Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

[BetterInLakePlacid]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

Everything is better in Lake Placid

 

[daveo211]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

Am I the only one who doesn't read the NCAA change as a combining of the events, but rather that they want similar playoff structure( longer playoffs) and coinciding dates? I read nowhere that the evnts would be at the same location. Did I miss it?

 

[LakerEagleLover]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

Am I the only one who doesn't read the NCAA change as a combining of the events, but rather that they want similar playoff structure( longer playoffs) and coinciding dates? I read nowhere that the evnts would be at the same location. Did I miss it?

I am sure Norm has a link for that...

 

[Dyce]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

Am I the only one who doesn't read the NCAA change as a combining of the events, but rather that they want similar playoff structure( longer playoffs) and coinciding dates? I read nowhere that the evnts would be at the same location. Did I miss it?

While your inferences could possibly be drawn from one of Norm's quotes,

Championship Date Formula Change. The committee accepted as information that the men’s ice hockey committee anticipates requesting a championship date formula change to facilitate a joint championship format with Division I men’s ice hockey in 2015.

his other one,

Division III Men’s Ice Hockey – Term Extension Request. The men’s ice hockey committee requested that the term of Bruce Delventhal, director of athletics at Plattsburgh State University of New York, be extended for one year. Mr. Delventhal is the chair of the committee, and the committee indicated that allowing him to serve until September 1, 2012, would greatly help to facilitate the process of combining the Division III championship with the Division I championship. The NCAA Division III Nominating Committee supported this request.

is pretty cut-and-dry about this. Plus, what possible reason could there be to sync the dates besides a joint site?

 

[pete99race]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

IMO, combining the men's championships to one location will potentially do more to harm the sport than any other event.

There are two main points to consider (again, this is just MY opinion).

1-Increase in costs Ok, the obvious one is flying four teams to the site, instead of (usually) one. There might be some economy of scale for rooms, meals, etc, but probably not enough to offset the flights. A secondary cost is having schools maintain ice for several weeks longer, which also will occur in months that are getting increasing warmer. For some schools, that may not be as much of a factor, but for any schools already on a shoestring, it may cause re-examination of supporting the sport.

Which brings me to

2-Decrease in teams Again, perhaps not immediately apparent, but there would exist the possibility that the NESCAC schools opt out due to the late end date. (Please note, this is not intended as a commentary on their choices of length of season, etc. They are well within their rights to decide that on their own.) If they did decide not to participate in the national tournament, they likey would follow the same path as NESCAC football. The loss of ten teams to the total teams may change the number of tournament bids to 9.

Another side effect, although possibly more western DIII fans would attend, far less eastern fans would go. Result, noticeably fewer DIII fans.

In any case, it seems that this proposal is far more likely to SHRINK Division III hockey than enhance it, and is a mistake.



One other opinion, I am not convinced that the DIII ice hockey committee had much of a say in this, other than the NCAA mandated they come up with a plan.


One more time, ALL of the above statements represent my personal opinion only.

Agree with your points.
For example, how many D-3 fans would make the trip to Florida this year for the D-1 FF, if it were the combined format??
As my group was traveling back to De Pere from LP yesterday, we all really liked the idea of holding the men/women FF at the same venue.

 

[PrezdeJohnson09]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

As my group was traveling back to De Pere from LP yesterday, we all really liked the idea of holding the men/women FF at the same venue.

I haven't talked to ONE single FAN yet that doesn't like the idea of combining the men's and women's.

 

[LakerFan99]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

I haven't talked to ONE single FAN yet that doesn't like the idea of combining the men's and women's.

I think it's a great idea. They could do what they do at many of the Grand Slam tennis tournaments. Women's semis on Friday, Men's semis and the women's final on Saturday, Men's final on Sunday. I think it would expose a lot of people to women's hockey.

 

[norm1909]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

IMO, combining the men's championships to one location will potentially do more to harm the sport than any other event.

There are two main points to consider (again, this is just MY opinion).

1-Increase in costs Ok, the obvious one is flying four teams to the site, instead of (usually) one. There might be some economy of scale for rooms, meals, etc, but probably not enough to offset the flights. A secondary cost is having schools maintain ice for several weeks longer, which also will occur in months that are getting increasing warmer. For some schools, that may not be as much of a factor, but for any schools already on a shoestring, it may cause re-examination of supporting the sport.

