I agree that the whole recipe is for a poorly attended tournament, but I don't pin the blame on the venue. No other city is as easily accessible (read: driving in and out with no overnight) to more MAC schools than Cleveland. Toledo, BG, Akron and Kent fans can all drive here and back with no need for a hotel, and the city has a very significant population of grads from every Ohio MAC school (NE Ohio is still the state's largest metro area). You simply cannot find a better combination for easy access to casual fans... and let's face it, most tourney attendees are casual. Yes, many on this board get hotel rooms, as do parents and close friends and die-hards. There simply aren't that many die-hards. 

How does it work from a scheduling standpoint for all of the NBA/NHL etc. teams who play in arenas that also host conference tournaments and NCAA tournament games?  Obviously they can schedule a string of road games for many teams but at some point won't there will be an imbalance if too many venues are hosting?
 

Yes. Can't we just all agree that on a given night, anything is possible. I recall the 2002 season when we opened the MAC tourney at home against Central, a team with 9 wins, and they whipped us.

 

I agree with that Andrew. We are the cause of the  drop off. When we ran through the tourney in 2010 Ford and Dambrot were so Incensed that they held a special Shortman convention and pressed the MAC officios to "make sure that does not happen again". I agree with the basic premise of making the entire season count and on the other hand I see quite vividly your point of not penalizing 5 and 6 and condemning them to an impossible task...especially in the light where there is not much separation and the unbalanced schedule puts a team with a particularly difficult schedule as opposed to the others in the top 4 seeds. 

I really detest this when a team has some injuries and turmoil but gets their act together over the course of the season and then is actually the best team in the MAC over the last few weeks going into the tourney. This format works against that scenario inasmuch as the "best" team to represent and advance the conference in tha case would face an insurmountable task....

I am not sure how you appease the remaining shortman in keeping the tourney the way he wants and yet give more parity by dropping the 11/12 game.  What does that do to the bracketing with 10 teams in your scenario? Best possible answer is to dominate the league as * IMHO * we should be....don't make it an issue, Support , show up and become a big time fanbase that recruits want to play in front of.... 

 

thats a good solution. Maybe you can forward it and get it to grow some legs.  Out of curiosity, what is your thoughts on this 10 team bracket then? Is that what the final product would look like?  Definitely designed to favor those who achieve in the regular season. 

					1	Valparaiso
							(bye)
											1	Valparaiso	65
										5	Butler	46
	4	Milwaukee	68
	9	UIC	55
						4	Milwaukee	49
						5	Butler	71
	5	Butler	70
	8	Wright State	52
																1	Valparaiso	50
																3	Detroit	70
						2	Cleveland State
							(bye)
											2	Cleveland State	58
										3	Detroit	63
	3	Detroit	80
	10	Loyola	71
						3	Detroit	93
						6	Youngstown State	76
	6	Youngstown State	77
	7	Green Bay	60

 

That's my point.  Just let the team that succeeded significantly better in the regular season and the fan base that still cares just have that win without even playing the game.

Borna - That bracket to me rewards the 2 seed way too much more than the 3 seed.  What I like about the "Ruck Bracket" lets call it is the gradual rewarding/punishing of the regular season:

1-2 - Triple Bye
3-4 - Double Bye
5-6 - SIngle Bye
7-8 - Home Game
9-10 - Away Game
11-12 Season Over