a vitally important recap of all the dumb tweets sent during the Harbaugh coaching search
So this is an objective post not related to anything on the actual field of play but more about the stadium itself and how I would like to see my ticket dollars spent in the future.
During the weather delay our beloved PA announcer was making regular updates to a completely empty stadium (some lolz) but the more serious problem is that under the cover of the canopy this could not be heard by anyone unless they were standing in the mouth of one of the entry portals...an undesirable position due to the heavy spray.
After wandering around for awhile waiting out a ride, hearing the noise of PA but not being able to comprehend any of it, my wife went into a family restroom and came back with a complete update (thinking this was radio guys piped in to the restrooms)
However, I feel like its a serious problem that needs to be addressed in the facility planning for the future. The crowd needs information and direction, and I for one, will do whatever benevolent Mr. Grapentine recommends but I'd like to be able to hear it also. What I'd like to see is a system to be able to switch gears (selector switch if you will) to broadcast Public Address under the covered areas of the stadium while under weather delay. We are bound to have more weather delays just by probability in the future and this would be really helpful as a fan attending the game. Note for clarity that I'm not asking for PA to be broadcast underneath for any other circumstances.
This year, the University is celebrating 100 years of the aerospace department (of which I'm a grad, yayy). Here is the flyover schedule for Saturday, it's awesome (with pictures because I'm an aviation photogrpaher):
B-17 'Yankee Lady'
B-25 'Yankee Warrior'
This here's 'Panchito' but similar color scheme to 'Yankee Warrior'
P-51 Mustang, F-86 Sabre, F-100 Super Sabre
Not necessarily flying together. I've heard the F-100 will do an afterburner pop over the stadium, which is really cool. Might make ya jump.
Lockheed Electra Model 12
T-34 Demo Team
There are also three helicopters listed:
And that's all I'm allowed to say ;)
EDIT: Also, don't expect these to all fly together. An F-100 can't really fly slow enough to stay in a good formation with a P-51 (see Thunder Over Michigan Airshow 2013). I've heard that they will start doing flyovers at about 3:15.
Architectural renderings of the new Atlanta Falcons stadium have been released.
Bowl of tortilla chips? Origami? An architectural reference to the Falcons logo?
Maybe it's just me, but I think they might have overdone the whole "rise up" exhortation thing.
I have had a Fanvision for the past three seasons that I have always used at Michigan Stadium, but it did not work yesterday. For those who don't know what a Fanvision is, it is a small controller with a screen that provides real-time stats as well as replays and streams of games from around the country. I went online and couldn't find anything definitive as to whether or not Fanvision service at the Big House has ended. Did anyone else with a Fanvision have this problem and/or know if the service is over? It really was great to have one.
P.S. The webiste http://www.fanvision.com/ doesn't list football on the website anymore, so I am assuming they ended service, but I still can't find anything that definitively says so.
This is my first diary, and the statistical analysis isn't normalized as much as I'd like (just gathering the data was tedious enough). Ironically, I put this together Monday, only to see Brian's DOME post on Tuesday. He graciously upped my MGoPoints so I could post this.
Be kind - constructive criticism is much apprecited.
Now that we're facing the Regional Semifinals/Finals, I thought I'd try to quantify the effect of the venue on scoring totals. For this exercise, I complied a list of all Sweet Sixteen teams over the past 5 NCAA Tournaments (2008 - 2012). I also included this year's teams. I looked at the regular season scoring avererags for the individual teams*, the individual team scoring average for the Tournament thus far (including all games not played at football stadium/dome sites), and then the average scoring for those teams during the Regional Semifinals/Finals and Final Four games.
*Taken from the Wednesday prior to NCAA Tournament games
LIMITATIONS: Obviously, the data is going to be affected by the quality of opponents and individual matchups. It follows that the Sweet Sixteen teams typicaly score more during the first weekend, as opposition isn't as elite as the teams they may face the rest of the tournament. My hope is including a larger sample size and including regular season averages helps mitigate that impact to some degree. The regular season scoring average is also the raw statistic, not adjusted for tempo-free. Last caveat is that overtime periods (especialy for tournamet games) may impact final numbers (there have been 18 OT games since 2008 - not all in the first weekend or involving Sweet Sixteen teams - vs. 160 total games for my sample size)
Before I get into that analysis, another interesting trend emerged. From comparing a team's regular season scoring average to the team's tournament (non-football site) average, it becomes possible to rank the Sweet Sixteen teams against their increase or departure from their regular season scoring average. In four of the past five seasons, among Sweet Sixteen teams, one of the top two teams that increase their scoring average in the tournament over their regular season average made the Final Four. Similarly intersting is that in four of the past five seasons, one of the bottom two teams who score LESS in the tournament than their regular season average also made the Final Four:
|YEAR||TEAM||SCORING DECREASE||TOURNEY PPG (1st Weekend)||REG SEASON PPG|
|2008||UCLA||1st / -13.5||60.5||74.0|
|2010||Duke||2nd / -7.5||70.5||78.0|
|2011||Kentucky||1st / -11.4||65.0||76.4|
|2012||Kansas||1st / -11.5||63.5||75.0|
|YEAR||TEAM||SCORING INCREASE||TOURNEY PPG (1st Weekend)||REG SEASON PPG|
|2008||UNC||1st / +21.8||110.5||88.7|
|2009||UConn||2nd / +20.2||97.5||77.3|
|2011||VCU||2nd / +9.5||81.0||71.5|
|2012||Kentucky||1st / +7.3||84.0||76.7|
This year, the teams with the biggest scoring increase are ohio state* (87.5 ppg tournament, 69.3 reg season) and FGCU (79.5 ppg tournament, 72.3 ppg reg season)
The teams with the biggest scoring decrease this year are Indiana (70.5 ppg tournament, 80.0 ppg reg season) and Oregon (62.5 ppg tournament / 71.7 ppg reg season)
* Personally, I do not capitalize ohio state or osu. Out of spite.
So, back to the overall point of this exercise. Do football stadiums/domes negatively affect scoring more than basketball arenas? Based on my research, no.
In the past five tournaments, there have been 11 basketball-arena sites hosting the second weekend of the tournament and 9 football-stadium sites.
- Overall, scoring is down: -8.1% the second weekend vs the first weekend; -8.4% from a team's regular-season scoring average.
- True basketball sites have a larger drop in scoring: -9.9% from tournament average, -10.5% from regular season average.
- Football stadiums see a drop of only 6.2% and 6.3%, respectively.
All Final Fours have been played in football stadiums over the past five tournaments. Scoring is down 15.0% from previous tournament performance and down 14.9% from regular season performance.
There were a few outlier games/teams/seasons which impact the analysis (full chart - ED-S: I put it as a Google Chart here). Breaking it down by venue shows further impact (also gives wise readers some insight to Vegas totals for the East Region at Lucas Oil):
|VENUE||VAR / TOURNEY PPG||VAR / REG SEASON PPG||YEAR|
|FORD FIELD||-15.74%||-10.73%||2009 FF, 2008 MW REG|
|LUCAS OIL||-14.81%||-15.40%||2013 MW REG, 2010 FF, 2009 MW REG|
|RELIANT STADIUM||-11.67%||-13.19%||2011 FF, 2010 S REG. 2008 S REG|
2011 SW REG, 2008 FF
|EDJONES DOME||-7.84%||-10.40%||2012 MW REG, 2010 MW REG|
|PHOENIX STADIUM||-4.11%||+4.77%||2009 W REG|
|GEORGIA DOME||+9.11%||+8.21%||2012 S REG|
(Cowboy Stadium has never hosted NCAA Regionals/Final Four)