Which brings me to

2-Decrease in teams Again, perhaps not immediately apparent, but there would exist the possibility that the NESCAC schools opt out due to the late end date. (Please note, this is not intended as a commentary on their choices of length of season, etc. They are well within their rights to decide that on their own.) If they did decide not to participate in the national tournament, they likey would follow the same path as NESCAC football. The loss of ten teams to the total teams may change the number of tournament bids to 9.

Another side effect, although possibly more western DIII fans would attend, far less eastern fans would go. Result, noticeably fewer DIII fans.

In any case, it seems that this proposal is far more likely to SHRINK Division III hockey than enhance it, and is a mistake.

One other opinion, I am not convinced that the DIII ice hockey committee had much of a say in this, other than the NCAA mandated they come up with a plan.

One more time, ALL of the above statements represent my personal opinion only.

First let me note, I am only the messenger - I totally agree with your assessments above.

That said, I believe the egotists that are getting this done, as I have noted before, are going to push the fact there is a lot of potential for sponsorship be professional markets. I believe that their rational is to boost the "value added" to the professional markets but including the DIII component. Note that while the fan base of DI is substantially larger than DIII, there is nevertheless a very large number of DIII stakeholders, the purpose behind sponsorship is “marketing exposure”. The recent successful outdoors, non-championship contest held in professional venues (such as the Norwich game in Fenway), can be used to extrapolate marketing potential. There is little chance that the combination of the DI & DIII championships would reduce the revenue generated by the DI championships, and as we all deduce, the DIII championships really do not generate a positive cash flow. That said, if the value added to the market exposure is enough to sway potential professional market sponsorship they will have accompli$hed their “objectives”. Below are some examples of non-Championship scenarios being offered in the NCAA document - Professional Sports Organizations Sponsorship of Intercollegiate Competition Events.

Example No. 1 - The Boston Bruins may financially sponsor the Beanpot Hockey Tournament, but not serve as a sponsor (financial or identifiable) of Boston University, Boston College, Harvard University or Northeastern University.

Example No. 2 - The Minnesota Twins may financially sponsor an ice hockey game between the University of St. Thomas (Minnesota) and Macalester College, but it may not sponsor (financial or identifiable) either institution.

There is also this contained in the cited document:

Options to Consider

1. Sponsor legislation for the 2011-12 legislative cycle to specify that a professional sports organization:

a. May serve as a financial sponsor of an intercollegiate competition event (e.g., regular season, conference championship, NCAA championship, other postseason competition), provided the organization is not publicly identified as such; and

b. May serve as a financial sponsor of an activity or promotion that is ancillary to the competition event and may be publicly identified as such.

2. Same as Option No. 1, but limit it only to NCAA championships.

3. Same as Option No. 1, but limited it only to NCAA championships and conference championships.

4. Do nothing and maintain the current legislation which restricts a professional sports organization from serving as a sponsor for an intercollegiate event and NCAA championships.

 

[jerrynu26]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

....The recent successful outdoors, non-championship contest held in professional venues (such as the Norwich game in Fenway), can be used to extrapolate marketing potential....

I am not sure how Babson covered their share of the expense of that event (it was a pay-to-play, for profit deal), but I believe much (most) of the Norwich side was covered by the alumni base. In my opinon, this was primarily due to the "once in a lifetime" appeal of the event, as well as it being held in an area with a large alumni population.

Judging from the number of participants in similar outdoor events, I think it would be a mistake to assume that level of contribution every year.

Then again, we are talking of an organization that decided that "Fighting Sioux" was objectionable, while allowing a non-aboriginal in painted gear on a horse to hurl a flaming spear to the turf at home football games.

 

[norm1909]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

I am not sure how Babson covered their share of the expense of that event (it was a pay-to-play, for profit deal), but I believe much (most) of the Norwich side was covered by the alumni base. In my opinon, this was primarily due to the "once in a lifetime" appeal of the event, as well as it being held in an area with a large alumni population.

Judging from the number of participants in similar outdoor events, I think it would be a mistake to assume that level of contribution every year.

Then again, we are talking of an organization that decided that "Fighting Sioux" was objectionable, while allowing a non-aboriginal in painted gear on a horse to hurl a flaming spear to the turf at home football games.

I understand - and agree with your comment "I think it would be a mistake to assume that level of contribution every year.” but that said, if the point is to promote a "Field of Dreams" (i.e. 'If you build it, they will come'), then you can extrapolate what you want from it (i.e. Figures don't lie, but liars figure).

