Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

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

  • #46
    Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

    I hate the idea of two sites. If the east can't sell more, then find better sites out there. Or, since more teams are from the west, why not have three regionals this side of Philly?
    Have one in Michigan, one in Chicago, and one in St. Paul.
    Albany is a lousy location, I was there once and will never go back. Detroit was a blast and we had plenty of places to go during the weekend.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

      Originally posted by BobF View Post
      The times I saw it banged out Maine was playing!
      That is my point... I should have mentioned Maine as well... but in my experience (and I have not been to every east regional) but I would say that if the game does not include either Maine, UNH, BU or BC, then the attendance stinks. (And attendance is even better if it includes 2 of those teams).

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

        Count me as another one who thinks the price is the biggest factor. I am a hardcore hockey fan and of course had a great time tonight in Worcester for the two games. I can somewhat justify $47.50 for the two games today. But I will be skipping tomorrow because even I cannot justify another $47.50 for just one game. If the NC$$ wants to get casual fans in the door, they need to offer cheaper tickets. This is such a great tournament, and I think it's sad to look at the attendance numbers in places like Albany and Ft. Wayne. Worcester and St. Paul are not bad this year, but how much better would all of the sites be if the price point could draw some casual fans?
        Colorado College Hockey: Finding new and creative ways to break your heart since 1957.
        -dggoddard

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

          Originally posted by ck1969 View Post
          I think the regionals need to be moved to other venues (in the east anyway) besides the same ol Albany & Worcester. Manchester is OK. Portland Maine would make an awesome location.
          Except that they don't currently have an arena big enough. Yes, technically it meets the minimum standards, but at 6,733 seats it's smaller than several Hockey East arenas and far too small for a regional. On top of that it's a dump.

          Originally posted by ck1969 View Post
          Close to the Boston fan base.
          distance from Boston (according to Google Maps)
          DCU Center: 53 minutes
          Verizon Wireless Arena: 54 minutes
          Providence Civic Center: 55 minutes
          Cumberland County Civic Center: 1 hour 46 minutes
          Mullins Center: 1 hour 55 minutes
          Arena at Harbor Yard: 2 hours 35 minutes
          Times Union Center: 3 hours
          Last edited by Lake Whitt; 03-28-2010, 12:10 AM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

            Blocksi - Actually, I think in the Midwest there are good options. (Getting venues to bid is another issue).

            Green Bay is 8700. Quad Cities is about 10,000. Indianapolis (Pepsi Coliseum) can be about 8000, IIRC. Des Moines has a 15,000-seat facility. Bloomington (Ill.) is about 6000, I think. The US Cellular in Milwaukee (formerly the MECCA is 10,000). Sears Center outside Chicago is 10,000. How big is Allstate (the Horizon)? And the UIC Pavillion is 10,000. The Nutter Center (Dayton) is in that range...


            On the smaller side, Lincoln is 5000, the Civic Auditorium in Omaha is 6000, the new Fargo place is 5000, I think. How big are Peoria and Rockford?
            St. Norbert College Green Knights
            NCHA regular season champs: 97-99, 02-08, 10-12, 14, 16, 19
            NCHA playoff champs: 98-99, 03-05, 07-08, 10-14, 17-19
            NCAA Champions: 2008, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2018
            ---
            SNC women: 2013 O'Brien Cup Champions

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

              Originally posted by Lake Whitt View Post
              Except that they don't currently have an arena big enough. Yes, technically it meets the minimum standards, but at 6,733 seats it's smaller than several Hockey East arenas and far too small for a regional. On top of that it's a dump.


