More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is...

[Patman]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

Well, it'd be six assuming you still want a Frozen Four but your point remains. It'd end up being a Friday/Saturday/Sunday 2/3/1 setup. The ice for the regional final Saturday night would be hideous.

Edit: I guess you could do a 2/2/2 where the winners Friday have nothing to do Saturday and play Sunday afternoon instead. Not sure how that would work.

2/2/2... that's how I'd do it... 2/3/1 would only be if you want to keep all the travelers down to two games.

[J.D.]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

Seriously? Toledo is a great regional site. Beautiful brand new arena that is a manageable size for a regional, and about as centrally located as a Midwest regional can be. It's less than a 200 mile drive for seven different teams. It was a joke that the NCAA passed it over as long as it did.

Who is hosting? Guess I'll just have to check in and see what the attendance is like next year. Toledo, OH just doesn't scream great location for a hockey regional.

The trendline in the NCAA seems to follow a proven site selection methodology (e.g. NCAA hoops). For example, Big Ten basketball has rotated its sites between Indianapolis and Chicago over the past ten years. This allows the conference to play its tournament in the U.S.’s third biggest market (Chicago) and one of basketball’s most historic cities (Indianapolis) on a regular basis while also preventing any one team from having a home-court advantage on an annual basis.

I think it's dangerous to compare NCAA hockey to NCAA basketball...

Many college arenas are booked out for other things concerts etc....last minute hosting duties might become a logistical nightmare and possible revenue lost by holding open dates for an event you may or may not host wouldn't be appealing to arenas either.

It really wouldn't be that hard. You'd just have to keep the arena available for one extra weekend going forward.

As far as I'm concerned, it's got to be the pricing. St. Paul half empty with Minny and NoDak there. Worcester half empty with BC there (note that the BB regional is also being hosted by BC, but BC isn't there). You could have counted on both of these teams to be in these regionals months ago; it's not like this would be a sudden unplanned expense for fans.

BC is not the host in Worcester and didn't start this great stretch of play until February...

BC doesn't bring nearly as many fans as Maine and Duluth isn't bringing in anyone. Sunday night, 8pm start, and Worcester = sparse crowd for sure. IMO they would have done better playing this game in the afternoon -- I really think the prospects of driving out to Worcester for a late start when then the game is on TV and folks have work/school the next day will not help tonight...but maybe I'll be wrong! (I doubt it

They weren't as "together" as Maine fans, but there were just as many BC fans there yesterday. Your overall point is a good one though. Starting the Northeast regional final at 8 PM EST on a Sunday night is laughable. That's the biggest problem.

[CLS]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

...

It really wouldn't be that hard. You'd just have to keep the arena available for one extra weekend going forward.

...

53 teams (some of which share a facility or even have to rent ice) keep their arena open for a game that won't happen for 45 of them?

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

Does anyone have handy attendance numbers from the women's hoops tourneys when they temporarily went away from home sites for most 1st and 2nd round games? One of the reason they abandoned the idea was the embarrassingly horrible attendance. I think it was actually much worse than what we see in hockey. I'm talking about crowds in the hundreds.

I'm opposed to home ice in the tournament because I think it unfairly aids the home team by giving such a huge advantage to half the home teams with such a flawed system. Not enough separates seeds 4 through 8 from 9-12 to give them the advantage of, say, Yost Arena.

With many things we can do to give the regionals more atmosphere, home ice does not need to be returned to just yet anyway. Keep ALL the teams as close to home as possible within the current seeding model at the four sites. There could easily have been a number of teams placed at different sites and attendance would have been improved at Green Bay or Bridgeport or Worcester. Try and keep every team possible within reasonable driving distance (yeah reasonable is in the eye of the driver, but for argument sake, 6 or 7 hours is a target, and that gets me to either GB or StP)

Offer single day tickets much sooner than they offer them now. Tiered pricing, which Notre Dame used in 2010 at Fort Wayne. (the problem there was Notre Dame had a terrible year and missed, and the tiered pricing was still obscenely high) Of course lower ticket prices overall. For the life of me I don't understand this one. It seems like simple economics. When the demand for $80 tickets doesn't exist, lower the **** prices.

