NCAA Regionals - Time to Go Back to 2 Sites?

[HockeyMan2000]

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

And now with the tournament at a non-traditional site many of us are also concerned that instead of a national championship what we may see in Ford Field is empty seats, bad ice, and as a result a substandard product. Which is why many regular Frozen Four attendees are taking this one off!

Well said!

The whole issue of holding the Frozen Four at "non traditional sites" is a valid one to have. Ford Field was a stunt decision that I hated from the start (and I've been going to FF's since the early '80s) but places like Tampa -- yes I'm all for a nice warm venue for a change, and I'll almost certainly go, but what good in the big picture is it going to do for college hockey?

It's not like people living in regions of the country where college hockey doesn't exist are all of a sudden going to think "wow, what a great sport, I'm going to watch it the rest of the year!" That'll never happen, ever. They don't have teams there to watch, most college hockey TV coverage is done on a local, not national, basis...it's mystifying to me what they think they will get out of it. What's the point of "broadening the sport's scope" when it just isn't there in the majority of the nation to begin with?

As much as I love it, this sport is what it is -- a regional sport with a comparatively small number of teams. And to be honest, it's always going to be that way. I don't want to say it's an "inbred sport," but it is to some degree. How many of us are fans whose parents were fans and we follow it because of where we are or the schools we went to or live near? I'd say it's got to be the majority, easily.

The NCAA only cares about the $$, absolutely, but it's interesting, to me at least, that they don't seem to have a firm grasp on what this sport really is -- or ever will be. They can't see that there isn't enough support out there to make 4 regionals viable in terms of attendance, but have done nothing about it, while they seem to be going out of their way to inconvenience the very fans -- those people who walked up in Providence and started the whole FF "phenomena" decades ago -- who started this all for them.

It's certainly an interesting conversation to have...

[IrishHockeyFan]

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

I've attended the last 2 regionals hosted in Grand Rapids, and they drew 7000-8000 with Michigan, Michigan State, and ND playing there in some combination. And GR has more things to do than either Ft. Wayne or Albany, though I wouldn't consider it a prime site for overall points-of-interest-draw.

Not to quibble too much, but in the three regionals in Grand Rapids Notre Dame has been placed, the average "official" attendance has been 4854. The most attended single session had 5325.

[bronconick]

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

Hell, the only reason I've even gone to GR the last couple of times is because I know it won't sell well unless Michigan/MSU are there, and those people buy up in the last 2-3 weeks. I order mine in January, get 5th row seats on the blue line, and convince myself that the cost isn't so bad for that location. (The fact that Western was "hosting" all but the last one was a bonus point. If Western ever made a freaking tournament, I wanted to do my small part to encourage them to keep bidding so we could possibly one day be the 4 seed hosting a regional and ****ing people off. Alas, such is a pipe dream.) I sure as hell wouldn't pay the same for upper deck seating. Cutting that upper deck seat price in half is the absolute quickest way to fix some of the issues.

[alnike]

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

Can't wait to see how West Regional attendance will be next year in St. Louis for 2011. That's a close drive for all.

[alfablue]

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

I'll propose one place in the midwest just for people to chew on. Toledo has a brand new arena that the local ECHL team plays in. Seats I think 7800 or so for hockey. Has plenty of food and beer in the area plus stuff for families to do if necessary. Easy flight into Detroit or Toledo. Central location to most of the CCHA schools and only a days drive from most of the East coast.
Hell even the Twin Cities is about 600 miles away all by freeway if you like.

Sounds like a good place for Bowling Green to put a regional bid for. Heck, I'd go if it were that close.

[BobF]

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

I'm amazed people don't think the NCAA knows this, or can't do simple calculations.

Lower the price points from $200 to $50 and you need to attract 4x as many people to get the same gate revenue. The only people interested in doing that are the concessionaires, because for them, more people means more revenue, regardless of ticket prices.

What the NCAA knows is that location and the alumni bases of the particular teams involved affects regional attendance far more than ticket price. You could make attendance next to free and it still wouldn't put attendance up above a certain point because only a certain number of people have any interest in college hockey at all, as opposed to pro; only so many are interested in watching games that don't involve their favorite team; only so many are interested in a game they have to travel to; only so many live within easy travel reach of a regional site.

You consider all those factors and you have to price to maximize your revenue at the expected attendance point.

I'm sure the NCAA has no more (or any less, for that matter) incompetence than any other organization of its size, but I'm consistently amazed at why so few people are interested in divining why things are done the way they are, rather than pointing out how obvious it is that things are done poorly and should be changed in a way that directly improves the situation for the analyst, and not for the organization-- in this case, cheaper tickets.

I'm sure the NCAA can-- and should-- do more to evangelize college hockey. Somehow I don't think it hinges on regional tourney ticket pricing.

There are certain things the NC$$ knows and then and then there are certain things they don't seem to care about!

What we have on this board are the most ardent supporters of college hockey in the country. We are a small group, but we all can recall attending regionals where the arenas were packed and the atmosphere was great. Some of those were at campus sites, some were the "super" regionals, while others were the current format of 4 regional sites.

