NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

I'd say you like entertainment more than you like hockey.

Don't we all enjoy hockey (and sports in general) BECAUSE of the entertainment value? If I didn't find the game entertaining, I wouldn't care enough to watch and I wouldn't be involved in this conversation.

 

[moose97]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Yeah, I don't think too many people nation-wide realize what that two game winning streak did for RIT hockey on campus and throughout the entire Rochester area ... Although, on a personal note, I am now feeling much more pressured to get my tickets early since the local demand for tickets is going way way up. I can see the one home game at Blue Cross Arena selling out in '10-'11, which would be amazing at 11,500 people (something the Amerks haven't even done in a few seasons, btw).

I've been thinking about this post for a couple days now. Looking at what '09 did for Bemidji State (in a hockey market - but one where when I got here in '99-'00, high school usually out-drew BSU): BSU had never averaged more than ~ 1500 in the first 6 years of its D-I history (and that 1500 figure was a bump for joining D-I in their first year, '99-'00. After that, the next six years were closer to 1200). Then, BSU made the NCAA's in D-I for the first time in '04-'05. Their attendance jumped to 1700 a game in '05-'06, and was between 1550 and 1700 for the next couple years. Then, BSU is back to a nice run in '08-'09, and attencance spikes to 1900 a game that year. Even though that is the highest total in D-I history, attendance climes to 2300 a game after a Frozen Four run (and where BSU now outdraws high school easily).

Now, surely there was increased intrest because of the impending move to the WCHA and the new rink being built, but I don't think those two things alone would have spiked attendance to near sell-out over last season. Clearly, just making the NCAA's helps attendance. However, the FF run (and WCHA/new rink) made BSU hockey the thing to do in town.

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

I've been thinking about this post for a couple days now. Looking at what '09 did for Bemidji State (in a hockey market - but one where when I got here in '99-'00, high school usually out-drew BSU): BSU had never averaged more than ~ 1500 in the first 6 years of its D-I history (and that 1500 figure was a bump for joining D-I in their first year, '99-'00. After that, the next six years were closer to 1200). Then, BSU made the NCAA's in D-I for the first time in '04-'05. Their attendance jumped to 1700 a game in '05-'06, and was between 1550 and 1700 for the next couple years. Then, BSU is back to a nice run in '08-'09, and attencance spikes to 1900 a game that year. Even though that is the highest total in D-I history, attendance climes to 2300 a game after a Frozen Four run (and where BSU now outdraws high school easily).

Now, surely there was increased intrest because of the impending move to the WCHA and the new rink being built, but I don't think those two things alone would have spiked attendance to near sell-out over last season. Clearly, just making the NCAA's helps attendance. However, the FF run (and WCHA/new rink) made BSU hockey the thing to do in town.

Even though I still couldn't have imagined RIT doing what they did this past season, I was rooting so much for BSU throughout their run in '09 simply because it felt like maybe our team could do the same some day because of the two schools' somewhat parellel pasts and our NCAA Tournament rivalry in the '80's. I just wish I had been around during those years (still in high school). From all I've read, those D-II and D-III Championships were awesome.
It's just THAT BIG of a deal to teams like this. While RIT hockey may never be "the thing to do" in a city the size of Rochester, it's certainly growing its following in town more every year, especially after the Frozen Four hoopla. Of course, RIT doesn't have to worry about selling more tickets (except to the BCA game) since they have sold out nearly every game the last 4 years (somewhere between 1800 - 2100 depending who you ask). But now the demand and lead time we'll need to get tickets is going to ramp up even more than it has over the last few years, creating more and more demand for a new arena. But RIT doesn't have all the government red tape BSU had to go through to get theirs built. They "just" have to find a wealthy donor or two to pony up the cash for a new or re-furbished arena. I'm still keeping my fingers crossed over that one. Let's just hope the stock market doesn't crash again. We heard rumors about the talk of a new arena just before the market tanked in '08. Then it suddenly went quiet. Not too many rich folks were willing to part with their money at the time, understandably so.

 

[4four4]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

However, the FF run (and WCHA/new rink) made BSU hockey the thing to do in town.

As opposed to sitting home alone and drinking all night?

 

[MikeAnderson]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

What happens under that plan when a team earns a chance to host a regional, but their arena isn't capable of doing so? Having the #1 seeds host regionals is probably not particularly attractive in terms of logistics.

