Problems for Ford Field?

[Handyman]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

The "host" is responsible for guaranteeing to the NCAA that all or some of the projected revenue figures outlined in the budget bid would be met. Clearly the revenue figures are not going to be met, based on the pre-sale of tickets. Perhaps they can scale back the budgeted costs by tweaking the budget and making the stadium seating chart smaller, but the costs of the ice & video equipment isn't going to come down.

The co-hosts, CCHA & Detriot Metro Sports Commission, clearly won't want to lay out cash to cover a disastrous turnout (if Michigan doesn't make the Frozen Four), so they'll probably move the event to Joe Louis.

But I wouldn't be surprised to see the NCAA yank the event from Detroit altogether, if they can't secure Joe Louis, sellout Joe Louis or want to punish Detroit for reneging.

You need to start reading what others are saying before posting because none of what you said is possible and it has been discussed already why.

Why do people think that if FFFF sells out (HAHAHA!!) ESPN or the average non hockey fan is all of a sudden going to care? They don't care about NHL hockey do you really think they are going to care about college hockey where there 58 teams total that play half of which no one has ever heard of?

Also, do you think schools that are strapped for cash (most of them) as it is are all of a sudden going to say "Well uh ya know I know our endowments are down and Title IX is going to bite is in the *** over it but we should start up college hockey! I mean they sold out Ford Field it is obviously a successful idea!" Do you think they are going to ignore the fact that many schools are having issues with keeping programs alive? And lets say programs do start up, where you going to put them? The WCHA is overflowed as is the CCHA so any western school that starts up is screwed. The CHA is dead as is their autobid unless programs start up in the next year (i.e. before the Frozen Four) so that is out. Hockey East is pretty much filled to capacity as is the ECAC (maybe 1 or 2 new programs could go there I am not sure to be honest but I doubt they would accept them) so eastern teams are screwed too.

This idea that a successful FFFF will be the catalyst for all new awesomeness for college hockey is ridiculous. End of the day all of the same problems will be around only now we will have the added issue of the NCAA most likely mandating a gimmick FF in every round of selections...oh joy! I am sure 80K will want to watch UND vs. Miami! I can see the ratings EXPLODING...until the average fan realizes it isnt the Irish vs. the Hurricanes

 

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

Thank you Handyman. Totally agree.

FFFF ain't changing anything. Penn State, Syracuse, etc etc etc isn't going to put up money to start a new team, because then they'd need to pony up $$$ for a women's team for Title IX compliance. That's a lot of money. All because a lot of Michigan, and Michigan State, and Notre Dame fans filled up an arena to see their teams play in the Detroit (best case scenario).

This sport is going to be contracting more than it is expanding. A game with 50K fans will be a footnote nationally for 1 day. That is it.

The good thing is that if no one shows up at the FFFF, it's not going to have a big negative effect either. A tree is falling in the woods and no one is there, people.

And I love the little CH fanboys asking... "Don't you want to grow this sport?!?? Um... no. It can't handle growth right now and really there is no need. It is a niche sport and that is what makes it so great. The 16 team tourney is working good... everything is great. Why grow? It's not broken, why fix it?

That being said, the folks organizing this event can absolutely buy back my ticket as long as they give me my priority point for applying successfully (they're keeping the fee, I should keep my priority point, which is the only reason I bought a ticket anyway).

 

[satyking]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

I keep reading about low tix sales......where is the sale of tix reported.....or are these just guesses made by the uninformed

 

[Puck Swami]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

I think this is a little dire. A sparsely attended FF would be news for one day, maybe. If it sells out the next few years it'll be a blip, much like Anaheim is now, in a string of successful tournaments.

Anaheim, while not a sellout, was a successful tournament, selling 14,000+ seats in a venue thousands of miles away from the college hockey world. I think that tournament set up the sellouts that followed, and changed a lot of opinions about how attractive the game had become as a national draw. Now, the weather was very un-Californian that week (rainy and cold), but the tournament itself was a success, as a lot of people predicted a showing of less than 10K...

 

[dggoddard]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

I keep reading about low tix sales......where is the sale of tix reported.....or are these just guesses made by the uninformed

You can fool around on the Ticketmaster site to see that Center Ice tickets can still be had in the 36th row, section #107. That leads me to believe that the original post on this thread is true. That they've only sold half the tickets they expected to.

We heard previously that the end zone "Riser Seats" were reserved for the students. Not sure if that is still the case.

Usually a couple of thousand corner seats are set aside for fans of each team.

 

[CLS]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

I keep reading about low tix sales......where is the sale of tix reported.....or are these just guesses made by the uninformed

See Post #1. The source is unidentified and the rumor is unconfirmed, but TPFD is a long time and reliable poster and the fact that the rumor exists and all and hasn't been hooted down is a problem for the FFFF.

I think this is a little dire. A sparsely attended FF would be news for one day, maybe. If it sells out the next few years it'll be a blip, much like Anaheim is now, in a string of successful tournaments.

I think Columbus is a better example of a sparsely attended FF. The street price was literally less than zero -- people couldn't give their tickets away. It indicated that it matters a lot who the FF teams are, a lesson ignored by the FFFF proponents and the NCAA.

 

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

Anaheim, while not a sellout, was a successful tournament, selling 14,000+ seats in a venue thousands of miles away from the college hockey world. I think that tournament set up the sellouts that followed, and changed a lot of opinions about how attractive the game had become as a national draw.