Instead of putting up annual bids for locations, find a way to work with a rotating group of cities and venues, perhaps 7 or 8, for each years regionals and FF. Build a relationship with a city and venue so that they know, every 2 or 3 years they are getting a regional or FF. And for the love of God, keep the locations in hockey specific areas. No one should have to go to St. Louis for a regional, or Tampa or Anaheim for a FF.

Of course, marketing. The only marketing Notre Dame ever did in 2010 consisted of announcements over the PA at home games. And since we stunk, our fans knew the chances of Notre Dame being there were slim and none. Work with the teams that potentially could be placed in a region. Work with the local youth and recreational hockey organizations. Provide complimentary tickets for those willing to help in promotion unless there is a proven demand (or a very reasonable expectation of one, like StP) for tickets. Partner with the various universities to market to their season ticket holders slightly discounted tickets. Season ticket holders are obviously a potential market and should be rewarded for their loyalty to a college team. If they are willing, do it with the local pro league team that plays in the venue.

Any of these ideas on their own would help put more people in each location. Taken together they may create the kind of environment everyone craves.

[GB Puck Fan]

53 teams (some of which share a facility or even have to rent ice) keep their arena open for a game that won't happen for 45 of them?

I think assuming 45 are available - especially if you want size minimums - is risky. Many facilities do host other events (I.e. Wisconsin and Ohio State have high school sports tournaments). Some places may not want the work associated with hosting such an event. And with predetermined sites, many of the logistics - not just for fans but TV, the teams, etc - are easier.

[mnstate0fhockey]

Yeah, I see your point. There was no "advantage" for the Gophers playing in St. Paul in front of those manacing BU fans that packed the place...

Apparently you don't know the Gophers record at the X. It really isn't that big of an advantage for them. NHL sheet vs Olympic, rarely play there, and with UND, UMD, etc there, crowd isn't as "pro Gopher" as you think (Plenty of UND fans cheering for BU). Biggest advantage Gophers had IMO is lack of travel. Keep BU out East. Problem solved. But, if it's a problem for people, move the Gophers elsewhere. I STILL don't like the campus idea.

[Priceless]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

It's called going up against the NCAA round ball regional finals. They're done when this starts.

If that was the case, put the East regional in Worcester at 5:30 and the West regional in St. Paul at 8:00. Playing the Western game first makes 0 sense.

[Priceless]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

The fees are courtesy of Ticket Master or the venue (or both!) and not the NCAA.

Two regional sites can work.
4 pods of 4 teams over the course of three days. Using this year's bracket as an example:
Friday in Worcester: #1 BC v #4 AFA Noon, #1 Union v #4 Michigan State 3:30
Friday in St, Paul: #1 Michigan v #4 Cornell 6:00, #1 North Dakota v #4 Western Michigan 9:30

Saturday in Worcester: #2 UMD v #3 Maine Noon, #2 Miami v #3 Lowell 3:30
Saturday in St. Paul: #2 Ferris v #3 Denver 6:00, #2 Minn v #3 BU 9:30

Sunday in Worcester: BC v UMD Noon, Union v Lowell 3:30
Sunday in St. Paul: Cornell v Ferris 6:00, North Dakota v Minnesota 9:30
(all times eastern)

It's TV friendly - All games can easily be televised.
It's fan friendly - Six games in three days.
It can be made more fan friendly by: tiering ticket prices, promoting single day tickets, allowing re-entry between games.

A prime time game at the X between Minnesota and North Dakota with reasonably priced tickets should be close to a sellout. In Worcester, today would still have the fan bases from BC, Lowell and Union so the attendance will be a tad better than the looming disaster of an 8:00 Sunday night start between BC and UMD...

