Is anyone a fan of the 2-site regional format?

If ideal locations were chosen, then it wouldn't be a bad idea, imo.

But it seems like those in charge do not take the fans into consideration as much as they should, when determining which cities to target for bids.

This year, the 2 host cities are Fort Worth and Sacramento.

Seems like more appealing cities/locations could have been chosen for this year.

If you're not gonna do that, then you should just go back to the 4-city model, as you're more likely to have better attendance across the board.

While Fort Worth is a semi-decent spot for this year, given its proximity to schools such as Texas, TCU, OU, Baylor, and Texas Tech - Sacramento is doing no one any favors, and attendance there will probably be poor.

Next year's sites include Las Vegas and Philly.

Thumbs up on Vegas, thumbs down on Philly (unless you're catering strictly to UCONN fans).

2028 is even more meh: Portland and DC

I think the women's game would be best served by going back to the 4-city setup and rotating the regional sites to appealing destinations - where a good number of fanbases can attend within reason, and that can also be appealing to fans of the game in general.

I'd target the following cities:

Southwest: Dallas, San Antonio, Houston
Southeast: Atlanta, New Orleans, Charlotte
West: Las Vegas, Los Angeles
Midwest: Indianapolis, Chicago, Kansas City
East: NYC area, DC

All of the above cities are appealing sites, and would be easily accessible for many of the Top 25 fan bases.

If you're gonna stick with the 2-site plan moving forward, then maybe throw Vegas into the mix much more often.

blackie said:

---

Amazing that it isn't within 50 miles of Storrs. That seemingly used to be the prime consideration.....how to give UConn 4 home games to get to the FF.....as if they needed the help.

---

Yea. The fact UCONN has to travel at all is shocking.

I think cities bid. And hosting these tournaments can be extremely expensive. And needs to be fer enough away from men regional locations to not conflict or create travel issues.

LTBear19 said:

---

Is anyone a fan of the 2-site regional format?

If ideal locations were chosen, then it wouldn't be a bad idea, imo.

But it seems like those in charge do not take the fans into consideration as much as they should, when determining which cities to target for bids.

This year, the 2 host cities are Fort Worth and Sacramento.

Seems like more appealing cities/locations could have been chosen for this year.

If you're not gonna do that, then you should just go back to the 4-city model, as you're more likely to have better attendance across the board.

While Fort Worth is a semi-decent spot for this year, given its proximity to schools such as Texas, TCU, OU, Baylor, and Texas Tech - Sacramento is doing no one any favors, and attendance there will probably be poor.

Next year's sites include Las Vegas and Philly.

Thumbs up on Vegas, thumbs down on Philly (unless you're catering strictly to UCONN fans).

2028 is even more meh: Portland and DC

I think the women's game would be best served by going back to the 4-city setup and rotating the regional sites to appealing destinations - where a good number of fanbases can attend within reason, and that can also be appealing to fans of the game in general.

I'd target the following cities:

Southwest: Dallas, San Antonio, Houston
Southeat: Atlanta, New Orleans, Charlotte
West: Las Vegas, Los Angeles
Midwest: Indianapolis, Chicago, Kansas City
East: NYC area, DC

All of the above cities are appealing sites, and would be easily accessible for many of the Top 25 fan bases.

If you're gonna stick with the 2-site plan moving forward, then maybe throw Vegas into the mix much more often.

---

This omits what to me has been the most fun site…Tampa.

Chibears2 said:

---

LTBear19 said:

---

Is anyone a fan of the 2-site regional format?

If ideal locations were chosen, then it wouldn't be a bad idea, imo.

But it seems like those in charge do not take the fans into consideration as much as they should, when determining which cities to target for bids.

This year, the 2 host cities are Fort Worth and Sacramento.

Seems like more appealing cities/locations could have been chosen for this year.

If you're not gonna do that, then you should just go back to the 4-city model, as you're more likely to have better attendance across the board.

While Fort Worth is a semi-decent spot for this year, given its proximity to schools such as Texas, TCU, OU, Baylor, and Texas Tech - Sacramento is doing no one any favors, and attendance there will probably be poor.

Next year's sites include Las Vegas and Philly.

Thumbs up on Vegas, thumbs down on Philly (unless you're catering strictly to UCONN fans).

2028 is even more meh: Portland and DC

I think the women's game would be best served by going back to the 4-city setup and rotating the regional sites to appealing destinations - where a good number of fanbases can attend within reason, and that can also be appealing to fans of the game in general.

I'd target the following cities:

Southwest: Dallas, San Antonio, Houston
Southeat: Atlanta, New Orleans, Charlotte
West: Las Vegas, Los Angeles
Midwest: Indianapolis, Chicago, Kansas City
East: NYC area, DC

All of the above cities are appealing sites, and would be easily accessible for many of the Top 25 fan bases.

If you're gonna stick with the 2-site plan moving forward, then maybe throw Vegas into the mix much more often.

---

This omits what to me has been the most fun site…Tampa.

---

Tampa is a great Final 4 site.

Not so sure about it being a great regional site though, as it's still a good piece away from most of the key contenders.

This pertains to most of the Florida sites, actually.

LTBear19 said:

---

Chibears2 said:

---

LTBear19 said:

---

Is anyone a fan of the 2-site regional format?

If ideal locations were chosen, then it wouldn't be a bad idea, imo.

But it seems like those in charge do not take the fans into consideration as much as they should, when determining which cities to target for bids.

This year, the 2 host cities are Fort Worth and Sacramento.

Seems like more appealing cities/locations could have been chosen for this year.

If you're not gonna do that, then you should just go back to the 4-city model, as you're more likely to have better attendance across the board.

While Fort Worth is a semi-decent spot for this year, given its proximity to schools such as Texas, TCU, OU, Baylor, and Texas Tech - Sacramento is doing no one any favors, and attendance there will probably be poor.

Next year's sites include Las Vegas and Philly.

Thumbs up on Vegas, thumbs down on Philly (unless you're catering strictly to UCONN fans).

2028 is even more meh: Portland and DC

I think the women's game would be best served by going back to the 4-city setup and rotating the regional sites to appealing destinations - where a good number of fanbases can attend within reason, and that can also be appealing to fans of the game in general.

I'd target the following cities:

Southwest: Dallas, San Antonio, Houston
Southeat: Atlanta, New Orleans, Charlotte
West: Las Vegas, Los Angeles
Midwest: Indianapolis, Chicago, Kansas City
East: NYC area, DC

All of the above cities are appealing sites, and would be easily accessible for many of the Top 25 fan bases.

If you're gonna stick with the 2-site plan moving forward, then maybe throw Vegas into the mix much more often.

---

This omits what to me has been the most fun site…Tampa.

---

Tampa is a great Final 4 site.

Not so sure about it being a great regional site though, as it's still a good piece away from most of the key contenders.

This pertains to most of the Florida sites, actually.

---

Yes. Good point. I read thread but was thinking of FF for Tampa. Regionals need to be regional. But when conversation was about destination spots, Tampa popped into my head.