Re: Attendance at Regionals
Even though more air travel might be required, and extra work and expenses for host schools might be involved (like whitewashing boards at host arenas), has consideration been given to (a) having the round of sixteen games played at the home rinks of the top eight seeds, with four games on Saturday and four on Sunday; (b) then having the top four remaining seeds host quarterfinal games the following weekend, with two games on Saturday and two games on Sunday; and (c) then having the Frozen Four played in or near a major metropolitan area, alternating between eastern and western hosts, with preferences given to cities where hockey would be considered a good attraction?
I realize that from year to year, it would be hard to predict the total capacity of the home rinks of the top eight seeds, and that it’s conceivable (though probably not likely) that there would be a year when the top eight seeds would be schools with small home rinks. However, if the total attendance at this year’s regionals (twelve games) was 37,321, that represents about 70% of the total capacity of the home rinks of this year’s top eight seeds (52,915). If you were to add four quarterfinal games played at home rinks, then the four highest ranked seeds that advanced to this year’s quarterfinals would’ve had total capacity of 26,561.
Take total capacity of 79,476 for twelve games, and if there were an average of 50% turnout for each of those games, you might’ve had 39,738 in attendance. But let’s say that you could’ve attracted 70% capacity or more by using home rinks for the first two rounds, then you might’ve drawn at least 55,633 to those twelve games, or roughly one and a half times as many in attendance as those who actually attended this year’s regionals.
Even though more air travel might be required, and extra work and expenses for host schools might be involved (like whitewashing boards at host arenas), has consideration been given to (a) having the round of sixteen games played at the home rinks of the top eight seeds, with four games on Saturday and four on Sunday; (b) then having the top four remaining seeds host quarterfinal games the following weekend, with two games on Saturday and two games on Sunday; and (c) then having the Frozen Four played in or near a major metropolitan area, alternating between eastern and western hosts, with preferences given to cities where hockey would be considered a good attraction?
I realize that from year to year, it would be hard to predict the total capacity of the home rinks of the top eight seeds, and that it’s conceivable (though probably not likely) that there would be a year when the top eight seeds would be schools with small home rinks. However, if the total attendance at this year’s regionals (twelve games) was 37,321, that represents about 70% of the total capacity of the home rinks of this year’s top eight seeds (52,915). If you were to add four quarterfinal games played at home rinks, then the four highest ranked seeds that advanced to this year’s quarterfinals would’ve had total capacity of 26,561.
Take total capacity of 79,476 for twelve games, and if there were an average of 50% turnout for each of those games, you might’ve had 39,738 in attendance. But let’s say that you could’ve attracted 70% capacity or more by using home rinks for the first two rounds, then you might’ve drawn at least 55,633 to those twelve games, or roughly one and a half times as many in attendance as those who actually attended this year’s regionals.
Comment