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

Ticket prices have to be looked at as a factor. I paid $20 to watch Notre Dame in their first NCAA tournament in 2004 at Van Andel. By 2009 I was paying $32.50. Inflation alone would have raised that price to $22.53 in 2009 and only $24.10 this year. No one is charging $44 for an all session pass. If they were, I'd bet you'd have a much more respectable crowd. If the seating requirement to host a regional were dropped to say 5000 seats and Notre Dame hosted one, I'd likely pay $20 or $25 to watch a regional final even if ND were absent. No way would I pay $50 to watch two teams I have no rooting interest in though. Lower ticket prices help get more locals in.

[mnstate0fhockey]

The fees are courtesy of Ticket Master or the venue (or both!) and not the NCAA.

Two regional sites can work.
4 pods of 4 teams over the course of three days. Using this year's bracket as an example:
Friday in Worcester: #1 BC v #4 AFA Noon, #1 Union v #4 Michigan State 3:30
Friday in St, Paul: #1 Michigan v #4 Cornell 6:00, #1 North Dakota v #4 Western Michigan 9:30

Saturday in Worcester: #2 UMD v #3 Maine Noon, #2 Miami v #3 Lowell 3:30
Saturday in St. Paul: #2 Ferris v #3 Denver 6:00, #2 Minn v #3 BU 9:30

Sunday in Worcester: BC v UMD Noon, Union v Lowell 3:30
Sunday in St. Paul: Cornell v Ferris 6:00, North Dakota v Minnesota 9:30
(all times eastern)

It's TV friendly - All games can easily be televised.
It's fan friendly - Six games in three days.
It can be made more fan friendly by: tiering ticket prices, promoting single day tickets, allowing re-entry between games.

A prime time game at the X between Minnesota and North Dakota with reasonably priced tickets should be close to a sellout. In Worcester, today would still have the fan bases from BC, Lowell and Union so the attendance will be a tad better than the looming disaster of an 8:00 Sunday night start between BC and UMD...

Not bad. I like it.

[Red Cows]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

I submit that the attendance at these regionals is actually pretty good. The notion that that they are poorly attended defies logic when you look at the numbers with your eyes instead of your hearts.

Here is the average home attendance of the 16 NCAA tournament teams (few of whom play to 100% capacity):

North Dakota 11,634
Minnesota 9,539
Boston College 7,549
Minnesota-Duluth 6,328
Maine 6,182
Michigan 5,997
Michigan State 5,364
Denver 5,359
Boston U. 4,963
UMass-Lowell 4,904
Cornell 4,238
Western Michigan 3,444
Miami 3,021
Air Force 2,483
Union 2,009
Ferris State 1,947

Where are all the butts in seats at these regionals? I submit that they are there, based on this list.

The participating team's home attendance average, total, for each of the 4 regionals:

Worcester 22,542
St Paul 29,580
Bridgeport 15,298
Green Bay 17,541

What percentage of these fanbases are going to make a trip to one of the regional locations and pay the ticket prices charged to see their teams besides all the other ancillary expense? I don't think regional attendance looks bad or out of whack at all based on these numbers. In fact, it looks pretty good to me.

Teams like Union don't have much of a fan base to bring. They can't even sell out an arena, consistently, that seats 2,225 people! Or Ferris State, that plays to about 78% capacity in a building seating 2,493?

Everybody posting about this here seems to live in some fantasyland where all sorts of fans of these teams (and college hockey in general) exist in numbers far beyond the reality of the situation. Further, if you move these games back to on-campus sites into the puny arenas most of these teams play in, the home team has home field advantage and the fans of the opposing team that want to come get shut out of doing so, too.

