Big 12 Tournament permanently in Kansas City?

[campbest]

All I know is, bricktown seems to be getting more and more popular. There are a lot more people going there now than I remember in years past. This summer, it has been extremely busy.

I'm not sure when your most recent experience has been, with bricktown, but it has certainly gained some steam, so to speak.

(Most of what I said is based off of speculation, based on my own observations. No research was done to support my idea that it is becoming more popular.)

Thanks, Tom. Only time I ever head to Bricktown is if there is a concert we want to see at the Wormy Dog, some friends might go to an occasional Redhawks game.

As someone who has spent time at both places, P&L wins hands down. Actually had an OKC friend get back from KC last weekend and said he wished OKC had a similar set-up. TIFWIW.

 

[Brent]

Throw my 2 cents in here.

Football should never ever be in St. Louis. Edward Jones is terrible place to watch a game and as many have said it's not a Big XII town and is rather inconvenient for most of the conference to get to.

I live in KC and haven't missed a CCG in Arrowhead and imo people make to much out of the weather. If you dress appropriately and your team isn't getting shelled, it really doesn't seem very cold.

The BB tourney should be rotated as well. No one city should reap the benefits of putting it on every year.

btw as a Kansas Citian. The P&L district sucks.

 

[campbest]

btw as a Kansas Citian. The P&L district sucks.

Not unusual for a local to say, my friends from San Antonio never go to the Riverwalk....but every OU fan who went in '07 said it was the best CCG ever.

 

[thebigabd]

Not unusual for a local to say, my friends from San Antonio never go to the Riverwalk....but every OU fan who went in '07 said it was the best CCG ever.

Exactly.... when people come visit us in Denver from Oklahoma they all think the mountains are awesome and 16th Street in Downtown is great. I hate going Downtown Denver and the mountains are cool for about the first 6 months you live here. Then you discover that if you dont ski there is absolutely nothing for you to do up there unless you are a 60+ year old person interested in novelty towns and like shopping for antiques.

 

[mattham4]

I've been to over 20 Big 8/Big 12 hoops tournaments and there is no question in my mind that KC does it at least 2X better than any other city that's given it a shot. Sure, I grew up there but I haven't lived there for over 25 years so I don't consider myself too biased. Hell, it would be better for me if it was in Dallas simply based on proximity (I've lived in Houston for the past 17 years).

 

[tomkar98]

Thanks, Tom. Only time I ever head to Bricktown is if there is a concert we want to see at the Wormy Dog, some friends might go to an occasional Redhawks game.

As someone who has spent time at both places, P&L wins hands down. Actually had an OKC friend get back from KC last weekend and said he wished OKC had a similar set-up. TIFWIW.

There is talk of adding a lot to the south downtown area and extending the canal. So there is certainly more time for improvement. Heck, there is already improvement, but this could add for greater potential.

Anyways, I have been to both places (don't know why I never mentioned this before, guess I was focused on OKC. haha). I think both are great for holding the Big 12 Tournament. OKC is not, yet, at KC's level, but I think with time, it can get there. Especially when you add that there will be renovations to the stadium and that there will be improvements to the general area.

 

[SoonerEyeDoc]

I've been to over 20 Big 8/Big 12 hoops tournaments and there is no question in my mind that KC does it at least 2X better than any other city that's given it a shot. Sure, I grew up there but I haven't lived there for over 25 years so I don't consider myself too biased. Hell, it would be better for me if it was in Dallas simply based on proximity (I've lived in Houston for the past 17 years).

Well said. I am a lifelong Kansas Citian (who is definitely biased) but there is no city that has supported it like KC. I have attended every Big 8/12 tourney from 1988-present that has been in KC and it is a great event; even more so now with the Sprint Center and P&L District. It seems to me that Dallas could care less about hosting the Big 12 tournament; plus, there's not much around the AA center except the W hotel and N9ne steakhouse (unless there's a lot more that's been built since I was there a year and half ago).