What is frustrating to most of us is that we are bias and feel we have the greatest game to support and know how much atmosphere adds when we are in attendance and from a viewing standpoint.

Some folks on here may feel embarrassed that if no one goes it shows apathy toward a great sport and we don't want that impression to be how the sport is viewed while in the national spotlight. While others simply want the excitement they feel when watching this sport to be showcased to the casual fans who might embrace the sport.

It's obvious however that the NC$$ does not care, otherwise they would do something about it and address ticket prices. Being in the business world I've had to adjust many of the things I do the past two years, and have even reduced pricing from two years ago in order to keep business. We're all not out here living in a vacuum! We have ideas that could improve their bottom line, but it is evident that they simply don't care.

The NC$$ accidently stumbled upon a gold mine in the Frozen Four as the sport grew without any support from their Kansas City headquarters. Many years ago you could walk up to the gate at the Frozen Four in Providence (before it was the "frozen" four) and buy a ticket. We helped to create this cash cow for them, and now we're concerned that their ignorance could send the sport backward instead of forward when we are already dealing with issues with competing with major junior programs and a smaller pool of kids playing the sport in New England.

Obviously there is much to think about, and how to market the sport to sell more tickets at these regionals is a high priority.

And now with the tournament at a non-traditional site many of us are also concerned that instead of a national championship what we may see in Ford Field is empty seats, bad ice, and as a result a substandard product. Which is why many regular Frozen Four attendees are taking this one off!

[MichPieGuy]

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

We didn't go to any of the regionals this year, deciding instead to watch as many as possible on ESPNU (the ones missing from their schedule were painfully noted in their absence, you'd think with all their affiliate networks that the came could have been up SOMEWHERE). Instead, we decided to invest our hockey weekend at the FF, since it's "only" 250 miles from home.

But the gates at Albany and Ft. Wayne looked horrendous, especially when one considers each of those regionals had 2 (or 3, at Albany, arguably) teams within a reasonable drive. With only 3 games over a 2 or 3 day weekend taking up only 9 hours or so of the time period, a host venue needs to have interesting things to do. Albany and Ft. Wayne both fail on that account, and that may have killed some of the casual fan traffic. St. Paul and Worcester, with proximity to Boston, offer so much more in the down time. NCAA should consider that if it wants better gates. But still, it looks like venues of 8,000 or less (unless Minny is in St. Paul or BU/BC in Worcester or Boston) fit the bill more than adequately. I've attended the last 2 regionals hosted in Grand Rapids, and they drew 7000-8000 with Michigan, Michigan State, and ND playing there in some combination. And GR has more things to do than either Ft. Wayne or Albany, though I wouldn't consider it a prime site for overall points-of-interest-draw.

It's tough to justify paying the tourney prices if you're basically sitting on your hands or watching the cable in the hotel room excepting game time. And NCAA chooses too many host cities for regionals that fit that description right now.

[B]GO MIAMI REDHAWKS!!! [/B](Hockey has a home in Ohio, but it's not where I-70 and I-71 meet!!)

[Knucklefunk]

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

I'll propose one place in the midwest just for people to chew on. Toledo has a brand new arena that the local ECHL team plays in. Seats I think 7800 or so for hockey. Has plenty of food and beer in the area plus stuff for families to do if necessary. Easy flight into Detroit or Toledo. Central location to most of the CCHA schools and only a days drive from most of the East coast.
Hell even the Twin Cities is about 600 miles away all by freeway if you like.

[aparch]

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

And this was after the committee played with the #3 seeds to improve attendance.

Simple solution, lower the ticket prices.


I had no problem paying $110 for FIVE tickets to the CCHA Championship day at Joe Louis Arena. Hell, had I chosen cheaper seats, I could have gone for both days for the same price with the same group of people.

I was appalled when I read that it would have been over $200 in for TWO tickets for the weekend regional. OR almost $110 for just ONE GAME for just two people.


It definitely made me not want to go see my team play in their first regional since 1999.

[RedFreak]

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

I was watching some of the basketball this weekend and on one of the games (don't remember which one) the camera pulled back and much of the upper deck of that arena was empty too.

I think part of it is clearly the inablity of most people to rearrange their schedule on a few days notice to travel half way across the country, no matter what the ticket price. The tickets need to be priced to get the locals to show up.

[rvd5star69]

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

the 3 pm start time friday was very hard to make. Also pepsi arena has awful ice surface cornell had more turnovers in their own end then all season.

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

I'm amazed people don't think the NCAA knows this, or can't do simple calculations.

Lower the price points from $200 to $50 and you need to attract 4x as many people to get the same gate revenue. The only people interested in doing that are the concessionaires, because for them, more people means more revenue, regardless of ticket prices.

What the NCAA knows is that location and the alumni bases of the particular teams involved affects regional attendance far more than ticket price. You could make attendance next to free and it still wouldn't put attendance up above a certain point because only a certain number of people have any interest in college hockey at all, as opposed to pro; only so many are interested in watching games that don't involve their favorite team; only so many are interested in a game they have to travel to; only so many live within easy travel reach of a regional site.

You consider all those factors and you have to price to maximize your revenue at the expected attendance point.

