FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
He was probably told he had to pay another nickel in order to get off the MTA.
He was probably told he had to pay another nickel in order to get off the MTA.
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.
Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
- Thread starter Caustic Undertow
- Start date
billmich88888
Registered Person
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
Biggest event until the full scale football playoff takes hold
Biggest event until the full scale football playoff takes hold
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
As I recall, I remember reading last year or the year before where even coaches are not happy with the way these regionals are going. Problem is, I have no idea if they have any say whatsoever in how these things are done. Which is a shame, because they obviously should.
As I recall, I remember reading last year or the year before where even coaches are not happy with the way these regionals are going. Problem is, I have no idea if they have any say whatsoever in how these things are done. Which is a shame, because they obviously should.
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
I actually like the idea of regionals being really regional. So in the early rounds you're trying to find the best in the east to play the best in the west in the Finals. I guess I would err on the side of having local teams play locally and bring fans than trying to balalnce the brackets. To me that's something of a fools errand any way. I also don't love the 2 week break between the regionals and the Frozen Four. Play the semi-finals Friday and the Championship Sunday to make it a real Championship Weekend...Hockey Friday Basketball Saturday, Hockey Sunday, Basketball Monday. As far as location for regionals, I think you need to avoid obvious places without a tradition of college hockey, I'm lookin' at you St Louis. But if you keep teams near "home" even at the expense of mucking up rankings, and I doubt they would be that bad quite honestly, I think you'd get better attendance and better atmosphere. And it would make it a more intense final if that's even possible to have East vs West. Of course you always will have the occasional borderline situation...is Niagara really east or west, better in Toledo or Manchester? But that's something you can deal with when it comes up.
I actually like the idea of regionals being really regional. So in the early rounds you're trying to find the best in the east to play the best in the west in the Finals. I guess I would err on the side of having local teams play locally and bring fans than trying to balalnce the brackets. To me that's something of a fools errand any way. I also don't love the 2 week break between the regionals and the Frozen Four. Play the semi-finals Friday and the Championship Sunday to make it a real Championship Weekend...Hockey Friday Basketball Saturday, Hockey Sunday, Basketball Monday. As far as location for regionals, I think you need to avoid obvious places without a tradition of college hockey, I'm lookin' at you St Louis. But if you keep teams near "home" even at the expense of mucking up rankings, and I doubt they would be that bad quite honestly, I think you'd get better attendance and better atmosphere. And it would make it a more intense final if that's even possible to have East vs West. Of course you always will have the occasional borderline situation...is Niagara really east or west, better in Toledo or Manchester? But that's something you can deal with when it comes up.
giwan
Really??!!
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
Did you see that many crowds? The only time you saw crowds for Bball is if the games were nearby. ie Dayton for OSU, Auburn Hills MI for UM and MSU
Did you see that many crowds? The only time you saw crowds for Bball is if the games were nearby. ie Dayton for OSU, Auburn Hills MI for UM and MSU
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
I have been on the bandwagon of super-regionals since the end of year 1 with 16 teams. I liked the old 12 team 2 games each day with more fans from other schools. When they first started with Providence and Worchester I would drive between them to catch more games - even did Albany and Worchester but that is a bit of a drive and the schedule can be problematic.
It is simple to pull off Day 1 Friday evening games (4 and 8) - first round for a bracket. Day 2 Saturday afternoon games (2 and 6) - first round for the other bracket. Day 3 Sunday afternoon games (12 and 4) - super regional finals early game is day 1 winners late game is day 2 winners.
For scheduling Day 3 is defined so everybody in a game has similar rest, you and your opponent either both got a day of or both played yesterday. The games are in the afternoon to avoid Sunday night games and give people a chance to get out Sunday night; I would go earlier in the day still if I could. Day 2 is defined so that the higher seed gets the early game, being the "#1" gets you ~3 hours more rest. Day 1 is undefined and is picked by the committee, so they could chose to put a large traveling fan base (Wisco, Michigan, Cornell) as the late game regardless of seed to help fans with the potential to travel day of game, example Cornell going to Manchester or Providence could drive day of game for the late slot. But Day 1 schedule is left to committee discretion to maximize attendance as the teams all get the next day off anyway.
