Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Attendance at Regionals

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Attendance at Regionals

    Originally posted by riverhawk2000 View Post
    The NCAA should give schools 1000 tickets for free to distribute to students.
    hahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahaha

    No seriously, you ex hahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahaha

    Sorry, you expect the NC$$ to give something away? For free?

    hahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahha

    Comment


    • Re: Attendance at Regionals

      Originally posted by Alton View Post
      While I'm with you on allowing schools to host regionals on campus, I don't see why only certain schools should be allowed that opportunity. Either they all should be allowed, or none should be allowed, but I have been mystified about the NCAA Hockey Committee's logic in allowing only certain schools to host.



      This is not an issue. In my experience, people don't do anything at a regional other than go to hockey, drink, eat and drink. Getting back to my original point, most hockey fans won't even go to a regional if it means having to spend the night in a hotel room. If you have a regional in Omaha, it will be packed to the rafters with screaming fans if The University of Nebraska-Omaha is in the tournament. It will be Grand Rapids-level empty if The University of Nebraska-Omaha is not in the tournament, unless you drop the ticket prices to single digits.

      Why not adopt a format where we can guarantee that every first round game is played in an arena that is packed to the rafters with screaming fans? The game day atmosphere is the best thing about college hockey, and for some reason, when the NCAA tournament rolls around, we try to act like it is the worst thing.
      As much as I'd like to see it at high seed campus site, what do we do with the second round? The NCAA likes the frozen four so they aren't going to turn that into an 8 team tournament? You can't expect every arena to hold 3-4 weekends open for the possibility of 2-3 hockey games to be played in their buildings. One of the biggest pushers for the B1G conference tournament to just be one weekend with all 6 teams going straight to the "neutral" site was so that schools like Wisconsin (pushed hard) can use the Kohl Center for High School Basketball, Volleyball, Wrestling or whatever instead of having it reserved for college hockey to appease Wisconsinites. Ohio State has also had the same problem when hosting conference playoff games, getting bumped to their old building because of Wrestling (I think?). As for your assessment of pricing, I don't really think it needs to be single digits. I think $15-20 a game could work fine, you could also offer family four packs or not have 1 tier for the whole building (a huge pet peeve of mine). I think the NCAA is very narrowminded in their approach to solving this problem. There are a ton of options. They just refuse to adjust their plans and think eventually it will improve and turn into the a smaller version of the Basketball tournament.
      Michigan Tech Legend, Founder of Mitch's Misfits, Co-Founder of Tech Hockey Guide, and Creator/Host of the Chasing MacNaughton Podcast covering MTU Hockey and the WCHA.

      Sports Allegiance: NFL: GB MLB: MIL NHL: MIN CB: UW CF: UW CH: MTU FIFA: USA MLS: MIN EPL: Everton

      Comment


      • Re: Attendance at Regionals

        Men's lacrosse has the quarterfinals at 2 neutral sites (2 QF on 1 day at a "North" venue and 2 QF on 1 day at a "South" venue). Hockey could do the same, and possibly avoid the problems with regional attendance (because it would be a 1-day event). If not neutral, why not on campus quarterfinals? College hockey did it for over a decade, and they can do it again. I certainly don't see why we should arrange the entire NCAA hockey tournament around Wisconsin's decision not to build a hockey rink. If they can't host, I'm sure the NCAA can find somebody who can.

        "The game of hockey, though much in vogue on the ice in New England and other parts of the United States, is not much known here."

        --The Montreal Gazette, March 4, 1875.

        Comment


        • Re: Attendance at Regionals

          Originally posted by Alton View Post
          ...

          The sad fact is that the predetermined-site regionals don't work. There is nothing that can be done to make them work. We just need to call it a 20+ year experiment that has obviously failed, and go back to the drawing board. Perhaps the NCAA Hockey Committee could take a look at other 16-team bracketed tournaments that they have in Division I (e.g., Men's Lacrosse, Women's Lacrosse, Field Hockey) and see how they do things. Personally, the Men's Lacrosse format strikes me as quite reasonable.
          I don’t think it’s fair to say that the pre-determined site regionals haven’t worked or that it’s a 20+ year experiment that has obviously failed. I think they’ve worked fine in the east, but then I fully admit that I think having tournament games at a neutral site is a positive factor, even if it means a less than full arena. There’s a problem in the west, though I certainly wouldn’t use “haven’t worked” or “failed” to describe the situation. On what basis do you use those terms? Attendance alone? Attendance vs. capacity alone?

