What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

[mookie1995]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

What about seats for visiting teams?

Ex- if bu is sent to play the goods and bu has 1400 confirmed deposit paid ticket buyers, they should be able to attend (same if goods were sent to Boston).
How will the "home" team work that and be happy with it?

[tape]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

All great talk but someone from the East coast like myself would never go to Omaha, Des Moines, or Sioux Falls. Omaha is a fine city but can't hold a candle to the Boston area or even Manchester, NH.

If you would never go there, how would you know?

[The Zlax45]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

If you would never go there, how would you know?

I did some freelance work in Omaha...

[HockeyMan2000]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

My impression is the NCAA really loves the regionals for some good reasons (cross-polinating of parts of the hockey community; the attempt to make college hockey a "Big Event" destination) and some bad reasons (great time for big fish to lord it over their little pond; G-7 style weekend get away for booze, broads, and Buicks).

The current regionals are also easy to televise, which has to be one of the main positive attributes. In the current structure, they get nearly every game on ESPNU/ESPN2, with just a pair of games relegated to streaming this year. If they go back to the regionals at local venues and a 2 of 3 format, guaranteed they will be nearly all streaming with little (if any) exposure on an over-the-air national platform (unless the NCAA opts to let local outlets produce the games/syndicate them again). Even if they do that, the national audience is diminished...but you can also argue few watch them now when they ARE on, so what's the difference?

But -- that said -- that's really the only positive left to the current structure. We've said it year in and year out -- the 4 regional format is a bust. It sounds great in theory but they're not enough of a draw, and haven't been since they decided to move from 2 regionals to 4. That really killed it, because when it first started and there was just an East and West venue, that "destination" element was clearer for consumers. When they moved onto 4 venues without enough of a consumer appetite to sustain that format, it was really the beginning of the end, even though they've stuck with it for much too long.

How about a mix of campus sites for the 1st weekend, followed by a weekend of 2 regional sites, then the FF...maybe not ditch the regional structure completely, so that they get the exposure pre-FF on TV as they currently do, but cut it down so that audience isn't being split up into 4 venues.

Either way, the whole way the NCAA approaches this sport has long been curious, and it would not surprise me at all if they are finally listening. I agree with Red Cows completely that exclusively holding the FF in NHL-sized stadiums in major metro areas (without a college hockey connection) is a waste of time because most of these cities could care less about the sport -- when college hockey doesn't exist in the location the FF is being held, it's worthless. There are arguments about "Growing the game" but you can't "market" or "expand" something that doesn't exist in that location in the first place. All they're doing is making more of an imposition on the die-hard college hockey fan who comprises most of the crowd to begin with and will follow whereever they go. The last few times we haven't gone in the last few years, we've gotten calls from NCAA reps asking why. We've told them it's too expensive and have had no interest in going to ____ location. Frankly if they have to hold it in a "big city" every now and then, just do it in Boston and St. Paul so at least a fair portion of fans can get there without making an enormous hassle every time. Throw in smaller cities like Providence that they've passed over recently because of the size of the venue; the city has a rich FF tradition and fans loved it in the past. Try it in Omaha if there's enough of a demand there...sure it may not interest some in the East Coast, but at least it seems to be a place that's embraced the game. Even do a rotation like they used to...whatever, changes need to be made. Their problem has long been they seem to believe the sport is a much bigger deal than it actually is.

[Sean Pickett]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

How about a mix of campus sites for the 1st weekend, followed by a weekend of 2 regional sites, then the FF...maybe not ditch the regional structure completely, so that they get the exposure pre-FF on TV as they currently do, but cut it down so that audience isn't being split up into 4 venues.

Not a bad idea, but what about just returning to 2 super-regionals? I went every year when there was only one super-regional in the east.

Sean

[Red Cows]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

All great talk but someone from the East coast like myself would never go to Omaha, Des Moines, or Sioux Falls. Omaha is a fine city but can't hold a candle to the Boston area or even Manchester, NH.

Yes, but I caveated naming those particular towns by saying there are others like them all over America. I don't got to tourney hockey games for the city they are being held in, I go for the hockey. You can find something interesting to do, anywhere. Fun is as fun does. I'm not specifically espousing those towns, in particular, they are examples among many.

By the way, FWIW, Omaha has arguably the finest zoo in the world. Not in the U.S. In the world.

I don't say so, TripAdvisor and other such web sites like it do.

[RPI fan 4 life]

Not a bad idea, but what about just returning to 2 super-regionals? I went every year when there was only one super-regional in the east.

Sean

But you have to remember that the "super-regionals" was when there were only 12 teams in the tournament. What they could do is to make it a 3-day tournament with 2 games on Friday, 2 games on Saturday with Friday's winners playing the early game on Sunday and Saturdays winners playing the late game on Sunday. And the other regional could be a Thursday through Saturday format.