I do believe there are significant marketing potential, synergies and economies of scale to warrant a successful combination* of the DI & DIII championships, BUT I am not convinced they have the competencies to accomplish it. That said, most professional sports organizations DO have the competencies (i.e. they tend not solicit “volunteers” or to assign/hire from within when it does not make economical and sound business sense.) The potential to succeed is there, the probably of failure, however, is where I would currently steak my wager.

*by "successful", I do mean in more than just the dollars & cents to the NC$$ - BUT ...

 

[LakerEagleLover]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

But maybe they could return the Frozen Four $kills Challenge

...This reminds me Norm - when Neil Musselwhite appeared in the skills contest, he did it without any ice to practice on....all the ice in Oswego, including the Campus Center, was gone by the time the team returned from the tournament....cost of keeping ice down and cold was mentioned elsewhere...

Having said that, it didn't hurt Neil in the least... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-at-frozen-four-skills-competition-in-detroit

 

[altazo]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

I think combining the men's and women's events is a great idea.

I also like the thought of moving the men's event back to campus locations, but I think the venues would have to be pre-determined and I'm not sure that many would be suitable. Rinks I could see hosting: Oswego, Platt, Norwich, Midd, Elmira (haven't seen their facility, but I know they've hosted before), Superior, St. Johns, and maybe SNC. I know both MSOE and Adrian are new and modern, but I'm not sure they have enough seating capacity. Any other nice facilities out there that would work?

 

[PSUChamps2001]

I think combining the men's and women's events is a great idea.

I also like the thought of moving the men's event back to campus locations, but I think the venues would have to be pre-determined and I'm not sure that many would be suitable. Rinks I could see hosting: Oswego, Platt, Norwich, Midd, Elmira (haven't seen their facility, but I know they've hosted before), Superior, St. Johns, and maybe SNC. I know both MSOE and Adrian are new and modern, but I'm not sure they have enough seating capacity. Any other nice facilities out there that would work?

Waaaaaayyyy to small. There isnt a rink around DIII (east) that can handle the size the FFs have become except maybe Utica.

 

[LakerFan99]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

Waaaaaayyyy to small. There isnt a rink around DIII (east) that can handle the size the FFs have become except maybe Utica.

I believe it was mentioned earlier in this thread that the requirement to host a championship is a rink with at least 3000 seats.

 

[altazo]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

Yeah, I forgot about Utica.

Wasn't there just about 3500 people attending at LP in a venue with basically bottomless seating for D3 hockey? I think playing in front of 2500 people in a packed house with a hot ticket would create a pretty cool environment too.

If we're talking about seating 3000 minimum, that pretty much would only leave Superior and St. Johns in the western region.

 

[norm1909]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

I believe it was mentioned earlier in this thread that the requirement to host a championship is a rink with at least 3000 seats.

NCAA DI Frozen Four championship venues average about 18000 in seating capacity!

While the merger isn't scheduled until 2015, Pittsburgh will host the 2013 Men’s Frozen Four at the Consol Energy Center (Capacity 18,087), while Philadelphia’s Wells Fargo Center (fka Wachovia Center) (capacity 19,537) will be the host venue for the 2014 championship.

 

[PSUChamps2001]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

Yeah, I forgot about Utica.

Wasn't there just about 3500 people attending at LP in a venue with basically bottomless seating for D3 hockey? I think playing in front of 2500 people in a packed house with a hot ticket would create a pretty cool environment too.

If we're talking about seating 3000 minimum, that pretty much would only leave Superior and St. Johns in the western region.

Lake Placid is listed at 7,700...but back a few years ago we had 5,500 or so there and it was packed. Yes the upper bowl wasn't full, but the lower bowl was packed. HAD Plattsburgh been in the FF, it would have been packed again. Does that mean we should hinder everything on Plattsburgh being in it? No. But you're going down a path we faught with for YEARS out East. It becomes nearly impossible to get a ticket to an NCAA FF game. Especially at smaller DIII rinks. Just look at the data. Why do you want to tell nearly 1,500 - 3,000 people no you can not go to the FF this year sorry? Maybe out west when the Eastern fans don't travel as much as they would if it was in their back yard.