OKC has a good setup for the tournament and I believe they support it as well, plus it's nice to have more of a pro OU crowd. However, I don't think crowd support means as much in the end result (Sampson won back to back years in KC, blowing out KU in front of their "home" crowd in 2002). I would love for it to be here full time, but if it does rotate, it should go between OKC and KC. They have the best set up for the tournament in the most centralized location.

 

[slappy in OP]

Sorry to gang up on you here Campbest, but I have to agree with what others have already said.


Dallas should be left out of the rotation for the Big 12 basketball tournament. I absolutley stand by my statement (no matter how comical it seems to you) that having the basketaball tournament in Dallas is boring. Don't get me wrong, I like the city of Dallas. There obviously is plenty to do there. The issue is the set up that Dallas has. The AA arena is very nice, but there is not a lot to do in the immediate vicinity compared to KC and, yes, OKC. Another issue is that the people of KC and OKC get excited about having the tournament. The people of Dallas do not seem to know it is even there (at least that was my experience).

I'm glad that your friends came up to KC and had a good time at the P&L, but you have to realize that it is DEAD year round down there except for tournament times or a concert. Bricktown has a lot more consistant activity. I have been to Bricktown recently and it has probably grown since you have been down there.


Anyway, I did not post here to get into an arguement or anything. I just think that you are selling OKC a little short on this subject.

:boomer:sooner

 

[campbest]

Sorry to gang up on you here Campbest, but I have to agree with what others have already said.


Dallas should be left out of the rotation for the Big 12 basketball tournament. I absolutley stand by my statement (no matter how comical it seems to you) that having the basketaball tournament in Dallas is boring. Don't get me wrong, I like the city of Dallas. There obviously is plenty to do there. The issue is the set up that Dallas has. The AA arena is very nice, but there is not a lot to do in the immediate vicinity compared to KC and, yes, OKC. Another issue is that the people of KC and OKC get excited about having the tournament. The people of Dallas do not seem to know it is even there (at least that was my experience).

I'm glad that your friends came up to KC and had a good time at the P&L, but you have to realize that it is DEAD year round down there except for tournament times or a concert. Bricktown has a lot more consistant activity. I have been to Bricktown recently and it has probably grown since you have been down there.


Anyway, I did not post here to get into an arguement or anything. I just think that you are selling OKC a little short on this subject.

:boomer:sooner

No worries...if you read the thread you would of seen that I said Dallas is not a possibility because of attendance issues, there is just not the fan base for the event. Was referencing the fact that OKC is a more boring city than Dallas. Not sure what they could of have added in Bricktown since the last time I was there in May (besides that piano bar), but as a 24 year old male who frequents nightlife in KC, OKC and Dallas on a regular basis, the entertainment value which coincides with the tournament is greatest around the Sprint Center.

As I said in an earlier post, year round activity at P&L is irrelevant (see my San Antonio blurb), the atmosphere come tourney time is far superior in KC. Not that I am against having the tournament in OKC (it has a great set up with the Convention Center) but KC puts on a much better show, hands down. I would favor two years in KC, one year in OKC...something like that.

 

[Cheno]

From an OU standpoint, it would be great to have in OKC from time to time, but the Sooners won in KC on a regular basis early in this decade, including a beatdown on KU in front a partisan Jayhawk crowd in 2002, so crowd allegiance doesn't make as much of a difference as some might think.

Exactly. I use to just crack up at the people that said KU won in KC because of the home crowd. I think KU has won a greater % of tourney titles in OK/TX than in KC. I wouldn't mind rotating it between KC & OKC. KC does the best job in my opinion. Dallas should be out. That was a joke. I was there. Crowds were weak and it's not in a downtown type district like in KC/OKC. I had one of the best times of my life at the Big 12 tourney at the Sprint Center in KC. Now the drinking and partying in the Power & Light District had a lot to do with it but hey that's part of it right? I like in OKC as well because it's fun to hang-out and gives me an excuse to hit Mantles up for some Seared Ahi Tuna and a steak! KC by far does the best job though with the Power and Light literally right there.

