Re: NCAA Hockey Administrators to western fans: Drop Dead
Not meaning to argue with you pgb (done enough of that in the past
), but are you sure of the bolded statement? Or maybe tell us exactly what the host (school) does that's really expensive for the host (venue)? I have to believe that, for example, the Worcester bid itself is pretty much the same from year to year, and they’re staffed to accommodate events larger than an NCAA regional. And there’ve been many examples posted above of schools that are nowhere close to FF venues “hosting”, so evidently hosting doesn’t require close proximity.
Very surprised by this response. But maybe we've just unearthed yet another fundamental difference between the Eastern experience and the Western experience. Sometimes I get the feeling it's a wonder we can talk at all.
As a preface, let's remember that in any sort of business partnership, a lot of the particulars are negotiable. That certainly includes deals between a host university and an outside venue. As such, deals will vary from one to the next, geography notwithstanding.
Next, let me use OSU Hockey's experience as an illustration. When we hosted the FF in 2005, it was our show. Our people handled communications functions, game management roles, tickets, off-ice officials, the works. OK, that event was on campus. But when OSU Hockey hosted CCHA Playoff games and Holiday tournament games at Nationwide Arena, it was very much the same thing. No doubt some Nationwide staffers had to work those events, but it still very much OSU's show.
As another example, I've attended number of tournament games at The X, hosted by the University of Minnesota. Now I don't have the same ties to the MN Dept. of Athletics, so this observation comes from outsider looking in. But as far as I could tell, it was the same situation. Gopher fingerprints were everywhere; same PA announcer, same off-ice officials, and so on.
From those experiences and others, I've long assumed that this was the normal situation. But I guess I have to allow for the possibility that this is a normal Western situation, but that things are fundamentally different in the East.
Anyhow, in the arrangement I'm used to seeing, the host school provides a lot of sweat equity. The cash value may not be huge, but it isn't trivial either. And don't underestimate the fact that "easy to run" vs. "huge staff headaches" is going to come into play when decision-makers decide which events to take on. For extremely lucrative events, maybe venue management says "never mind, just let us take care of those things." But for events that are just barely viable, the deal may collapse like a house of cards without the sweat equity contributed by the host school.
I'll acknowledge that it's highly likely that permanent (or semi-permanent) hosts handle a higher percentage of the work than "one-off" hosts. Maybe that explains some portion of the different experience.
Finally, proximity isn't irrelevant, because travel isn't free. But university staff members can and do travel to work at out-of-town locations. Less common, but not particularly unusual.
It does seem to me that getting rid of the school host could accomplish some good by removing the current requirement that if a host school makes the tournament, they have to be sent to the region they host. For example, this year, the NCAA could have sent Providence College to some other regional if they thought it was unfair to Harvard to have to play a lower seeded Providence College in Providence. Or, in the Fargo/Sioux Falls example, if UND made the tournament as a fourth seed, the NCAA could send UND to another regional. Of course if they’re really concerned with attendance, they might choose not to do this, but at least it gives them a choice.
No need for an overly broad "solution." Just change the current requirement. Schools already host events that their own teams aren't competing in. Example: NCAA Men's Hoops. Eliminating host schools to accomplish this goal would needlessly leave staff resources on the sidelines.