In Division II, pretty much anyone with the capacity and the likelihood to make a tournament bids to be the host team. The seeding provides "first right" to host. If the top seed doesn't meet standards (or doesn't bid), it goes down the list.

That's an institutional issue, not a national issue.

I couldn't say how it works for Division I baseball or softball, which has regionals hosted by the top national teams. With a percentage of games hosted on campus fields approaching 100 across the division, I'm not sure this has, or ever would be, an issue for that tournament.

 

[blockski]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

In Division II, pretty much anyone with the capacity and the likelihood to make a tournament bids to be the host team. The seeding provides "first right" to host. If the top seed doesn't meet standards (or doesn't bid), it goes down the list.

That's an institutional issue, not a national issue.

I couldn't say how it works for Division I baseball or softball, which has regionals hosted by the top national teams. With a percentage of games hosted on campus fields approaching 100 across the division, I'm not sure this has, or ever would be, an issue for that tournament.

Yeah, I figured that would be the case with the first right. The question would be about alternative venues - let's say Ohio State has the same situation they had a year or so ago where the big rink is booked and they have to play in the OSU ice arena. If I'm OSU, there's no way I give up the home ice, but playing in the back-up barn isn't exactly what the NCAA is looking for.

----

Another consideration for 'fairness' that Brian at MGoBlog suggested was giving the road team in the best of three series all the home advantages in the second game (aside from the crowd) - switch benches, give them last change, etc.

 

[unofan]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

I couldn't say how it works for Division I baseball or softball, which has regionals hosted by the top national teams. With a percentage of games hosted on campus fields approaching 100 across the division, I'm not sure this has, or ever would be, an issue for that tournament.

It's changed over the years, I think anymore they try to give it to the higher seed wherever possible, though there are minimum requirements (which can be met with temporary bleachers, if needed). In the case of a super regional where two equally seeded teams make it, I think the one that knocked off the "national" seed gets preference.

 

[RedFreak]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Another consideration for 'fairness' that Brian at MGoBlog suggested was giving the road team in the best of three series all the home advantages in the second game (aside from the crowd) - switch benches, give them last change, etc.

Why not do what was done at the Wisconsin/Michigan State football game in Tokyo a few years back? When the Japanese crowd got to their seats, half had green and white pom-poms and the other half had cardinal and white. They actually were pretty enthusiastic about cheering for their designated team. I'm sure the home crowd hockey fans would be equally gracious.

 

[unhpuckfan2001]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Why not do what was done at the Wisconsin/Michigan State football game in Tokyo a few years back? When the Japanese crowd got to their seats, half had green and white pom-poms and the other half had cardinal and white. They actually were pretty enthusiastic about cheering for their designated team. I'm sure the home crowd hockey fans would be equally gracious.

Because I'm sure many people would share this sentiment:

"I'm not paying $24 (the going rate for a UNH home game) to go to a game at the Whit and not cheer for UNH. Not gonna happen."

 

[mmb5]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

I couldn't say how it works for Division I baseball or softball, which has regionals hosted by the top national teams. With a percentage of games hosted on campus fields approaching 100 across the division, I'm not sure this has, or ever would be, an issue for that tournament.

Softball has minimum hosting requirements: your stadium must have at least a seating capacity of 500, must not be open access, have lights among other things. Washington, a top tier team, had been unable to host before this year because their field didn't have lights. Michigan State was unable to host until this year because their stadium was open access.

Baseball does the guarantee model, $50K for a 4-team regional, $35K for a super regional, and although their requirements state that lights are "recommended", its pretty much a requirement.

Baseball and softball also adhere greatly to the 400 mile rule. Often times, a Western team will be the top seed in their group of four, but will be sent to the Northeast or Midwest because its cheaper to fly one team than three. Hockey wouldn't have that issue since only one team would be coming in instead of 3. The banding methodology is also only relevant for the top band of 16. It's not uncommon to have 1-2-2-3 or 1-3-4-4 in a regional.

I would gather that hockey, if they went this route, would probably use soccer as a model (2009 handbook, go to appendix H). They are played on campus sites for all but the final four.

 

[kingdobbs]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

I would gather that hockey, if they went this route, would probably use soccer as a model (2009 handbook, go to appendix H). They are played on campus sites for all but the final four.