          Comment


          • Re: Attendance at Regionals

            In what was does the regional setup have to do with a Wisconsin hockey rink?

            Comment


            • Re: Attendance at Regionals

              Originally posted by billmich88888 View Post
              In what was does the regional setup have to do with a Wisconsin hockey rink?
              If we switch to top seed hosts, some schools might not be too happy about having to keep another weekend open for hockey games, especially at schools that have multipurpose arenas like UNO, UW, OSU, etc.
              Michigan Tech Legend, Founder of Mitch's Misfits, Co-Founder of Tech Hockey Guide, and Creator/Host of the Chasing MacNaughton Podcast covering MTU Hockey and the WCHA.

              Sports Allegiance: NFL: GB MLB: MIL NHL: MIN CB: UW CF: UW CH: MTU FIFA: USA MLS: MIN EPL: Everton

              Comment


              • Re: Attendance at Regionals

                The regional setup pre-dates the kohl center

                Comment


                • Re: Attendance at Regionals

                  Originally posted by Shirtless Guy View Post
                  They just refuse to adjust their plans and think eventually it will improve and turn into the a smaller version of the Basketball tournament.
                  And they are wrong for about 8 billions reasons, all of which have been discussed here forever...

                  Comment


                  • Re: Attendance at Regionals

                    Originally posted by Shirtless Guy View Post
                    If we switch to top seed hosts, some schools might not be too happy about having to keep another weekend open for hockey games, especially at schools that have multipurpose arenas like UNO, UW, OSU, etc.
                    There are at least two important differences between the conference tournaments and NCAA play:

                    1. The NCAA games are single elimination. There's no need to block out three consecutive days for possible hockey games. You'd need to hold Friday OR Saturday OR Sunday open. Two of those three days could be used for something else.

                    2. The NCAA games come much later in the calendar than the 1st Round conference playoff games. By the last weekend in March, most of the profitable high school events competing for our venues have been completed.

                    Originally posted by Alton View Post
                    ...Why not adopt a format where we can guarantee that every first round game is played in an arena that is packed to the rafters with screaming fans? The game day atmosphere is the best thing about college hockey, and for some reason, when the NCAA tournament rolls around, we try to act like it is the worst thing.
                    Appreciate your perseverance on this issue. I continue to agree with you that a Lacrosse-type format is the way to go, and hope someday that the patience will be rewarded.

                    Originally posted by Alton View Post
                    Men's lacrosse has the quarterfinals at 2 neutral sites (2 QF on 1 day at a "North" venue and 2 QF on 1 day at a "South" venue). Hockey could do the same, and possibly avoid the problems with regional attendance (because it would be a 1-day event). If not neutral, why not on campus quarterfinals? College hockey did it for over a decade, and they can do it again...
                    IMHO, having the first round on campus and the quarterfinals at neutral sites strikes a nice balance among the competing considerations. And with just a little bit of careful marketing, those quarterfinals could become a very attractive event.

                    Consider: Have one West site and one East site. Each venue has a double-header. Both winners go directly to the Frozen Four. Live within 150 miles? No hotel needed. Live further away? Can probably get by with a single night of lodging. It seems to me that's an event that will survive a fan's cost benefit analysis.

                    Another factor is that attending a regional under the current format means missing most of the rest of the regional action. OK, the ESPNU coverage isn't absolutely ideal. But in the typical year, I manage to watch at least the four region finals. It's just more attractive than booking a trip in advance to a regional site where I may or may not have a rooting interest. Under the format I propose, one could make plans far in advance to attend the Western Quarterfinals -- wherever they might be -- and still be home to watch the Eastern Quarters on his or her own TV.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Attendance at Regionals

                      Or do one regional on a Saturday and the other on a Sunday and have to miss NONE of the other games

                      Comment


                      • Re: Attendance at Regionals

                        Catching up after a few days, and there are a few points I want to make.