Ticket sales - lower the cost it is just too high and the concessions is where the money is anyway, also lower the concession cost you would sell more if it wasn’t highway robbery. Also ticket packages at a super-regional need to be carefully thought out. It is bad when entire sections are empty. It kills me that UNH has a Friday night fan get together during the first game; the NCAA should find ways to limit those behaviors – even if just asking participating schools to refrain. With 8 teams the chance of big empty sections goes up without some sort of well-conceived ticketing. If you by the full package it is $10 a game but if you buy only your teams it is $20. A delta big enough to convince people to buy the package they are going to use but not so big where it make sense to buy all games and only attend 2. Those go on sale Sunday to Tuesday and then those blocks also open up to general public, that way lower bowl prime seats open up if a fan group isn’t going to show. Also some sort of method to convince people to watch other schools - prizes? even if just a Tee shirt or something a signed puck.
I have been on the bandwagon of super-regionals since the end of year 1 with 16 teams. I liked the old 12 team 2 games each day with more fans from other schools. When they first started with Providence and Worchester I would drive between them to catch more games - even did Albany and Worchester but that is a bit of a drive and the schedule can be problematic.
It is simple to pull off Day 1 Friday evening games (4 and 8) - first round for a bracket. Day 2 Saturday afternoon games (2 and 6) - first round for the other bracket. Day 3 Sunday afternoon games (12 and 4) - super regional finals early game is day 1 winners late game is day 2 winners.
For scheduling Day 3 is defined so everybody in a game has similar rest, you and your opponent either both got a day of or both played yesterday. The games are in the afternoon to avoid Sunday night games and give people a chance to get out Sunday night; I would go earlier in the day still if I could. Day 2 is defined so that the higher seed gets the early game, being the "#1" gets you ~3 hours more rest. Day 1 is undefined and is picked by the committee, so they could chose to put a large traveling fan base (Wisco, Michigan, Cornell) as the late game regardless of seed to help fans with the potential to travel day of game, example Cornell going to Manchester or Providence could drive day of game for the late slot. But Day 1 schedule is left to committee discretion to maximize attendance as the teams all get the next day off anyway.
Ticket sales - lower the cost it is just too high and the concessions is where the money is anyway, also lower the concession cost you would sell more if it wasn’t highway robbery. Also ticket packages at a super-regional need to be carefully thought out. It is bad when entire sections are empty. It kills me that UNH has a Friday night fan get together during the first game; the NCAA should find ways to limit those behaviors – even if just asking participating schools to refrain. With 8 teams the chance of big empty sections goes up without some sort of well-conceived ticketing. If you by the full package it is $10 a game but if you buy only your teams it is $20. A delta big enough to convince people to buy the package they are going to use but not so big where it make sense to buy all games and only attend 2. Those go on sale Sunday to Tuesday and then those blocks also open up to general public, that way lower bowl prime seats open up if a fan group isn’t going to show. Also some sort of method to convince people to watch other schools - prizes? even if just a Tee shirt or something a signed puck.
Rtn2GoldCountry
New member
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
Let everyone in.
Let everyone in.
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
They pretty much do, they just don't call the first round the NCAA Tournament. They call it conference tournaments...and i think everyone but 2 Hockey East teams get in, no?Let everyone in.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
I think I just saw an announcement that next years WCHA is going to only have an eight team playoff, meaning they will be leaving teams out... even though they are still calling it the final 5 there will be 4 teams and 3 games...
I wish H.E. had stayed at 8 teams - so the bottom 3 (and then 4) don't get in... oh well it isn't little league where everybody gets a participation trophy.
I think I just saw an announcement that next years WCHA is going to only have an eight team playoff, meaning they will be leaving teams out... even though they are still calling it the final 5 there will be 4 teams and 3 games...
I wish H.E. had stayed at 8 teams - so the bottom 3 (and then 4) don't get in... oh well it isn't little league where everybody gets a participation trophy.
Nick Papagiorgio
Holding court
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
Someone complaining about the Tampa Frozen Four probably didn't bother to go. That's the only way someone could not understand how great it was. It was one of the most glorious days of my life. I wish I hadn't gone down for just the title game.
MORE TAMPA PLEASE!
Someone complaining about the Tampa Frozen Four probably didn't bother to go. That's the only way someone could not understand how great it was. It was one of the most glorious days of my life. I wish I hadn't gone down for just the title game.
MORE TAMPA PLEASE!