Well, the format as presented in the article way back so many pages ago is identical to the lacrosse format, with the exception of a best-of-three first round (and also no mega-championship where all of the men's divisions play on the same weekend at the same site), so that will no doubt be a cromulent model to follow.

 

[mmb5]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Well, the format as presented in the article way back so many pages ago is identical to the lacrosse format, with the exception of a best-of-three first round (and also no mega-championship where all of the men's divisions play on the same weekend at the same site), so that will no doubt be a cromulent model to follow.

Yes, the lacrosse model is quite embiggening.

 

[RedFreak]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Well, the format as presented in the article way back so many pages ago is identical to the lacrosse format, with the exception of a best-of-three first round (and also no mega-championship where all of the men's divisions play on the same weekend at the same site), so that will no doubt be a cromulent model to follow.

Maybe we'll get more respect from ESPN.

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Maybe we'll get more respect from ESPN.

Maybe only if we keep using "words" like cromulent and embiggening

I detect that I am probably missing out on an inside joke here, but I just couldn't help myself

 

[RedFreak]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Maybe only if we keep using "words" like cromulent and embiggening

I detect that I am probably missing out on an inside joke here, but I just couldn't help myself

I figured I knew what embiggen meant, but I had to look up cromulent. Lo and behold, I hit the <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_the_Iconoclast#Embiggen_and_cromulent"> jackpot </A>.

 

[MikeAnderson]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

If I'm OSU, there's no way I give up the home ice, but playing in the back-up barn isn't exactly what the NCAA is looking for.

Then if you're OSU, you block off the time early if you have even a sneaking suspicion that you'll host. If the OSU administration doesn't have enough faith in its program to prepare an appropriate hosting bid well in advance, then why should the NCAA grant exceptions for the sake of home ice?

 

[blockski]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Then if you're OSU, you block off the time early if you have even a sneaking suspicion that you'll host. If the OSU administration doesn't have enough faith in its program to prepare an appropriate hosting bid well in advance, then why should the NCAA grant exceptions for the sake of home ice?

It's not that simple, though. Wisconsin had the same problem with the Kohl Center before they worked out the contractual details. Basically, the state high school association wanted their tournament held that one weekend that just so happened to be the first weekend of the WCHA playoffs. Their contract gave them priority over hockey - the reason being that everything got all political, as the high schools were threatening to take the entire tournament away from Madison and move it to Milwaukee, thus they were exerting pressure on the public university to give them the premier dates.

As a result, UW had to play a couple of first round series at the Dane County Coliseum instead of their usual home rink.

It's not about faith, it's about business and the terms laid out in the contracts. These things are also signed years in advance - the High School Tournament was something like a 5 or a 10 year contract. Wisconsin finally worked out a deal with the state high school folks about tournament timing and venues, and it's all straightened out now. However, adding potential NCAA hosting into the mix might be more complicated.

I think UNO's run into this issue with the Qwest Center, too.

So, if you're a team playing in a multi-purpose venue, you're asking your landlord (whether that's the school or someone else) to hold 2 prime weekends open and free of events (for league playoffs and for the NCAAs) and forgo earning any revenue - just on the chance that the hockey team might advance. Venues like that can't survive on hockey alone.

Not saying it can't be done, as I think it certainly can - and on the whole, it would result in more money for the NCAA and a much better atmosphere. I do think there will be some conflicts, however.

 

[bronconick]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Anyone else feeling the irony of arguing about upsets in a year where the worst two teams in the NHL playoffs regular season wise are playing each other starting tomorrow for a trip to the Finals?

 

[Patman]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

Anyone else feeling the irony of arguing about upsets in a year where the worst two teams in the NHL playoffs regular season wise are playing each other starting tomorrow for a trip to the Finals?

if you want to know why, besides time, that baseball will never add another round, look at just that issue. If a team wins 60% of its game against an opponent then in a seven game set the that team will only win the series roughly (IIRC... done this in class several times... not pulling out the calculator) 71% of the time. Most of the time in hockey and baseball 60% is generous... in basketball 60% or better you can see in the opening round but after that not so much.

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

I figured I knew what embiggen meant, but I had to look up cromulent. Lo and behold, I hit the <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_the_Iconoclast#Embiggen_and_cromulent"> jackpot </A>.

I should be ashamed of myself. I knew I recognized embiggen. I actually didn't remember cromulent. I should have figured that was a Groening special.
Nice work