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.

Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

TeamPoland said:
I just think with how mamy creative minds we have out there we could at least find a semi-solution. Not great, but acceptable.
Click to expand...
Welcome back my friend, to thread that never ends. We're so glad you could attend. Come inside, come inside.

Appreciate your attempt to be creative with the Permanent Sites idea. And you're correct, lots of good people have participated in this conversation -- both in this thread & over the years.

The issue endures because the problem is so daunting; at least in the Western half of the College Hockey world. A nice summary from davyd83:

davyd83 said:
One of the problems the Regionals face, in any format, is that a good percentage of their target market has just spent money on the conference tournaments. Only a certain percentage can afford both their conference tourneys, then make a last minute trip to regionals, especially if a flight is involved. And of those that can, they’re more likely to wait and see if their team makes the Frozen Four.
Click to expand...
Leading some of us to believe that the first round games should held on campus sites.

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
Not saying “higher seed hosts” is the answer (it isn’t)...
Click to expand...
But in the spirit of creativity, would you consider letting Conference Champs host?:o In previous editions of this thread, I've laid out this idea in considerable detail. With your indulgence, here's how my format would have played out in 2019:

Organizing The Tournament Field
1. Home ice is awarded to the 6 tournament champions, plus the top 2 teams at-large teams in the Pairwise.
2. Seed the Home teams #1 through #8, according to their Final Pairwise score.
3. The remaining at-large teams are the Visitors. Seed them #9 through #16, again according to Pairwise scores.
4. Pairings maximize bracket integrity: #1 vs. #16; #2 vs. #15; and so on.
5. Trades are allowed for the purpose of avoiding intra-conference match-ups. But no trades are needed in 2019.

2019 First Round Pairings
#16 Bowling Green @ #1 St. Cloud State University
# 9 Quinnipiac @ #8 American International College

#13 Cornell @ #4 UMass Amherst
#12 Arizona State @ #5 Clarkson

#15 Providence @ #2 Minnesota-Duluth
#10 Denver @ #7 Notre Dame

#14 Harvard @ #3 Minnesota State
#11 Ohio State @ #6 Northeastern


Possible Second Round Sites
Gold & Purple Finals the following Saturday in St. Paul.
Red & Maroon Finals the following Sunday in Boston.

I truly believe that this format would create great excitement at the 8 host schools, fill lots of seats, and make for a wonderful two rounds of hockey. It's also my belief that the conference tournaments would be greatly enhanced, given the additional prize of NCAA Home Ice.

My two cents; FWIW. If anyone wants to discuss further, I'd be glad to do so. Otherwise, I'll keep the peace & just enjoy this weekend's telecasts.:cool:
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

@evegoe: I've seen questions about NCAA Regional requirements & confirmed some info.

A financial guarantee of $150k is required to host. After $150k+expenses covered, 80% goes to NCAA, 20% to host.

Also, host needs a 5,000+ seat arena w/playing conditions of championship caliber.
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

joecct said:
@evegoe: I've seen questions about NCAA Regional requirements & confirmed some info.

A financial guarantee of $150k is required to host. After $150k+expenses covered, 80% goes to NCAA, 20% to host.

Also, host needs a 5,000+ seat arena w/playing conditions of championship caliber.
Click to expand...

Was just gonna post this. And Vegoe is in the know. Trusted source.
 
The Rube said:
Was just gonna post this. And Vegoe is in the know. Trusted source.
Click to expand...

The handbook for every championship are readily available on the Mothwr Ship’s website. The spatial requirements are also quite extensive. It’s an interesting read.

r
 
pgb-ohio said:
Welcome back my friend, to thread that never ends. We're so glad you could attend. Come inside, come inside.

Appreciate your attempt to be creative with the Permanent Sites idea. And you're correct, lots of good people have participated in this conversation -- both in this thread & over the years.

The issue endures because the problem is so daunting; at least in the Western half of the College Hockey world. A nice summary from davyd83:

Leading some of us to believe that the first round games should held on campus sites.

But in the spirit of creativity, would you consider letting Conference Champs host?:o In previous editions of this thread, I've laid out this idea in considerable detail. With your indulgence, here's how my format would have played out in 2019:

Organizing The Tournament Field
1. Home ice is awarded to the 6 tournament champions, plus the top 2 teams at-large teams in the Pairwise.
2. Seed the Home teams #1 through #8, according to their Final Pairwise score.
3. The remaining at-large teams are the Visitors. Seed them #9 through #16, again according to Pairwise scores.
4. Pairings maximize bracket integrity: #1 vs. #16; #2 vs. #15; and so on.
5. Trades are allowed for the purpose of avoiding intra-conference match-ups. But no trades are needed in 2019.

2019 First Round Pairings
#16 Bowling Green @ #1 St. Cloud State University
# 9 Quinnipiac @ #8 American International College

#13 Cornell @ #4 UMass Amherst
#12 Arizona State @ #5 Clarkson

#15 Providence @ #2 Minnesota-Duluth
#10 Denver @ #7 Notre Dame

#14 Harvard @ #3 Minnesota State
#11 Ohio State @ #6 Northeastern


Possible Second Round Sites
Gold & Purple Finals the following Saturday in St. Paul.
Red & Maroon Finals the following Sunday in Boston.

I truly believe that this format would create great excitement at the 8 host schools, fill lots of seats, and make for a wonderful two rounds of hockey. It's also my belief that the conference tournaments would be greatly enhanced, given the additional prize of NCAA Home Ice.

My two cents; FWIW. If anyone wants to discuss further, I'd be glad to do so. Otherwise, I'll keep the peace & just enjoy this weekend's telecasts.:cool:
Click to expand...

