized crowd. In order to achieve that, however, the championship has to be at a point where it can attract not only whoever, but wherever.

"That's the key question," Jacobs said. "Is there significant fan interest that will draw a crowd regardless of who the four teams are? If a committee feels somewhat confident in that answer, then it's right to start exploring that possibility."

Then the teams can settle it from there.

"Maybe you have to give up something in order to gain," Stevens said. "And in an effort to make a truly national championship in which everyone has an equal shot, you do have to give up the campus-like atmosphere.

"But regardless, when it comes down to the last four teams, the best team is going to win, no matter where the games are played."

Division II Field Hockey

Division II Men's Soccer

Division II Women's Soccer

Division III Field Hockey

Division III Ice Hockey

Division III Women's Lacrosse

Division III Men's Soccer

Division III Women's Soccer

Division III Women's Volleyball

Division I Women's Soccer

Year Site (on-campus or predetermined) Attendance

1990 North Carolina (on campus) 3,200

1991 North Carolina (on campus) 3,800

1992 North Carolina (on campus) 3,573

1993 North Carolina (on campus) 5,721

1994 Portland (on campus) 5,000

1995 North Carolina (predetermined) 6,926

1996 Santa Clara (predetermined) 8,800

1997 North Carolina-Greensboro (predetermined) 9,460

1998 North Carolina-Greensboro (predetermined) 10,583

Division III Women's Volleyball

Year Site Championship-match participants Attendance

1990 Washington (Mo.) UC San Diego vs. Washington (Mo.) 3,417

1991 Washington (Mo.) Washington (Mo.) vs. UC San Diego 3,423

1992 Washington (Mo.) Washington (Mo.) vs. UC San Diego 3,024

1993 Juniata Washington (Mo.) vs. Juniata 1,325

1994 Ithaca Washington (Mo.) vs. Wis.-Oshkosh 600

1995 Wis.-Whitewater Washington (Mo.) vs. Cal Lutheran 884

1996 Wis.-Oshkosh Washington (Mo.) vs. Juniata 504

1997 UC San Diego UC San Diego vs. Juniata 1,335

1998 Juniata Central (Iowa) vs. UC San Diego 225

Division II Women's Soccer

Year Site Championship-match participants Attendance

1990 Barry Sonoma St. vs. Keene St. 148

1991 Cal St. Dom. Hills Cal St. Dom. Hills vs. Sonoma St. 832

1992 Adelphi Barry vs. Adelphi 551

1993 Barry Barry vs. Cal Poly 650

1994 Franklin Pierce Franklin Pierce vs. Regis (Colo.) 2,500

1995 Franklin Pierce Franklin Pierce vs. Barry 1,600

1996 Lynn Franklin Pierce vs. Lynn 1,214

1997 Cal St. Dom. Hills Franklin Pierce vs. West Va. Wesleyan 164

1998 Lynn Lynn vs. Sonoma St. 1,260