                        Originally posted by SCSU BlackandRed View Post
                        ... Big problem in my opinion is hosting the regionals in cities that are non-major metros. Flights to Toledo were either impossible or insanely priced and then combine that with challenging start times, just leads to a big struggle in getting fans in the seats. I'm guessing it was the same for UND and MN going into Grand Rapids. ...
                        DTW (Detroit metro airport) is 50 miles from the Huntington Center in Toledo. Heck, I've always joked that flying into DTW you land in Toledo and taxi to Detroit. While some may think 50 miles is far; the Toledo airport is 20 miles from Huntington Center. Or look at many metros where the airport is far from downtown (Denver is 25 miles for example).
                        Grand Rapids actually has quite a few flights. While not a major metro airport, it is a decent sized commercial airport.
                        I still think it was ridiculous to have Toledo and Grand Rapids in the same year, and all regionals in the Eastern time zone, but I don't think that neither Toledo nore Grand Rapids could work in the future.

                        Originally posted by IrishHockeyFan View Post
                        ...Now whether or not to sell beer is certainly a valid question to ponder (personally I see no reason to NOT sell it, it's available at virtually every sporting event in the world, amateur or pro), but those who think that it is any large reason for the meager crowds are fooling themselves...
                        I agree that no beer isn't a reason for the meager crowds, but it could be a reason for a potential host site to consider. If we want large cities with bigger populations to draw from, then we are looking at host sites that can get a variety of events where they can sell more tickets and more concessions and sell alcohol. If I own a facility and have a choice between NCAA hockey which I can sell 2000 tickets and can't sell beer or a concert I can sell 10,000 tickets and sell alcohol, I'm picking the concert. Heck, I'll even take Disney on Ice over a 2000 ticket hockey game. All those whiney brats can get there parents to buy them slushies and popcorn.

                        Originally posted by Alton View Post
                        In my experience, people don't do anything at a regional other than go to hockey, drink, eat and drink. Getting back to my original point, most hockey fans won't even go to a regional if it means having to spend the night in a hotel room.
                        I know I'm an exception, but I enjoy making a vacation out of a regional. The problem has been finding things to do in some towns. Like Bridgeport, or Ft. Wayne (we played indoor mini golf and watched bouncyball on tv 'cause we didn't know what else to do). Somewhere like Green Bay, I toured Lambeau, but having done that once, I don't know what I'd do if I went there again.
                        Originally posted by West Texas Wolverine
                        wT, your wisdom is as boundless as the volume of your cheering.
                        Arenas visited:
                        7 B1G
                        9 WCHA (all except Huntsville)
                        6 NCH (UNO, NoDak, DU, Miami, SCSU, WMU)
                        5 Hockey East (BU, BC, UNH, Lowell, Vermont)
                        5 ECAC (RPI, Union, Dartmouth, St. Lawrence, Clarkson)
                        2 AHA (Mercyhurst, RIT)

                        Comment


                        • Re: Attendance at Regionals

                          I say the #1 team in each region hosts 2 3 and 4. If #1 can't host because something else is booked at the arena or if they can't sell the place out...move it to #2. If #2 can't host...#3, you're up.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Attendance at Regionals

                            I'm not sure if this has already been discussed in the 16 pages of the thread, but here's a thought...

                            1) Seed teams 1-8 (two teams/seed) by East/West
                            2) First Round - Best of 3 series at the higher seed's home rink - Played Fri-Sun (if necessary)
                            3) Two "Regional Quarterfinal" locations, one east, one west - Played Fri-Sat
                            4) Frozen Four like normal, but played Fri-Sat

                            This year's tournament could have looked like this...

                            Initial seeding...

                            East
                            #1 Seed - Quinnipiac
                            #2 Seed - Lowell
                            #3 Seed - Boston College
                            #4 Seed - New Hampshire
                            #5 Seed - Niagara
                            #6 Seed - Union
                            #7 Seed - Wisconsin/SCSU
                            #8 Seed - Yale/Canisius

                            West
                            #1 Seed - Minnesota
                            #2 Seed - Notre Dame
                            #3 Seed - Miami
                            #4 Seed - North Dakota
                            #5 Seed - Denver
                            #6 Seed - Mankato
                            #7 Seed - Wisconsin/SCSU
                            #8 Seed - Yale/Canisius

                            Obviously, we'd still try and avoid intra-conference matchups in the first round, so we swap Denver with Niagara as 5 seeds, sending DU out west. The 7 and 8 seeds are interchangeable, but we'll stick with integrity (1v16/2v16...etc) as much as possible, so UW gets #7 East and SCSU gets #7 West. Yale gets #8 West, and Canisius gets #8 East. So our first round brackets look as follows...