One of the big problems is arena availability, For instance, the Verizon Center in Mankato, MN has a concert tonight.
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

I don't know if this is true, but it's my perception that arenas built nowadays are in use pretty much 365 days a year. I don't know that an economic model allows for a 50-100 million dollar building to sit idle for very many days a year.

I think that is one of the reasons keeping the "regional" system in place but moving to a top-4 seeds host model is not being pursued. There are so many rinks that would have trouble accommodating 4 teams, and especially on short notice. Some pretty good programs probably fall into that group. If we were to require all 60 teams to either be able to host 4 teams in the event they are a 1 seed, or find a suitable alternative, I doubt that is possible. There is no way Ferris State is going to pay to block out Van Andel for 3 or 4 days every March in the event they needed it. You'd have to pay the venue enough to sit idle in situations where you don't use it because it isn't like they could secure alternate, paying customers for something on just a few days notice.

I like having 16 teams. I like single elimination. I think top 4 seeds hosting regionals might be the only way we have to consistently generate both revenue and excitement (at least for one game in each region) AND keep at least most of the current TV availability. I don't know how to do it. The women do it for basketball, but basketball teams are half the size and don't have nearly the equipment requirements. That alone makes it a bit easier for a basketball team to host, but I would assume there are at least a few teams who have a realistic shot at hosting first and second round games that play in sub-standard spaces. Does anyone here know what those teams might do?
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

cetihcra said:
The handbook for every championship are readily available on the Mothwr Ship’s website. The spatial requirements are also quite extensive. It’s an interesting read.

r
Click to expand...

Those docs are definitely interesting. I've always enjoyed reading the FF Participant's Manual myself.
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

WeAreNDHockey said:
I don't know if this is true, but it's my perception that arenas built nowadays are in use pretty much 365 days a year. I don't know that an economic model allows for a 50-100 million dollar building to sit idle for very many days a year.

I think that is one of the reasons keeping the "regional" system in place but moving to a top-4 seeds host model is not being pursued. There are so many rinks that would have trouble accommodating 4 teams, and especially on short notice. Some pretty good programs probably fall into that group. If we were to require all 60 teams to either be able to host 4 teams in the event they are a 1 seed, or find a suitable alternative, I doubt that is possible. There is no way Ferris State is going to pay to block out Van Andel for 3 or 4 days every March in the event they needed it. You'd have to pay the venue enough to sit idle in situations where you don't use it because it isn't like they could secure alternate, paying customers for something on just a few days notice.

I like having 16 teams. I like single elimination. I think top 4 seeds hosting regionals might be the only way we have to consistently generate both revenue and excitement (at least for one game in each region) AND keep at least most of the current TV availability. I don't know how to do it. The women do it for basketball, but basketball teams are half the size and don't have nearly the equipment requirements. That alone makes it a bit easier for a basketball team to host, but I would assume there are at least a few teams who have a realistic shot at hosting first and second round games that play in sub-standard spaces. Does anyone here know what those teams might do?
Click to expand...

I don't know how you solve the short notice scheduling issue if you want to have home site hosting in the first round. I will say one of the big problems the NCAA has with NCAA playoff hockey attendance is going up against basketball. I remember in 1992, NMU was playing Michigan in Detroit (JLA) and it was up against a Michigan NCAA Tournament basketball game. JLA should have been packed with Michigan fans, but it was virtually empty. The Michigan fans that were there hung out in the concourse watching the basketball game. (Okay, NMU did get their ***** handed to them).
Look at this weekend. Big weekend for college hockey, but all anyone is talking about is the sweet 16 in basketball. I am not disrespecting basketball, but clearly hockey can't compete against it for fan interest. I realize there is no simple solution here, and any solution is fought with holes, but is is worthy of discussion.
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

But yet schools do bid so what is their reasoning for doing it and what do they have to gain from doing it?
Obviously if they make the tournament they are then in a regional in their home state but what else?
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

Hockeybuckeye said:
But yet schools do bid so what is their reasoning for doing it and what do they have to gain from doing it?
Obviously if they make the tournament they are then in a regional in their home state but what else?
Click to expand...

For the good of the game, mostly (I imagine).

They still stand to make a little money...if they sell 5000 tickets at $100, after the NCAA's cut they clear $70k, not including concessions. Not a monster payday, but not entirely negligible for some athletic departments.

Who knows?

r
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

devildog said:
but clearly hockey can't compete against it for fan interest.
Click to expand...

Then why do they try? That's what bothers me. For example, they moved the Frozen Four back a week to avoid the BB Final Four. To me, that extra week kills a lot of momentum (not to mention it goes up against the Masters, which many here don't care about but it affects me when I have to travel to the FF - I can't see both). Besides, typically that only applies to a small sample of schools (mostly B1G schools). I mean, I don't think St. Lawrence, Colgate, any of the Ivy League schools, or even any of the Hockey East schools (except for Connecticut) are going to the Final Four anytime soon. Neither is Colorado College, North Dakota, Denver or St. Cloud. Hockey is a niche sport and they should trying to RETAIN those of us who consider it our primary sport instead of appeasing everyone else.
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

Alcohol being served here in Manchester. Good luck to arena staff dealing with UMass fans.
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

So many Harvard fans in Manchester. All that red is blinding.

Oh...those are empty seats...
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

They thought it was in Manchester, England
 
Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

Bonin21 said:
Okay bud
Click to expand...

What? Every year people complain about the regional format (including me). Every year people make suggestions but all of them have logistical problems. The NCAA makes $600,000 in pure profit (plus 80% of anything the venue makes) from the four regionals. If any of the ideas had merit and the NCAA could increase its profit margin they would be implemented. Instead we have friends and family crowds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top