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
Caustic – Thanks for linking to the old threads, because I don’t think the arguments have changed much. Competitive fairness is far more important to me than “atmosphere”. While I have to accept something like the PWR for determining who is in the tournament, I think it’s far too imperfect to award something as significant as home court advantage. ESPECIALLY when you magnify home court advantage by really sticking it to the lower seed and its fans. They have to travel to an unknown destination (as they do now), but if they win, they have to travel to ANOTHER unknown destination the next week.
In you applied this system to this year’s tournament and the higher seeds won the first round, you’d have North Dakota playing at Quinnipiac to decide a FF participant. Do you really want that?
While I wish the regionals were better attended, I think full crowds and “atmosphere” are much more of a deal to (some) fans than they are to the teams, and the emphasis should be on fairness to the teams. You should not tip competitive balance for the benefit of the fans. If the opportunity to play in the FF can’t motivate a team to play in front of a less-than filled arena, they don’t deserve to be in the tournament.
Caustic – Thanks for linking to the old threads, because I don’t think the arguments have changed much. Competitive fairness is far more important to me than “atmosphere”. While I have to accept something like the PWR for determining who is in the tournament, I think it’s far too imperfect to award something as significant as home court advantage. ESPECIALLY when you magnify home court advantage by really sticking it to the lower seed and its fans. They have to travel to an unknown destination (as they do now), but if they win, they have to travel to ANOTHER unknown destination the next week.
In you applied this system to this year’s tournament and the higher seeds won the first round, you’d have North Dakota playing at Quinnipiac to decide a FF participant. Do you really want that?
While I wish the regionals were better attended, I think full crowds and “atmosphere” are much more of a deal to (some) fans than they are to the teams, and the emphasis should be on fairness to the teams. You should not tip competitive balance for the benefit of the fans. If the opportunity to play in the FF can’t motivate a team to play in front of a less-than filled arena, they don’t deserve to be in the tournament.
The Freds
Goin' Up?
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
How about an eight team tournament with games at the campus sites of the top four seeds. Play two games, total goals wins. The four winners go to the Frozen Four.
I bet more fans used to watch the play-in games, way back when, under that scenario than do now in the larger arenas.
I've just stopped going to the regionals.
How about an eight team tournament with games at the campus sites of the top four seeds. Play two games, total goals wins. The four winners go to the Frozen Four.
I bet more fans used to watch the play-in games, way back when, under that scenario than do now in the larger arenas.
I've just stopped going to the regionals.
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
I wrote this once before, but of all the Frozen Fours I have been to, this was disappointing. In 2004, everything in Fleet Center was wrong (except what happened on ice). April 2004 I was on break from working what I call "the Iraq project", and unknown to me, my girlfriend (now wife) got tickets through DU. Boston is a neat city to be a tourist in. It was great decompressing as a tourist in Boston. The hotel we had was great. The games themselves were awesome (especially the last 5 minutes). Everything else was horrid. I feel the Fleet Center treated the administrators of Maine, UMD, and Denver poorly. I got conflicting information from the ushers. One usher said that he got absolutely no preparation for this and was unaware that there was no alcohol sales. Around the Fleet Center, I was disappointed. I did not feel welcomed, but I felt like I was expected. Maybe it was their expectation to be in heavy rotation for the Frozen Four. Maybe they think they deserve it just because it is Boston.
pgb-ohio also added the fact that the lottery seats were worse than normal and that the Fleet Center failed to abide by NCAA rules (like removing or covering over signage and logos). I remember thinking the same about the signage and logos but as I sat with the DU fans, I was unaware of the seating arrangements.
I wrote this once before, but of all the Frozen Fours I have been to, this was disappointing. In 2004, everything in Fleet Center was wrong (except what happened on ice). April 2004 I was on break from working what I call "the Iraq project", and unknown to me, my girlfriend (now wife) got tickets through DU. Boston is a neat city to be a tourist in. It was great decompressing as a tourist in Boston. The hotel we had was great. The games themselves were awesome (especially the last 5 minutes). Everything else was horrid. I feel the Fleet Center treated the administrators of Maine, UMD, and Denver poorly. I got conflicting information from the ushers. One usher said that he got absolutely no preparation for this and was unaware that there was no alcohol sales. Around the Fleet Center, I was disappointed. I did not feel welcomed, but I felt like I was expected. Maybe it was their expectation to be in heavy rotation for the Frozen Four. Maybe they think they deserve it just because it is Boston.
pgb-ohio also added the fact that the lottery seats were worse than normal and that the Fleet Center failed to abide by NCAA rules (like removing or covering over signage and logos). I remember thinking the same about the signage and logos but as I sat with the DU fans, I was unaware of the seating arrangements.