 

[BigTime]

I think that KC and the Big 12 basketball tournament are a match made in heaven. As much as I would like it to come to OKC (and maybe Tulsa) from time to time, I wouldn't be upset at all if it were always in KC.

I also think that Dallas doesn't give a rat's arse about college basketball and it should not return there.

 

[skyvue]

Exactly. I use to just crack up at the people that said KU won in KC because of the home crowd. I think KU has won a greater % of tourney titles in OK/TX than in KC.

You also used to crack up at the notion that KU has benefited in recent years from a weaker northern division, something most hoops fans can readily agree on.

Comparing KU's success in OKC and Dallas to their winning percentage in KC relies on a ridiculously low sampling.

And no one said that KU won in KC because of the home crowd, but to pretend it's not a positive factor in the local team's favor, both in KC and in OKC, is disingenuous at best.

 

[Cheno]

You also used to crack up at the notion that KU has benefited in recent years from a weaker northern division, something most hoops fans can readily agree on.

False. Please speak the facts. I cracked up at the notion KU won the Big 12 BECAUSE OF playing in the North. KU has won the Big 12 so much because they've had the best teams. And THAT is something most hoop fans can readily agree on.

Comparing KU's success in OKC and Dallas to their winning percentage in KC relies on a ridiculously low sampling.

Sorry then but it's the only sampling we have.

And no one said that KU won in KC because of the home crowd, but to pretend it's not a positive factor in the local team's favor, both in KC and in OKC, is disingenuous at best.

Sure it's been stated that way before. Just as it's been stated KU won the '88 title game because it was played in KC. It's been stated here many teams. To suggest otherwise is silly.
Sure it's a positive factor but not a deciding factor at all. And unless the game is played on the moon then someone will always have a "home court advantage" so why even bring it to the table? The Big 12 tourney should be played where it can make the most money for the conference and give the fans the best venue/atmosphere possible. KC is a lot farther ahead than any venue it's been played at. OKC would be 2nd.
Again, I'm in favor of rotating it between those two venues. Dallas is a joke on the otherhand.

 

[skyvue]

False. Please speak the facts.

I am speaking the facts, and anyone who's been on this board and others for any length of time knows it. You have consistently and repeatedly downplayed, even denied, the benefit to KU of playing in the weaker division and mocked posters who cited that benefit.

Sorry, but it's not even debatable. That's what happened, over and over.

And I'd be surprised if even one of those posters claimed that playing in the weaker division was the ONLY reason KU won the Big 12. Perhaps some poster or other did suggest that in reference to a particular season -- it's possible, I can't swear no one did -- but the vast majority have merely pointed out that KU benefits from playing in the north, that's it's been a factor -- not the only factor, by any means, but an undeniably key factor -- in their success.

And you could always be relied upon to come rushing in and deny that KU benefited at all from weaker competition in Big 12 play.

You're spinning the discussions in a way they simply did not occur -- virtually no one said the weaker Big 12 North or playing the tourney in KC were the only reasons KU has done well. But you have consistently denied that either factor benefits KU at all.

And you've done so for years on end.

 

[SoonerNorm]

I am speaking the facts, and anyone who's been on this board and others for any length of time knows it. You have consistently and repeatedly downplayed, even denied, the benefit to KU of playing in the weaker division and mocked posters who cited that benefit.

Sorry, but it's not even debatable. That's what happened, over and over.

And I'd be surprised if even one of those posters claimed that playing in the weaker division was the ONLY reason KU won the Big 12. Perhaps some poster or other did suggest that in reference to a particular season -- it's possible, I can't swear no one did -- but the vast majority have merely pointed out that KU benefits from playing in the north, that's it's been a factor -- not the only factor, by any means, but an undeniably key factor -- in their success.