                            East
                            #1 Quinnipiac vs. #8 Canisius (Avg. Attendance - 3,122 (101% Capacity))
                            #2 Lowell vs. #7 Wisconsin (Avg. Attendance - 5,246 (87% Capacity))
                            #3 BC vs. #6 Union (Avg. Attendance - 6,384 (81% Capacity))
                            #4 New Hampshire vs. #5 Denver (Avg. Attendance - 5,521 (90% Capacity))

                            West
                            #1 Minnesota vs. #8 Yale (Avg. Attendance - 9,950 (99% Capacity))
                            #2 Notre Dame vs. #7 SCSU (Avg. Attendance - 4,885 (98% Capacity))
                            #3 Miami vs. #6 Mankato (Avg. Attendance - 3,004 (94% Capacity))
                            #4 North Dakota vs. #5 Niagara (Avg. Attendance - 11,592 (99% Capacity))

                            Assuming that all series wrap up in 2 games and that all arenas are at average attendance, that equals 99,408 in attendance.

                            Then, for the Regional Quarterfinals the next weekend, on Friday we would have one set of Regional Finals, and on Saturday we would have the other set. The brackets would be preset (1v4, 2v3, etc.). Assuming all the same results as this past weekend, we'd have the following Regional Quarterfinals...

                            East
                            #1 Quinnipiac vs. #4 New Hampshire - Winner moves on to the Frozen Four
                            #2 Lowell vs. #6 Union - Winner moves on to the Frozen Four

                            West
                            #8 Yale vs. #4 North Dakota - Winner moves on to the Frozen Four
                            #7 SCSU vs. #3 Miami - Winner moves on to the Frozen Four

                            At the Frozen Four, I moved the games from Thu-Sat to Fri-Sat to give the teams an extra day to prepare as a result of the off week eliminated. The teams would have 5-6 off days to get travel in order. Another option would be to include the off week, and have the Regional Finals on Saturday-Sunday and keep the Frozen Four Thursday-Saturday. The problem there is that the Tournament now stretches 4 weeks instead of 3. In this scenario, the regular season would likely have to be shrunk 1 week (still the 34 games though) to accommodate the fact that the Conference Tournaments would be played 1 week earlier.

                            Either way, I would reseed for the Frozen Four, so it would look like this...

                            #1 Quinnipiac vs. #8 Yale
                            #2 Lowell vs. #7 SCSU

                            Now, let's say that Both #1 seeds made it, and Both #3 seeds made it. In this scenario, we'd square off East vs. West (i.e. #1 East vs. #3 West and #1 West vs. #3 East).

                            Anyway, that's how I'd like to see the tournament done.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Attendance at Regionals

                              Originally posted by beaverhockey View Post
                              I say the #1 team in each region hosts 2 3 and 4. If #1 can't host because something else is booked at the arena or if they can't sell the place out...move it to #2. If #2 can't host...#3, you're up.
                              Doesn't the NCAA put minimums on capacity? The last thing we need is Sacred Heart to go on a tear and then we have to have a regional in a 1,000-seat building.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Attendance at Regionals

                                Originally posted by billmich88888 View Post
                                Or do one regional on a Saturday and the other on a Sunday and have to miss NONE of the other games
                                Yup; exactly what I had in mind. One site's Quarterfinals on Saturday; The other site's Quarterfinals on Sunday. Pair of games on each day. Should have been more specific.

                                Regarding the proceeding weekend for the Round of 16: Most fans wouldn't try watch all 8 games. I would hope that all of those games would be put in desirable timeslots for the in-house, on-campus crowd -- meaning there would be some head-to-head conflicts for the TV viewer. But spreading those games across a three day weekend could keep the conflicts to a minimum. At the very least, it would be an improvement over the current situation.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X