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
This came up three years ago in a press conference the week before the Frozen Four. Jerry York was emphatic that you need that week off, because it really wouldn't be a whole week. A team could win its regional on a Sunday and have to turn around and get ready to fly out on Tuesday for a Thursday game. You've got support staff, bands, family, fans ... it's a lot to turn around in two days.
So besides having the week off to not conflict with basketball, it just makes sense for teams for logistics.
This came up three years ago in a press conference the week before the Frozen Four. Jerry York was emphatic that you need that week off, because it really wouldn't be a whole week. A team could win its regional on a Sunday and have to turn around and get ready to fly out on Tuesday for a Thursday game. You've got support staff, bands, family, fans ... it's a lot to turn around in two days.
So besides having the week off to not conflict with basketball, it just makes sense for teams for logistics.
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
I have been waiting for this thread to come up. So, forthwith, a new proposal: This is for the purpose of the Regionals only, not the Frozen Four, which will remain single elimination.
New proposal: The regional portion will last 2 weeks, and will be double-elimination.
First week: Campus sites of the top 4 seeds. Committee will arrange as now, with 4 brackets, each with a 1,2,3,4 seed. Seeds will play 'near home.' And, as much as possible, 2 will be Eastern linked, and 2 Western linked.
At each Subregional, there will be 2 games each day for 2 days. 1v4 and 2v3, followed by losers play losers and winners play winners. This means that 1 team will bow out of the tourney from each subregional. The 3 survivors will be seed 1,2,3 such that the 2 winners on Day 1 are #s 1 and 2.
Second Week: There are 2 Regionals. One east, one west. Each will host 6 teams (the 3 survivors from week 1 at 2 sites, the 2 linked sites from above).
Friday: 2 games. Here A and B are separate sites from week 1: 2A v 3B and 3A v 2B. This eliminates 2 teams, leaving 4.
Saturday: 2 games. 1A v 1B. Winner here advances to the FF. And, the 2 winners from Friday. This is an elimination game.
Sunday: 1 game. Loser from Saturday afternoon v winner from Saturday night. Winner advances to FF also.
I have been waiting for this thread to come up. So, forthwith, a new proposal: This is for the purpose of the Regionals only, not the Frozen Four, which will remain single elimination.
New proposal: The regional portion will last 2 weeks, and will be double-elimination.
First week: Campus sites of the top 4 seeds. Committee will arrange as now, with 4 brackets, each with a 1,2,3,4 seed. Seeds will play 'near home.' And, as much as possible, 2 will be Eastern linked, and 2 Western linked.
At each Subregional, there will be 2 games each day for 2 days. 1v4 and 2v3, followed by losers play losers and winners play winners. This means that 1 team will bow out of the tourney from each subregional. The 3 survivors will be seed 1,2,3 such that the 2 winners on Day 1 are #s 1 and 2.
Second Week: There are 2 Regionals. One east, one west. Each will host 6 teams (the 3 survivors from week 1 at 2 sites, the 2 linked sites from above).
Friday: 2 games. Here A and B are separate sites from week 1: 2A v 3B and 3A v 2B. This eliminates 2 teams, leaving 4.
Saturday: 2 games. 1A v 1B. Winner here advances to the FF. And, the 2 winners from Friday. This is an elimination game.
Sunday: 1 game. Loser from Saturday afternoon v winner from Saturday night. Winner advances to FF also.
UncleRay
M-A-I-N-E, GooOOO, Blue!
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
Not sure how that is different from this week - turning it around in two days after the league championships to get to the regionals.
Re: Change the tournament format, the 2013 debate
Having Saturday to Friday or Saturday to Saturday is two to three days more than Sunday to Thursday. And it's an event with a lot less around it in the way of hoopla, press appearances, etc.
Having Saturday to Friday or Saturday to Saturday is two to three days more than Sunday to Thursday. And it's an event with a lot less around it in the way of hoopla, press appearances, etc.