I'm sure the NCAA has no more (or any less, for that matter) incompetence than any other organization of its size, but I'm consistently amazed at why so few people are interested in divining why things are done the way they are, rather than pointing out how obvious it is that things are done poorly and should be changed in a way that directly improves the situation for the analyst, and not for the organization-- in this case, cheaper tickets.

I'm sure the NCAA can-- and should-- do more to evangelize college hockey. Somehow I don't think it hinges on regional tourney ticket pricing.

You have a point, but the NCAA knows what they WANT attendance to be while the arena people know how to maximize attendance. There are solutions to these problems with varying degrees of difficulty and results. The NCAA would be foolish not to examine these solutions. I think a lot of people on this site are also biased because they have seen the NCAA take foolish steps before, so expectations aren't very high.

The quick and easy fix is the price point. All seats are not created equal. Some people can afford center ice seats so let them buy them. For the Hockey East playoffs you could drop $42 for tickets in the Loge down to $19 for nosebleed seats. The NCAA wants to sell those nosebleeds for the same price as center ice. Different price tiers for different sections of the arena is really easy to do and would boost attendance (and increase profitability). Many people - particularly college students - can't afford $90 seats but will be happy to drop (for example) $30 for nosebleeds.

Another fix would be to drop the seating requirement. Look again at those %capacity numbers. Worcester managed the best day at a whopping 44%. Albany couldn't even crack 30% despite two local schools and one of the top two traveling fanbases in the East. Stop booking 14000 seat arenas for regionals. I'll go out on a limb and say the regional in the 19000+ seat Scottrade Center in St Louis will be a disaster. If Miami/Michigan drew THAT small a crowd 2 hours from the campuses of both schools, how big a crowd are they really going to draw in St Louis - especially if they price all 19000 seats the same and set the price ridiculously high?

They should look at using campus sites in the East like they have out West. They can still go to Manchester and Bridgeport, but Conte Forum would make a great host. Seating isn't so great at Agganis, but a lack of seats at regionals hasn't exactly been a problem. Worcester might work. Albany has to go. Attendance there is always abysmal. Going back to having the #1 seeds host probably won't work, and the sport has grown beyond that. It's not big enough yet to support huge arenas. Using more centralized hosts to the massive Boston market would help the sport tremendously, with trips to other areas to help the sport grow. Maybe one day the sport can support AHL arenas but that day has not arrived yet.

A radical solution would be the 3-day/8-team regional. There are some logistical problems, but those can be overcome. Hopefully our sport has progressed to the point where we can support four regionals instead of two, but the first two matters must be addressed.

[dmjossel]

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

NC$$ needs to realize what the rest of us know already, the economy $ucks and people don't have that kind of $ for a leisure day, so just the diehards attend. When my kids were young we all went to the games, now just me. Same with Hockey East we all used to go, and now if Maine is not in championship either no one goes or I just go with friends.

Have heard this before "It's the economy stupid" (not you eric). Lower the prices and they will come!

I'm amazed people don't think the NCAA knows this, or can't do simple calculations.

Lower the price points from $200 to $50 and you need to attract 4x as many people to get the same gate revenue. The only people interested in doing that are the concessionaires, because for them, more people means more revenue, regardless of ticket prices.

What the NCAA knows is that location and the alumni bases of the particular teams involved affects regional attendance far more than ticket price. You could make attendance next to free and it still wouldn't put attendance up above a certain point because only a certain number of people have any interest in college hockey at all, as opposed to pro; only so many are interested in watching games that don't involve their favorite team; only so many are interested in a game they have to travel to; only so many live within easy travel reach of a regional site.

You consider all those factors and you have to price to maximize your revenue at the expected attendance point.

I'm sure the NCAA has no more (or any less, for that matter) incompetence than any other organization of its size, but I'm consistently amazed at why so few people are interested in divining why things are done the way they are, rather than pointing out how obvious it is that things are done poorly and should be changed in a way that directly improves the situation for the analyst, and not for the organization-- in this case, cheaper tickets.

I'm sure the NCAA can-- and should-- do more to evangelize college hockey. Somehow I don't think it hinges on regional tourney ticket pricing.

[Bakunin]

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

Two solutions:
1) Go back to campus sites. Even if the host school doesn't make it, the atmosphere is better; a 70% full Mariucci is a hell of a lot better than a 40% full Xcel.
2) Lower the *'ing prices. Disinterested locals aren't going to fork over that much money to see teams they don't otherwise give a **** about. When attendance problems are this obvious, ticket prices of $15 per game should be the norm until the venues fill up.

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

Day	Site		Attendance	Capacity	% Cap
Fri	Albany		4073		14236		28.61%
Sat	Albany		3737		14236		26.25%
Sat	Worcester	6572		14800		44.41%
Sun	Worcester	6054		14800		40.91%
Fri	St Paul		7281		18568		39.21%
Sat	St Paul		7182		18568		38.68%
Sat	Ft Wayne	4133		10500		39.36%
Sun	Ft Wayne	3204		10500		30.51%

And this was after the committee played with the #3 seeds to improve attendance.