NCAA South Regional Tickets - Discounted
- Thread starter Sawyer
- Start date
I bought some last year thinking that Louisville might get placed there for the regional in hope that they would get to the second weekend (this was before the ban of course). I was lucky enough to sell mine as soon as the put the ban in place and get full value for my tickets. I heard people saying they went on Thursday and Saturday for like $19 a ticket. Glad I got out when I did.
Even if they hadn't taken a ban, Louisville wouldn't have been eligible to play in the south region.
Uh, if they would have gotten a high enough seed they would have been. Go back to your board with your nonsense. The women just played two games in the Yum for the tourney.
That's not correct sir. But if you think you're right, I guess that's all that matters.
The Cat fan is right on this one. In the men's tourney you cannot play in your home arena before the final four. Since they only play final fours in football stadiums now that can't even happen. If Louisville had been a one seed this year they would have been sent to the next closest regional (Chicago this year).
In the women's tournament they want to encourage bigger crowds so they let you play in your home arena the first two weekends. Top four seeds in each regional get to host first and second round games.
I bought two tickets to the South Regional hoping UK or IU would get sent there. Lost that bet. Ended up getting $450 for tickets where I paid $600.
In the women's tournament they want to encourage bigger crowds so they let you play in your home arena the first two weekends. Top four seeds in each regional get to host first and second round games.
I bought two tickets to the South Regional hoping UK or IU would get sent there. Lost that bet. Ended up getting $450 for tickets where I paid $600.
Are you certain? I would take your word over the Big Blew fan. However, I know lots of UofL fans that bought tickets this year and last year in hopes that the Cards would get placed in the Yum. I even talked to some people that didn't have tickets that were hopeful that we would get placed here in the future. Do you have any kind of link to that rule? I want to believe you man but I have hear more to the contrary of what you are saying.
Not sure what being a UK or UL fan has to do with it. If the people you spoke with were buying tickets hoping for UL to play, that's their mistake. It's been a long standing rule for the Men's that teams cannot host and play in the same facility. So when YUM hosts, UL will never be in that bracket. UK or IU could, since that is their natural region, but not the Cards. Same reason the Cards could play at Rupp but UK would not.
Here is the rule as written (source):
- A team will not be permitted to play in any facility in which it has played more than three games during its season, not including exhibitions and conference postseason tournaments.
- A host institution’s team shall not be permitted to play at the site where the institution is hosting. However, the team may play on the same days when the institution is hosting.
The women's tournament is treated differently for several reasons, including interest, ticket sales, venue size, and availability.
That's pretty bizarre - if I went through my professional career automatically discounting the decisions or statements made by non UK fans, I wouldn't get very far. Do some of you really assume that everything a UK fan says is automatically false? Seems a little drastic.
I can't speak to that as I don't think I have ever watched a college or professional women's basketball game.
I went to both of the UofL women's NCAA games this year at the Yum. Enjoyed everything but the result of the second game. About six years ago the women played the first two rounds at Xavier in Cincinnati. In the second round the Cards came from 10 points down in the last two minutes to beat the home team. One of the most exciting finishes I've ever attended. They don't have the athleticism of the males but they can play really good fundamental basketball.
I've heard the women's game is a purer form of basketball since men's has become more of a playground/pick up game style. And I have nothing against the women's game... just very limited time. I watch NFL football, some college football and basketball, all of March Madness, and very little else.
That "purer basketball" take is a ridiculous one. Surely there can't be anyone in their right mind that would watch a women's game over men's. It's simply an awful product. Might as well be watching a boys middle school game. Nothing "pure" about it. It's just a ridiculous argument from the PC crowd
So because you don't like it anyone who does is out of their mind? It is far from an "awful product."
- The U of L men's team cannot play any NCAA games in Bailout Arena. Doesn't matter the round.
- Women's basketball as played IS more fundamentally sound than the men's game. If you don't watch it, you wouldn't know that. There are no rules that make it that way. It's simply as the game is played.
- I don't discount all info from LPT fans, mostly info that is OPINION based. And the source matters. Guys like John have more credibility than the average LPT poster, and his track record here has proven that.
Thanks for the kind note zipp.
On the women's BBall topic, I think a good litmus test for that is whether people would watch a women's game if you removed any emotional attachment to it. For example, a good hunk of people go to U of L women's games. I wonder how many U of L fans would show if Florida played Stanford in the Yum center though?
I'm like OneEar, I've never watched women's BBall, but if it is really beautiful to watch, then would the assumption be that a few thousand people would still show for a non U of L game?
Exactly. It isn't "beautiful to watch" by any stretch. And they aren't "more fundamentally sound" than men. That's a myth. Zipp's is just being......Zipp's.
It is more fundamentally driven but it is not executed as efficiently.
This is correct. The men often try to out-athlete each other. Also watch skills at bounce passing, mid-range shooting, and shot fakes. Fundamentals that are increasingly lost in the men's game.
It IS true that I will watch a cockroach race if one roach is in a U of L uni. But that's a different subject--which viewers will watch which sport. If I loved women's basketball above all else, I would watch mostly women's basketball regardless of the teams playing. My priority is U of L sports, but that doesn't indicate anything pro or con about the quality of the various competitions.
As far as women's sports in general, it's also refreshing to watch players playing for the love of the game, at the pinnacle level of the sport (college), and not worried so much about the money. The same is probably true about some nonrevenue men's sports.
By the way, if you're a dude and still play ball of some type, you may find that watching the best women compete in that same sport is a good barometer for yourself. That is, the best women's players could give an amateur group of guys a good ballgame. Watch the U of L women's basketball team scrimmage against the male student managers. It's competitive ball. I was a pretty fair bowler in my day, and I enjoyed watching pro women bowlers because my game was more like theirs on a good day (for me!) Not to mention, a few of them were a lot more pleasing to the eye than their male counterparts!
"Elite program", my a$$...
Last edited:
No my "Zipp is a moron" point. In all seriousness the fact that UL Women vs Student Mgrs is "competitive ball" is all one needs to know about how awful women's basketball is
Why do you watch college football? It's no where close to being as athletic as the NFL? Why watch UofL baseball? It's not even at the level of A league pro baseball. The level a sport is being played doesn't make it "awful."
I watched a few minutes of the Men's McDonald's All-American game last night. That was awful basketball played by very talented athletes.
I watched a few minutes of the Men's McDonald's All-American game last night. That was awful basketball played by very talented athletes.
Eye of the beholder stuff, Jay.
And to make it simpler for a few of us, always make sure to post your opinion on something so we know what to check out.
"Elite program", my a$$...
Dumbest post ever. Congrats. Women's basketball is brutal to watch. I know you're trying to be PC and all by pretending to enjoy it. I can't believe you really made the college football argument. Apples and oranges and those kinds of things.
And still a gazillion times better than watching any women's game ever played. Bad analogies Fred. Awful
Sorry Jay, but no less an expert but the late John Wooden said the same thing about women's BB as Zipp about being a purer game.
Ok dude keep watching. It's still awful and I think you know it. I guess basketball back in the 40s was "purer" basketball. Still awful to watch though
The number of turnovers, missed layups and poor officiating make women's basketball difficult for me to watch.
Didn't say I watched. I was just disagreeing with your premise. I will only watch at tournament time. KnuckleHank's comments just above sums up my personal feeling about the womens' game, as does Zipp on my decreased interest in the men's game.
1940's game? LMAO Teams like UNC, 'Nova and KU give me hope for the future.
