What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

B

Bumbles

New member
Beanpot starts tomorrow, with the marquee matchup between BU and BC being the highlight. I see this being another tight game although I wouldn't be surprised with a definitive BC win with the injuries Holze and Poulin suffered over the weekend. BC seems like they're starting to get scoring from players not named Stack and Schaus obviously continues to be solid in net. Whether BU will be at full strength will be a huge factor and hopefully Sperry continues her streak against BC.

Harvard vs NU should be a great one as well as the two teams seem pretty evenly matched.
 
Re: 33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

I understand there is going to be a charge at the gate. Does this possibly mean that the concessions will be open, too?

Shocking, I know, but it could be the first time that one can buy popcorn or a hot dog during a women's hockey game at BC......IF.... they open a stand or two.
 
Re: 33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

IceIsNice said:
I understand there is going to be a charge at the gate. Does this possibly mean that the concessions will be open, too?

Shocking, I know, but it could be the first time that one can buy popcorn or a hot dog during a women's hockey game at BC......IF.... they open a stand or two.
Click to expand...

Charging at the gate? Seriously?
 
Re: 33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

vellnueve said:
Charging at the gate? Seriously?
Click to expand...
The Women's beanpot is now run by Hockey East and not the individual schools. I haven;t asked, but I believe that the admission revenue goes to the league (and if so, hopefully in a separate account). Hockey East has been working to improve the Women's Beanpot, including starting the Women's Hall of Fame. They also offer a small selection of merchandise for sale at the games.

Sean
 
Re: 33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

Hockey purists will be touched by the way that the Harvard website has reported last night's game as a tie (which it was....)

As an ECAC school, Harvard doesn't believe in shootouts. Both Harvard and Northeastern finished the game tied and each therefore deserves a point -- one point.

In order to have one team appear in the final game next week, the shootout was necessary. But only for that purpose.

Come to think of it, shouldn't Harvard and NU alternate periods versus BC next week?
 
Re: 33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

Sean Pickett said:
The Women's beanpot is now run by Hockey East and not the individual schools. I haven;t asked, but I believe that the admission revenue goes to the league (and if so, hopefully in a separate account). Hockey East has been working to improve the Women's Beanpot, including starting the Women's Hall of Fame. They also offer a small selection of merchandise for sale at the games.

Sean
Click to expand...

I was told during the 2007 Beanpot at BC that the reason the concession stands weren't open during BC game's (and why admission wasn't charged) was that it cost $3000 to have the ticket booths open, various doors manned, etc. and that it couldn't generate the revenue neccesary to come close to breaking even.
 
Re: 33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

Watson Rink said:
In order to have one team appear in the final game next week, the shootout was necessary. But only for that purpose.
Click to expand...

Or they could just play until they have a winner as was the previous practice. Just ask Harvard about one such game. The men's Beanpot doesn't use shoot outs. I said it before when this change was made, but it just smells of paternalism towards the women, and/ or HEA just doesn't want to expend the same time and resources for the women to determine a proper winner. Either one is unacceptable in my view.
 
Re: 33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

Hux said:
I was told during the 2007 Beanpot at BC that the reason the concession stands weren't open during BC game's (and why admission wasn't charged) was that it cost $3000 to have the ticket booths open, various doors manned, etc. and that it couldn't generate the revenue neccesary to come close to breaking even.
Click to expand...
I was told the same thing about about Agganis Arena, except the cost was $10,000 and it included the ice crew and all other requirements for hosting an event. As for Conte, I don't think a few ticket sellers and ticket takers can cost so much unless they are really well paid! :)

Also, other schools, including BU, do charge and either they are breaking even or are willing to take the loss as part of supporting the women's program.

However, I still see no reason for not opening a concession stand. In the past PC and UConn haven't charged admission, but both still had consession stands open. Even with only 100-200 people I think consessions make money.

Sean
 
Overtime

Overtime

freak said:
Or they could just play until they have a winner as was the previous practice. Just ask Harvard about one such game. The men's Beanpot doesn't use shoot outs. I said it before when this change was made, but it just smells of paternalism towards the women, and/ or HEA just doesn't want to expend the same time and resources for the women to determine a proper winner. Either one is unacceptable in my view.
Click to expand...
I think the 2007 Harvard-BC game 3 OT game that ended at 12:21 AM is the reason the change was made.

