CIT round 2 attendence

[WILDCAT]

I guess it's no wonder why the CIT gave us a round 3 game.


CIT round 2 attendence so far. (still two games to play)

Air Force @ Weber State- 6,113 :notworthy: :clap:
Rider @ East Carolina- 3,886
Illinois Chicago @ Northern Iowa- 3,025
Canisius @ Youngstown State- 2,596
Tulane @ Bradley- 1,897
Western Kentucky @ Evansville- 1,651

 

[Waldo2]

My understanding is that hosting a home game is ALL about $ and has nothing to do about seeding or RPI.
Case in point - USU last year. They had only won 16 games before the CIT yet played all games at home.
It's all about $

 

[weberwildcat]

sunday's game, kent state at loyola
Attendance: 747

 

[SWWeatherCat]

My understanding is that hosting a home game is ALL about $ and has nothing to do about seeding or RPI.
Case in point - USU last year. They had only won 16 games before the CIT yet played all games at home.
It's all about $

Unless the CIT isn't being truthful in their own 2013 tourney guide:
- "...teams will be bracketed geographically."
- "Participating teams must have at least a .500 record ..."
- "...the entire field will be bracketed and seeded after the first round."
- "Criteria for selection will include ... win loss record, strength of schedule, strength of conference, and final ten games"

I realize the last quote could be solely regarding the selection of tournament participants and not pairings each round, however, it would seem a little dumb to not try and maximize profit and excitement of your tournament by not bracketing teams in an attempt to produce more competitive and exciting games deeper into the tourney. Fortunately, Weber has a quality team on the court and potential for great attendance numbers, comparatively. In fact, Weber looks a little bit like that USU team in that their record and RPI offset a poor SOC and can draw a good crowd.