[Sean Pickett]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

But you have to remember that the "super-regionals" was when there were only 12 teams in the tournament. What they could do is to make it a 3-day tournament with 2 games on Friday, 2 games on Saturday with Friday's winners playing the early game on Sunday and Saturdays winners playing the late game on Sunday. And the other regional could be a Thursday through Saturday format.

Yes, I should have stated it would have to be a 3-day format. Thank you for doing so.

Sean

[HockeyMan2000]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

Not a bad idea, but what about just returning to 2 super-regionals? I went every year when there was only one super-regional in the east.

I as well. I think the problem is logistical -- expanding it to 3 days makes it more of a commitment for fans, not to mention the possibility of added cost associated with that.

We've floated the idea of a "super regional" in the past. Certainly worth looking at. My thought of keeping a regional as a "2nd round" was based on having thinned the field down from 16 teams so you'd keep it structurally the same as it is now.

[Netman]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

As I say every year when this thread comes up, how about the NCAA lower the prices. You will get more causal fans at $49.

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

assuming the facilities managers' can arrange the schedules accordingly....not a problem if your team is the only one to use the home, hockey-only arena, I suppose, but if it's a multi-purpose space?

On campus playoff games? A single elimination format would work best for schools with multi-purpose arenas. Holding open 1 date open over the course of a three day weekend isn't an undue hardship. But having to hold open 3 dates, with the distinct possibility that all three dates will be wasted? It raises a financial issue, at the very least.

[UML]

As I say every year when this thread comes up, how about the NCAA lower the prices. You will get more causal fans at $49.

Lower prices and beer.

[SCSU Euro]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

I may be one of the only people who isn't all-in with on-campus, true "home-ice" advantage for the whole field. Its short notice, some of these cities are really hard to get to, and isn't the #1 seed's advantage that they're playing the #4 seed first? I don't think they should get their fans, their locker room, their particular ice (and perhaps odd dimensions)... I mean I get that for the top four teams, but should the #8 team really get that big of an advantage of the #9 team? I don't think so... Let #3 and #4 seeds have as even of a chance as the tops seeds

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

Yes, but I caveated naming those particular towns by saying there are others like them all over America. I don't got to tourney hockey games for the city they are being held in, I go for the hockey. You can find something interesting to do, anywhere. Fun is as fun does. I'm not specifically espousing those towns, in particular, they are examples among many.

Couldn't agree more. You're 100% correct. I've defended this position on USCHO for years. But we're in the minority. And our numbers are shrinking with every passing season. Every time a new set of tournament sites is selected, the conversation on the board is almost exclusively about the tourist opportunities.

By the way, FWIW, Omaha has arguably the finest zoo in the world. Not in the U.S. In the world.

I don't say so, TripAdvisor and other such web sites like it do.

Next time I make it to Omaha, I'll check it out. I'm sure it will be a day well spent.

But back in 2005 when Columbus hosted the Frozen Four, I also tried to play the Zoo card. (Think Jack Hanna & David Letterman) The invite fell on deaf ears.

Don't know why those from the East Coast are so reluctant to cross the Hudson. But otherwise solid people believe in all seriousness that Buffalo and Pittsburgh are Western cities, and that traveling to such distant locales is too arduous to be seriously considered. Or, if they find their courage, they'll head straight to Yellowstone and attempt to feed the bears out their car windows.

My point being that it's best to be realistic and just keep smiling. We can throw the party in Omaha or Columbus, but most of our Eastern friends aren't coming.

[Stauber1]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

I may be one of the only people who isn't all-in with on-campus, true "home-ice" advantage for the whole field. Its short notice, some of these cities are really hard to get to, and isn't the #1 seed's advantage that they're playing the #4 seed first? I don't think they should get their fans, their locker room, their particular ice (and perhaps odd dimensions)... I mean I get that for the top four teams, but should the #8 team really get that big of an advantage of the #9 team? I don't think so... Let #3 and #4 seeds have as even of a chance as the tops seeds

Why do you want to make the cut-off at 4, rather than 8?
Seems to me you have to make a call at some point.
The PWR decides who gets to host and who goes on the road. We as a community have come to accept that in terms of #15 getting to play for a championship while #16 gets to play golf, and I don't see much difference in the home/away situation.

Bottom line, the most legitimate critique of the current system is exactly what we are seeing in Providence this year. Or what we would have seen if Notre Dame had barely qualified for the tournament. Or if UND was a 4 seed. Or if MN had been a 4 seed last year. If teams are going to gain advantage for hosting, it would be better to tie it to seed rather than do it despite seed.

The other option is to have arenas with little to no atmosphere and/or have home advantage for teams that haven't "earned" it through their regular season play.