Sean
 
Re: 33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

Some of the men's holiday tournaments use shootouts, even if the Beanpot doesn't, right? I still don't like shootouts for the final.
 
Overtime

Overtime

dave1381 said:
Some of the men's holiday tournaments use shootouts, even if the Beanpot doesn't, right? I still don't like shootouts for the final.
Click to expand...
Yes, there are men's tournaments that use the shootout for both semifinals, and if I recall correctly, the championship game. I also believe that the Women's Beanpot still uses standard overtimes to decide the winner for the championship game.

Sean
 
Re: Overtime

Re: Overtime

Sean Pickett said:
I also believe that the Women's Beanpot still uses standard overtimes to decide the winner for the championship game.
Click to expand...
Ok, good. If that's indeed the case, then I have no problem with the rules. I'm fine with the shootouts for the women's semifinals, regardless of what the men do.
 
Re: Overtime

Re: Overtime

Sean Pickett said:
I think the 2007 Harvard-BC game 3 OT game that ended at 12:21 AM is the reason the change was made.

Sean
Click to expand...

I'm aware. I was at that game. And it is still wrong, imo. Are you really suggesting that if the BC/ BU game on Monday had gone three over time periods, that next year the men's Beanpot would utilize a shoot out?
 
Re: Overtime

Re: Overtime

freak said:
I'm aware. I was at that game. And it is still wrong, imo. Are you really suggesting that if the BC/ BU game on Monday had gone three over time periods, that next year the men's Beanpot would utilize a shoot out?
Click to expand...
I'm not suggesting anything, just stating the facts I'm aware off. I also found a <a href=http://wtbusportsradio.com/?p=683>WTBU article</a> from last year which quotes Coach Durocher: "Another thing is that someone could get injured in a long game like that. A Boston College player got hurt a couple years ago and that’s the reason the decision was made to have a rule change and switch to the shootout."

Sean
 
Re: Overtime

Re: Overtime

Sean Pickett said:
I'm not suggesting anything, just stating the facts I'm aware off. I also found a <a href=http://wtbusportsradio.com/?p=683>WTBU article</a> from last year which quotes Coach Durocher: "Another thing is that someone could get injured in a long game like that. A Boston College player got hurt a couple years ago and that’s the reason the decision was made to have a rule change and switch to the shootout."
Click to expand...
Hmmm, ok, but that argument could rationalize deciding NCAA games by shootout or the final by shootout. I suppose the issue is that Beanpot semifinal games just aren't important enough to merit it, and this is right tradeoff. With the overtime semifinals, if one game goes 3 OT and game 2 starts at 11 pm, that's really disruptive to everyone. If I'm one of the coaches I don't really want to have a 3 OT Beanpot semifinal. Both Harvard & BC underperformed the weekend following the 3 OT Beanpot semifinal.

I think having semifinal shootouts makes some sense. And if it's what the coaches agreed upon, fine with me -- I'd have more a problem if it was imposed on coaches from higher up.

There is no reason for the women to do something just because the men do. If the men's Beanpot has a much larger fan base and longer history that would work against semifinal shootouts, that's their problem.
 
Re: 33rd Annual Women's Beanpot?

Let me be clear... I am not saying that the women should play sudden death simply because the men utilize that method.

I am saying that it appears to me that the change on the women's side is a product of a sense of paternalism towards the women, an unwillingness on the part of HEA to expend the time and resources on the women's game, or both. I think the arguments made for the change to shoot outs, ie injuries and/ or late games are simply an excuse, imo, because I don't think the same standard would be applied to the men in the same situation. It's simply a convenient excuse to do less, imo.

Strictly speaking as a hockey fan, I hate shoot outs for either gender, regardless of the circumstances (semis, in season tournaments, deciding regular season ties, etc). An arbitrary skills competition should not decide the outcome of games or place in the standings. Jmo. Thankfully, the NCAA still considers such games as ties for tournament selection purposes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top