              distance from Boston (according to Google Maps)
              DCU Center: 53 minutes
              Verizon Wireless Arena: 54 minutes
              Providence Civic Center: 55 minutes
              Cumberland County Civic Center: 1 hour 46 minutes
              Mullins Center: 1 hour 55 minutes
              Arena at Harbor Yard: 2 hours 35 minutes
              Times Union Center: 3 hours
              Then you have Bangor trying to build a new arena and it's only going to have 5,000 seats and it won't be built for hockey. They sure are intelligent on the Bangor city council. The original plans had the building being built for hockey and it had 8,000 seats which would have been perfect, but they claim they don't have the money to build such a building. Hmmmm.... I'm sure the voters of Maine if it's sold correctly could support a bond to build a bigger building, but we'll never see it. Unless Portland builds a new Arena which is in the plans and you can count on them doing the right thing.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

                Originally posted by Priceless View Post
                Worcester: 6572
                Albany: 3737
                Fort Wayne: 4133
                St Paul: 7182

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

                  The availability of TV or internet video kills attendance. However the arenas must be making more by selling video rights than they would by selling seats.
                  A multiple price structure would be the greatest way to bring in fans. Those that will show up anyway will pay top price for the better seats so that the base attendance stays the same. The additional fans who want to go but are priced out would opt for the cheaper seats and attendance would rise. The fears of people all opting for the lower priced seats are unfounded. If you can afford it you buy the better seats.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

                    Originally posted by BC/HE View Post
                    The availability of TV or internet video kills attendance.
                    This has been an argument made about sports for a century now. Well first it was radio, then TV, now the internet. And it has never been true. Baseball and boxing in the early 1920s and 1930s worried that no one would pay to come see an event in person if you could hear it on the radio for free. Baseball and college football feared the same thing in the 1950s about the growing presence of TV. Even pro football, before fully embracing TV, wondered if showing games for free would drag down attendance before developing the most significant TV presentation of any sport. No empirical evidence has ever shown that simply having a sporting event available electronically has pushed down the numbers at the ball parks.

                    If the economy was buzzing and Minnesota made the Excel, that place would have been sold out, or close to it. Fort Wayne would have been well filled were Indiana and Michigan not suffering economically like hasn't been seen in nearly a century and Notre Dame made the draw. It isn't so long ago that the idea of being able to see every game on TV was a pipe dream. Many still complain about the availability of the games in their particular area or from their particular internet provider. I think the first real answer is more affordable tickets. Try that before we take our product off the medium that gives it the most exposure.

                    Knee jerk reactions because of a couple of bad draws and bad crowds while the nation is still reeling economically are ill-advised, at best. 2 sites means 12 teams, likely. There are ways to do 8 teams per site, but not ideal ones. I don't want this sport going backwards. 16 teams, 4 sites, and everyone playing the same number of games to win a championship makes the most sense. Find ways to make that scenario work.
                    Last edited by IrishHockeyFan; 03-28-2010, 09:59 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

                      Another thing about going back to 12 and having a 2-game total goal series: It encourages teams to run up the score, something I abhor. This is hockey, not Big-12 football. I don't want to see games where the final score is 8-1. The second game is usually terrible since the first winner will play a prevent defense the whole night.
                      If anything, have a best of three series at the home of the higher seed for the first two rounds. The problem with this format is now it will take three weekends instead of two. That wouldn't be bad, just look at the other sports that have a similar format, they sell tickets and make money.
                      There are plenty of fans (Denver, UND, etc) that would love to have another chance at redemption. St. Cloud would love to have another game or two against UW. That season series was balanced and a classic fight between matched teams.
                      Teams could be matched more regionally to allow for a home and home series.
                      Imagine Miami and Michigan alternating as host with the higher seed getting the final game. UND and St. Cloud would also be huge!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

                        Originally posted by Pucky-Bucky Backer View Post
                        Teams could be matched more regionally to allow for a home and home series.
                        Imagine Miami and Michigan alternating as host with the higher seed getting the final game. UND and St. Cloud would also be huge!
                        I've always found this idea interesting. ButI think it would be too difficult between a number of teams in the CCHA and the WCHA. You really cannot expect CC to play MTU in a home-home-and-home series in 3 days. The travel would kill even 18-23 year old kids. Even starting in one location and finishing up with two if needed at the other would be hard. Its too bad because there would be some intense hockey in a 3 game series.