I do love the "packed house" feel, and I will not dissagree with you there...HOWEVER, how many teams can even hold 3,500 fans? And then include the fact that if you have it at a "home" site that "home" site will take away TONS of tickets for Joe Public. Yes it would be nice to see 7,700 people at LP every year. A Plattsburgh/Oswego FF would probably come close. Just a few years ago we had a Final Four with 2 Western schools, and 2 Eastern schools with little to no following (compared to others) and still drew 3,100+ for the Championship game. Hot ticket?? More like impossible ticket (again at least out East). We use to have several fans who just simply couldn't get a ticket because they use to hold them at smaller rinks. Yes I would go sit in line at 3am to get my tickets, but that was also pre-father era, pre-career, where it wasn't a big deal. Would SNC or any other "major" program out there come all the way out East if you were only allowed 200 tickets *which after family, friends, alumni ect gets down to about 100*, are you going to drive all the way out here and "hope" for a ticket?? Or is it nice knowing, we have a 4,000-6,000 size rink where (unless its the perfect storm OSU,PSU,Norwich) tickets WILL be there?

Those schools with 3,000 + (I know Oswego is, and I know Plattsburgh no longer is at 3,500)

Utica - 4000
Oswego - ???
Elmira - 3200
UWS - 3000
St.Johns - 5763
Fitchburg - 4100
Wentworth - 5900
Concordia - 3000
Suffolk - 3684

Only 15% of DIII schools play infront of (on average thats listed) 50% capacity...most are in the 25%-30% so it isn't much of a shock for the majority of DIII. (except maybe the normal Norwich, Oswego, Plattsburgh, St.Norberts who are all 65%+ on average capacity.

 

[Laker28]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

I like the idea of combining the women with the men if for no other reason than to cut down on the time when there are no games. We did everything we could think of and afford to do in Placid on Saturday and still had over two hours to kill before the championship game. We wound up watching some of the Can-Am games over in the 1932 rink but that just isn't on the same level as teams competing for a national title. The more hockey I get to watch late in the season the more I like it.

Here is another thing that some people might not think of in regards to have the FF at Placid. Friday we had a family from New Jersey sitting near us that had never seen a DIII game before. The two boys were there for the Can-Am tourney and decided to go to the Oswego/Amherst game. They couldn't believe the speed of the game, they had figured D3 was for hacks that were too slow and talentless to play anywhere else. If the event was still at Campus sites, those kids wouldn't have been there and know knows you might see them playing D3 someday. There were more than a few folks at the games that went because they happened to be in town and it sounded like fun and I am sure a lot of them will attend more games in the future if they get the chance.

 

[The Real Georgia Peach]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

Having the DIII and DI tournaments will marginalize DIII. I can't think of any reason why a DI fan would care to watch a DIII game, other than idle curiosity. Having the DIII men and women's tournament at the same venue would at least have a solid DIII fan base to draw from. Also, a neutral site is much preferable than a college campus. Lake Placid is a near perfect site for DIII, as is Minneapolis/St. Paul for alternate sites. A destination site, known in advance, would provide a much larger fan participation,(and $$ for NCAA), with a site that offers an economy of scale for DIII. DIII will never provide more than 6,000 fans for a final, and that will make a 15,000 seat barn look empty.

 

[norm1909]

Re: Final Four Moving Back to Campus Sites

Having the DIII and DI tournaments will marginalize DIII. I can't think of any reason why a DI fan would care to watch a DIII game, other than idle curiosity. Having the DIII men and women's tournament at the same venue would at least have a solid DIII fan base to draw from. Also, a neutral site is much preferable than a college campus. Lake Placid is a near perfect site for DIII, as is Minneapolis/St. Paul for alternate sites. A destination site, known in advance, would provide a much larger fan participation,(and $$ for NCAA), with a site that offers an economy of scale for DIII. DIII will never provide more than 6,000 fans for a final, and that will make a 15,000 seat barn look empty.

Or from the promoters perspective -

Having the DIII and DI tournaments will enhance DI. I can't think of any reason why a DIII fan wouldn't jump on the chance to watch a DI game, what an opportunity. Having the DIII men and women's tournament at the same venue would marginalize the experence for the women. Also, a neutral site is much preferable than a college campus, the DI venue, known in advance, can provide for a much larger fan participation,(and $$ for NCAA), ease of public access and with a site that offers an economy of scale for both DI & DIII. DIII will provide upwards of 6,000 fans for a final, and that will help entice the marketing potential to the championship host.