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.
Possible Tournament Expansion
- Thread starter TonyTheTiger20
- Start date
robertearle
Well-known member
"HARD NO" to single site tournament!
If the idea is again to "save flights/travel" etc. it doesn't do that.
All 10 teams going to the single site means nine or ten teams travelling.
Two play-in games followed by the regular eight team format means nine or ten teams travelling: two or the four involved in play-in travel to games hosted by play-in teams; then four quarterfinal teams travel to four hosting quarterfinal teams; then three or four teams travel to the FF site. Nine or ten teams having to travel somewhere. Nothing "saved"
Obviously, what is lost is sellout crowds and really energized buildings for the teams hosting play-in and quarterfinal games.
I didn’t understand the single site cost savings, and actually thought of Wisconsin who doesn’t get to host Final Four Faceoff, now losing its annual NCAA hosting game.
but overall love the idea of expanding to 10 teams. When it was reported previously that CHA / NEWHA we’re going to share an auto bid or something that was a hard no for me. Kudos to the coaches for bringing this forward.
but overall love the idea of expanding to 10 teams. When it was reported previously that CHA / NEWHA we’re going to share an auto bid or something that was a hard no for me. Kudos to the coaches for bringing this forward.
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
Leave it alone. At least right now 4 schools get to have 1 home game, meaning their fans will get to see the games in person.
The 9 and 10 teams are not going to beat the 1-2 teams once out of 10 games, so what if the point, give some more players a metal or a participation trophy? If there was more parody like on the men's side, it would make sense. The men's side should expand because lower seeds are always making noise. Has there ever been a Holy Cross type upset win on the women's side?
The 9 and 10 teams are not going to beat the 1-2 teams once out of 10 games, so what if the point, give some more players a metal or a participation trophy? If there was more parody like on the men's side, it would make sense. The men's side should expand because lower seeds are always making noise. Has there ever been a Holy Cross type upset win on the women's side?
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
TitleIXHockey
Golden Knight
They're not supposed to, that's why they're the 9th and 10th seeds (or 7th and 8th seeds) and not the 1st or 2nd seeds. The 1st or 2nd seeds, being the first or second best teams in the country, should almost always beat the 9th and 10th seeds, being the 9th and CHA winner best teams in the country. If they were perhaps the 3rd and 4th seeds and not the 9th and 10th seeds, it might be reasonable to want them to beat the 1st or 2nd seeds more often as these teams are closer in talent.
Let's not be so hasty. As someone who traveled to Erie, I can see real advantages to the single site format. Ultimately you may have the better of the argument, but the verdict isn't obvious. I see two main advantages:
1. Bracket Integrity The "WCHA vs. WCHA Play-In Game" has been an almost annual event. And it usually destroys bracket integrity. Getting rid of that albatross is no small thing. With a single site, "No Intra-Conference Match-Ups In The First Round" can become the new normal.
2. Attending More Of The Tournament Under the current format, it's essentially impossible to attend more than 1 Quarterfinal. With a single site, you could attend all 7 (or 9) NCAA games for the price of a single trip. Or whatever portion of the tournament that fits into your schedule. If you're a true fan of the sport, that is a very cool option. For those who are a fan of only 1 team, period? It get that the likely reaction will be a yawn.
Personally I attended 2 sessions in Erie: The OSU/BC Quarterfinal and the UW/Northeastern Title Game. Work obligations precluded the OSU/UW Semifinal, though I did watch that game on TV. Due to Covid concerns, I opted out of overnight lodging. Granted, Columbus to Erie is a long commute. But it was well worth it for both games.
During the course of those drives, it certainly occurred to me that staying through would have been very appealing in more normal times. Though the particulars would have been different, I imagine that those staging the event had similar thoughts.
I believe you're correct on the travel factor, but we should untangled this a bit. With regard to Transportation: Under the current format, if a Quarterfinal Road team wins, that team has to travel twice. So that would cut into your savings. However, it seems clear that Lodging costs would increase considerably, with most or all teams on the road. Also, the number of nights of lodging required would increase for any team winning a Quarterfinal, and increase more for those making it all the way to the Title game.
I would be interested to know what costs were saved by staging the tournament at a single site, as opposed to five (or seven) sites. My suspicion is that some dollars were saved, but probably not a game-changing amount of money. But my further suspicion is that for NCAA personnel running the tournament, the single site made things much easier.
Correct. Note, though, that this point is a tougher sell at schools that have never hosted, or only host once in a blue moon. Meaning, of course, a very large majority of the competing schools.
Last edited:
zambonidriver
New member
This year it is at Pegula, State college is very well equipped to handle a single site format. They are used to hosting home football games and there are plenty of accommodations with in 1 mile of the arena . The nice thing about a one site tournament is it could grow in stature and become a real draw. I.E. the MSHSL boys ang irls high school hockey tournament.
The other nice thing is that larger nicer Venues could house the tournament. Pegula is an example of such a Venue. Excel would be another one. Englestead, Rochester etc..
I think it is a great idea. Especially with Wisconsin being in the tournament can you imagine the 10 day party when a town is taken over by the red horde....LOL
The other nice thing is that larger nicer Venues could house the tournament. Pegula is an example of such a Venue. Excel would be another one. Englestead, Rochester etc..
I think it is a great idea. Especially with Wisconsin being in the tournament can you imagine the 10 day party when a town is taken over by the red horde....LOL
I wouldn't be too concerned about that. As I recall, even rabid Badger fan Timothy didn't want to go to Lindenwood in case his team got booted before the final.
Looking forward to Pegula, and hoping to make it. Regardless of format.
8 Teams, 7 Games, 1 Site, 1 Champion is a very cool format. Your reference to the Minnesota High School Tournaments is well taken.
I'm all for having the tournament in nice places. Again, I'm excited for Pegula, and believe it will be a great fit. But I do have to take issue with some of the sites you've listed, mostly because they're too big for the Women's FF at this point in time.
NHL Arenas like The X simply have too much seating capacity. In the Twin Cities, Ridder and/or Mariucci are better options.
For Rochester, I presume you're referencing the Amerks' Downtown Arena. (Blue Cross Arena?) I'd honestly rather see the tournament hosted on campus at RIT, at Polisseni. Yes, I've been to the Men's Hockey Brick City Classic Downtown. Yes, it's a great event. That arena could actually work for a Women's FF. But Polisseni is also a very nice arena, and a better fit for our expected crowd, IMHO.
Again, we don't want to overreach. While the Wisconsin fan base is probably the best case scenario, I don't believe that huge numbers of fans will take a full week off work to attend; even Badgers.
But it's OK. We have to leave something for the next generation to accomplish.
Absolutely!
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
I disagree, they should at least have a slight chance. In many other sports, the lowest seeds have a chance to beat the top seeds and have done so. If having zero chance of winning doesn't matter, why stop at 10 or 12 teams then?