And you could always be relied upon to come rushing in and deny that KU benefited at all from weaker competition in Big 12 play.

You're spinning the discussions in a way they simply did not occur -- virtually no one said the weaker Big 12 North or playing the tourney in KC were the only reasons KU has done well. But you have consistently denied that either factor benefits KU at all.

And you've done so for years on end.

You are mistaken on this one skyvue. Cheno has consistently said for years that the south is tougher than the north but he has defended KU when it won Big 12 titles because they have beaten the strong south teams in the Big 12, not because they were good enough to beat the weaker north teams.

 

[seniorsooner]

Guys I didn't have time to read through all of this so if it's been posted before I apologize. Two things:

1)Saint Louis isn't an option for football because they don't even want the game. They have not even put in a bid to host the game since the early, early years of the conference.
2)Tulsa's #1 problem is and will continue to be the lack of hotels downtown. There are basically four downtown hotels, and two of those are of the "boutique" variety (Ambassador and Savoy). Until there are at LEAST two new high occupancy chain hotels down there Tulsa does not have a chance in hail of hosting the men's tourney.

 

[Cheno]

2)Tulsa's #1 problem is and will continue to be the lack of hotels downtown. There are basically four downtown hotels, and two of those are of the "boutique" variety (Ambassador and Savoy). Until there are at LEAST two new high occupancy chain hotels down there Tulsa does not have a chance in hail of hosting the men's tourney.

I don't see any point of hosting it in Tulsa. OKC is far better set-up for the tourney and it doesn't make sense to add a 2nd Oklahoma site.

 

[SoonerfanTU]

You are mistaken on this one skyvue. Cheno has consistently said for years that the south is tougher than the north but he has defended KU when it won Big 12 titles because they have beaten the strong south teams in the Big 12, not because they were good enough to beat the weaker north teams.

That argument doesn't work. KU is getting half those games at home, and never has to see those tough South teams twice. There is something said about facing a team twice, even if KU beats UT in Austin, the game in Lawrence wouldn't be a gimme.

It isn't fair, and I guarantee the unbalanced schedule has resulted in KU winning more titles than they'd have won otherwise.

Also, simply playing the tougher teams twice would cause KU to wear out a little quicker, thus opening up the possibility of losing a game they should win.

 

[thebigabd]

That argument doesn't work. KU is getting half those games at home, and never has to see those tough South teams twice. There is something said about facing a team twice, even if KU beats UT in Austin, the game in Lawrence wouldn't be a gimme.

It isn't fair, and I guarantee the unbalanced schedule has resulted in KU winning more titles than they'd have won otherwise.

Also, simply playing the tougher teams twice would cause KU to wear out a little quicker, thus opening up the possibility of losing a game they should win.

Don't forget that A&M and Baylor (outside of the last 3-5 years) have been major conference doormats... Baylor was horrendous and then got even worst after the Bliss thing happened, and A&M went 0-16 and always sucked prior to the arrival of Billy Gillespie.

To add to that, in that same time period Nebraska, Colorado, and Mizzou were never gimmes and Iowa State was quite good.

Through most of the history of the Big 12, A&M and Baylor (south teams) were the biggest jokes in the conference.

 

[DenverSooner]

This decade, the South has clearly been stronger, KU has clearly benefited from that and Cheno has argued on numerous occassions that the South was not stronger. Even if you say Baylor and A&M sucked, you typically have the South putting 4 teams in the top 6 and many times, if not most, it has been KU, OU, OSU and Texas in the top 4. Final standings are not indicative of actual strength when teams do not play the same schedule. For example, a south team may finish behind a north team in final standings simply because they do not get the benefit of playing CU, ISU and Nebraska twice.

This unbalanced schduel is/was a big advantage for KU. That certainly is not a knock on KU. It is not KU's fault that the South is tougher. KU has for the most part taken care of its business to make sure that KU capitalizes on its scheduling advantage. I do think it is a knock on KU fans that they cannot admit this.