I do have a problem with the site selection not being very fan friendly and the dissemination of the teams to specific regionals but I don't think much can be done about the attendance unless you could somehow chose regional sites after you knew the 16 team field, which isn't logistically possible, or, increase the following of college hockey teams and college hockey in general. To give you an idea of the scope of that problem, using UNO as an example, the Omaha World Herald covered no aspect of the WCHA tournament after UNO was out of it and has hardly covered the NCAA hockey tournament at all.

I think this situation is what it is. Lowering ticket prices isn't going to create a fanbase that isn't there in the first place. You could supply free tickets and I don't know what impact that would have given the other costs associated with going to a regional that is far away. And, you'd have to have somebody that wants the free tickets to give them to in the first place. I think the people that want to be at these regionals are, by and large, there.

[bronconick]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

2/2/2... that's how I'd do it... 2/3/1 would only be if you want to keep all the travelers down to two games.

The biggest issue that I've thought of since then would be getting 8 teams on the ice for an hour's practice.

[J.D.]

53 teams (some of which share a facility or even have to rent ice) keep their arena open for a game that won't happen for 45 of them?

Jesus, fine. If it's too much of a problem to keep the arena open for ONE extra weekend, then that team simply can't host. End of problem.

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

I do have a problem with the site selection not being very fan friendly and the dissemination of the teams to specific regionals but I don't think much can be done about the attendance unless you could somehow chose regional sites after you knew the 16 team field, which isn't logistically possible, or, increase the following of college hockey teams and college hockey in general.

Except that you can easily keep people from having to fly to get to a regional and that keeps a lot of fans away. As well, if you are close enough to drive you are quite probably close enough to do without an overnight stay, especially if your team loses the first game, or you choose to just go to a regional final. MSU fans who were not ever going to go to Bridgeport may well have gone to Green Bay. BU fans who were not likely to make the trip to St Paul under any circumstances may have had a completely different thought going to Worcester or Bridgeport. We can easily have placed 2 or 3 teams much closer to their game and that alone would have increased attendance. I considered going to Manchester last year to watch Notre Dame, but in the end the drive was too far. Had they been placed in St Louis (and that wouldn't have been a stretch) I would have been there without question. The regionals should be REGIONAL.

I think this situation is what it is. Lowering ticket prices isn't going to create a fanbase that isn't there in the first place. You could supply free tickets and I don't know what impact that would have given the other costs associated with going to a regional that is far away.

Again, not necessarily true. We have no idea what the market is anymore with reasonable ticket prices since the NCAA has allowed the venues and hosts to price people out of going. It is worth it to lower prices (dramatically in some cases) to see what the actual interest is. And as I have noted, more can be done to keep teams playing within a reasonable distance from their team's location, thus lowering costs to get there and offering an option to not have to stay overnight.

And, you'd have to have somebody that wants the free tickets to give them to in the first place. I think the people that want to be at these regionals are, by and large, there.

Like I noted, I would have liked to have seen Notre Dame last season, but going to Manchester proved to be impossible. Going to St Louis was very possible. I can't be the only person who was in that boat, so no not all the people that wanted to be at a regional were there. Hardly, in fact.

[CLS]

Re: More proof that the Regional system is a disaster: Today's attendance at the X is

...
Everybody posting about this here seems to live in some fantasyland where all sorts of fans of these teams (and college hockey in general) exist in numbers far beyond the reality of the situation. Further, if you move these games back to on-campus sites into the puny arenas most of these teams play in, the home team has home field advantage and the fans of the opposing team that want to come get shut out of doing so, too.

Or you’d have to tell a season ticket holder that they can’t have their seat because they have to hold tickets for the NCAA and for the other team.

...
I think this situation is what it is. Lowering ticket prices isn't going to create a fanbase that isn't there in the first place. You could supply free tickets and I don't know what impact that would have given the other costs associated with going to a regional that is far away. And, you'd have to have somebody that wants the free tickets to give them to in the first place. I think the people that want to be at these regionals are, by and large, there.

Great post, most thoughtful I’ve seen in the several hundred posts on the several threads discussing the regionals.