Re: NCAA Change the Tourney
You nailed it. The main problem with the Best of 3 campus site scenario is that it's "been there, done that." They already tried that format and they changed it for a reason. I don't see them ever going back to it, and I agree with you, it would be a step backwards. As much as we've been looking at things mostly from a profit/attendance perspective, there is an issue of fairness in terms of how the games are played out that has to be examined as well. There is a fundamental fairness inherent with teams playing games in neutral sites and not in the home rink of each season's higher seeds, which would often be an annual mix of BC, North Dakota, Michigan, etc etc. Beating those squads in 1 game is one thing -- having to do it in a multi-game series on their home ice is obviously far more difficult. Ultimately that system would only make it even easier for higher seeded teams and teams that typically finish in the upper tier of their conference to advance (the "right teams" as you call them).
Variety and diversity among your Frozen Four participants would almost certainly diminish as a consequence. IMO that's not at all something they will want to encourage -- the sentiment that "the same teams make it every year" will only be pushed even further in that direction if you back to campus site QF multi-game series.
Now single-game elimination on campus sites -- as a prelude to a weekend of 2 regional sites -- that makes a little bit more sense, yet I still don't know if things are such a mess that they'd go there. Alton and I disagree that adding another weekend of games to the current set-up won't tax the fan further in terms of their time/monetary investment in pre-Frozen Four hockey -- to me it'd be like expanding the tournament even though the amount of teams remains the same (yes I know there is a bye week now -- it's not a week in which the NCAA is asking fans to pay to see more games which it would under Alton's three-week playoff system). The bottom line to their proposed concept is that-- no matter where you do it -- you'd be adding another weekend of NCAA games to the current set-up, and given the current attendance issues, that just doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. Yes it solves some things but it adds other issues as well.
I think overall it's a question of improving what they're doing now, making smarter choices in terms of venue and team seeding, and finding a way to make the current "package" more appealing to consumers while balancing the fairness issue -- not going backwards to an old concept like campus site quarterfinal series (then again, who knows, maybe they'll be desperate!).
I have enjoyed the conversation big time because I think we all agree they've got to do something...just will be interesting to see what they do because one way or another, something's got to give.
I get why people like best of 3, I especially get why the NCAA would like it but it seems like a major step backwards if you ask me, a desperate ploy to make sure the "right teams" make it so the NCAA maximizes viewers and ticket sales.
Variety and diversity among your Frozen Four participants would almost certainly diminish as a consequence. IMO that's not at all something they will want to encourage -- the sentiment that "the same teams make it every year" will only be pushed even further in that direction if you back to campus site QF multi-game series.
Now single-game elimination on campus sites -- as a prelude to a weekend of 2 regional sites -- that makes a little bit more sense, yet I still don't know if things are such a mess that they'd go there. Alton and I disagree that adding another weekend of games to the current set-up won't tax the fan further in terms of their time/monetary investment in pre-Frozen Four hockey -- to me it'd be like expanding the tournament even though the amount of teams remains the same (yes I know there is a bye week now -- it's not a week in which the NCAA is asking fans to pay to see more games which it would under Alton's three-week playoff system). The bottom line to their proposed concept is that-- no matter where you do it -- you'd be adding another weekend of NCAA games to the current set-up, and given the current attendance issues, that just doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. Yes it solves some things but it adds other issues as well.
I think overall it's a question of improving what they're doing now, making smarter choices in terms of venue and team seeding, and finding a way to make the current "package" more appealing to consumers while balancing the fairness issue -- not going backwards to an old concept like campus site quarterfinal series (then again, who knows, maybe they'll be desperate!).
I have enjoyed the conversation big time because I think we all agree they've got to do something...just will be interesting to see what they do because one way or another, something's got to give.
Comment