Conference Tournament Home Cookin': Do Teams Deserve the Advantage?
So, like many, I have been watching quite a bit of basketball this past week.
Last night I happened to come across two games. The first was the Charleston-Chattanooga game, which was played in Chattanooga. The other was Siena-Niagara, which was played in Albany, home of the Siena Saints.
Chattanooga was not expected to win the conference tourney, but did. Siena was a favorite, and won. This made me wonder just how big home court is in a conference tournament.
Now, I know that the big conferences aren't going to adopt the "home court to the higher seeds" strategy, simply because there is too much money involved.
However, in the smaller conferences, many of the teams that finish No. 1 in the regular season get home court. Other groups use a predetermined site for their tourneys.
I feel, in the spirit of things, that all conference tournaments should be created equal. All tournaments should be played on neutral courts; that way, the highest chance of the best team winning is created.
But, again, this is just my opinion. There are schools that win on other teams' courts in title games. I just feel that in the spirit of the NCAA Tournament, which is played on neutral courts, the conference title games should follow suit.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?