                        eta yeah Micigan Tech in the NCAAs.... I hear it.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

                          Originally posted by IrishHockeyFan View Post
                          I've always found this idea interesting. ButI think it would be too difficult between a number of teams in the CCHA and the WCHA. You really cannot expect CC to play MTU in a home-home-and-home series in 3 days. The travel would kill even 18-23 year old kids. Even starting in one location and finishing up with two if needed at the other would be hard. Its too bad because there would be some intense hockey in a 3 game series.

                          eta yeah Micigan Tech in the NCAAs.... I hear it.
                          I agree that a home and home would all but be impossible (and costly) outside of Minnesota, but the idea is interesting for a few seconds.
                          The best of three at the higher seed's home ice still has merit.

                          Imagine a third game between two bitter rivals going to overtime! MN-UND or Mich-MSU, WOW!
                          Those are games would sell out in seconds.
                          Last edited by Pucky-Bucky Backer; 03-28-2010, 11:08 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

                            Originally posted by GB Puck Fan View Post
                            Blocksi - Actually, I think in the Midwest there are good options. (Getting venues to bid is another issue).

                            Green Bay is 8700. Quad Cities is about 10,000. Indianapolis (Pepsi Coliseum) can be about 8000, IIRC. Des Moines has a 15,000-seat facility. Bloomington (Ill.) is about 6000, I think. The US Cellular in Milwaukee (formerly the MECCA is 10,000). Sears Center outside Chicago is 10,000. How big is Allstate (the Horizon)? And the UIC Pavillion is 10,000. The Nutter Center (Dayton) is in that range...


                            On the smaller side, Lincoln is 5000, the Civic Auditorium in Omaha is 6000, the new Fargo place is 5000, I think. How big are Peoria and Rockford?
                            Allstate is a near 18-20K facility- the NCAA would consider it viable, but, IMO, it's unrealistic. To kind of piggyback off a number of things people said:

                            1- Lower the **** price. To ask, no, expect people to drop $95 for tickets, plus food, gas, lodging (or a flight) is ridiculous.

                            2- If you want people to go, put it in places where you can make a weekend out of the trip. Sorry, Fort Wayne, Albany, and Worcester- not exactly my ideas of weekend vacation destinations.

                            3- You could COMBINE the totals from FR-SA at all 4 regionals and not hit capacity at most NHL arenas (approx. 21K). IMO, the lack of available TV coverage probably did help attendance at a couple sites, especially if E360 isn't carried by your primary carrier- (**** you, Time Warner.).

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

                              Another thing about going back to 12 and having a 2-game total goal series: It encourages teams to run up the score, something I abhor.
                              There's no going back to 12 teams. When I suggested 2 sites, I wasn't implying reducing the field to do that...Priceless' idea of 3-day scheduling could make two 8-team sites do-able, I was more thinking along those lines.

                              Two day total goal series -- ugggh!! I Hated those back in the day, there's no way we'll see the likes of that again...people would go into the 2nd night and not even be aware what the score was the night before, lol. Or one team would go out to a big lead the first night, then coast in the second, making for a tedious and unexciting game.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

                                This isn't going back to 12 teams, nor total goals...and it isn't a knee-jerk reaction to a few small attendance figures this year.

                                Amherst: 3441 (41% capacity)
                                Amherst: 3662 (43%)
                                Rochester: 3887 (35%)
                                Albany: 4195 (29%)
                                Albany: 4301 (30%)
                                Albany: 4470 (31%)
                                Grand Rapids: 4839 (45%) (and that was for a game featuring Notre Dame and Michigan State)
                                Grand Rapids: 5201 (48%)

                                Western sites haven't been as plagued by attendance because the regionals are on or near campus (the Ralph, World Arena, Kohl Center).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X