Out of curiosity, what do you base this on? I feel like that tournament is selling out after 1999 regardless with a lot of local teams making it to close FFs plus a lot of big name teams (BC and Maine in Providence in 2000, BC and Michigan in 2001 in Albany, Minnesota at Xcel in 2002, Cornell and Michigan in Buffalo in 2003, Maine and BC in 2004 in Boston, 2005 was BAD, 2006 had Wisconsin in Milwaukee, etc) regardless of the turnout in Anaheim. Did people that went to Anaheim from the California and west coast region go for the 1st time in 1999 and all of a sudden start applying and boosting attendance in the future? I mean, if it changed opinions on how attractive the game had become as a national draw, did that matter since it left California and came back to the areas that are hotbeds of college hockey in the midwest and east coast (washington not being a CH hotbed but still a big city on the east coast) from 2000-current???

Just curious, I know you have your reasons for thinking this. I'm just not so sure this is a good hypothesis.

 

[Rover]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

Anaheim, while not a sellout, was a successful tournament, selling 14,000+ seats in a venue thousands of miles away from the college hockey world. I think that tournament set up the sellouts that followed, and changed a lot of opinions about how attractive the game had become as a national draw. Now, the weather was very un-Californian that week (rainy and cold), but the tournament itself was a success, as a lot of people predicted a showing of less than 10K...

Funny, I thought '98 was the real turning point with tickets scalping for high dollars and a packed NHL arena with lots of local coverage. Didn't go to Anaheim (the first one I'd missed in years) but to me Boston at that time was the beginning of the end of small arenas hosting the tournament. I guess we can agree that Albany wasn't the turning point.

Back to Detroit/etc. I don't think the point is a packed Ford Field is going to cause 10 programs to start up. I do think the point is that it assesses, publicly, where the sport stands. Increased TV coverage for college hockey - as in some sort of national broadcast - isn't the goal here. Hockey is a gate receipt sport. You can tell its strength in both college and pros by how many people are coming to the games, not the Neilson ratings (as opposed to hoops, in which the NBA has tons of unfilled arenas but big TV contracts as networks desperately wait for the next Jordan). Once in awhile, its not a bad idea to test the sport's popularity by putting it in either a bigger venue or a non-traditional one (DC, Florida). Had this effort not been made before, the thought process that it should only go to minor league facilities in small, boring cities might still be the norm.

College hockey is a growing sport, whether we like it or not. Used to be tickets were half what they are now, and 12,000 seat arenas fit the demand. Now the event sells out NHL barns, regionals are held where championships once were, schools are building larger home rinks, and its extremely difficult to run a program on the cheap. That may have resulted in a few less teams (what's the all time high for D-1 hockey programs - low 60's) but those remaining teams are stronger. These are good things IMHO. There's nothing wrong with stretching the envelope once in awhile in terms of exposure. It can't hurt, and it might help. Getting people to the games, not watching through television, is the key. If someone attended their first FF in DC this year, I'd be really surprised if they aren't now hooked on the sport after that experience.

 

[Sloe Gin]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

Funny, I thought '98 was the real turning point with tickets scalping for high dollars and a packed NHL arena with lots of local coverage. Didn't go to Anaheim (the first one I'd missed in years) but to me Boston at that time was the beginning of the end of small arenas hosting the tournament. I guess we can agree that Albany wasn't the turning point.

Back to Detroit/etc. I don't think the point is a packed Ford Field is going to cause 10 programs to start up. I do think the point is that it assesses, publicly, where the sport stands. Increased TV coverage for college hockey - as in some sort of national broadcast - isn't the goal here. Hockey is a gate receipt sport. You can tell its strength in both college and pros by how many people are coming to the games, not the Neilson ratings (as opposed to hoops, in which the NBA has tons of unfilled arenas but big TV contracts as networks desperately wait for the next Jordan). Once in awhile, its not a bad idea to test the sport's popularity by putting it in either a bigger venue or a non-traditional one (DC, Florida). Had this effort not been made before, the thought process that it should only go to minor league facilities in small, boring cities might still be the norm.

College hockey is a growing sport, whether we like it or not. Used to be tickets were half what they are now, and 12,000 seat arenas fit the demand. Now the event sells out NHL barns, regionals are held where championships once were, schools are building larger home rinks, and its extremely difficult to run a program on the cheap. That may have resulted in a few less teams (what's the all time high for D-1 hockey programs - low 60's) but those remaining teams are stronger. These are good things IMHO. There's nothing wrong with stretching the envelope once in awhile in terms of exposure. It can't hurt, and it might help. Getting people to the games, not watching through television, is the key. If someone attended their first FF in DC this year, I'd be really surprised if they aren't now hooked on the sport after that experience.

But for these people to get hooked, you have to reach out to hockey fans...not people that aren't hockey fans. Hockey itself is a very niche sport. It's not a sport that attracts the masses like say football or basketball. Hockey is a niche, the same way lacrosse, rugby, polo, curling, and triathlons are. These sports have a fierce fan base, but not nearly the casual fan base that basketball and football have. And even hockey fans that are NHL fans are not easy to convert to the college game. I have a buddy that works for the Wild that could care less about college hockey. He says the NHL is the only form of hockey he cares to watch.

Really, I like college hockey fans and how loyal they are. I'd rather see 15,000 passionate fans in an arena than 30,000 meh fans.

 

[CLS]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

. . . Once in awhile, its not a bad idea to test the sport's popularity by putting it in either a bigger venue or a non-traditional one (DC, Florida). Had this effort not been made before, the thought process that it should only go to minor league facilities in small, boring cities might still be the norm.

College hockey is a growing sport, whether we like it or not. Used to be tickets were half what they are now, and 12,000 seat arenas fit the demand. Now the event sells out NHL barns. . .

Great post. I agree, except for one point.

I think the problem with a non-traditional or larger venue as a test of the strength of the sport is that a huge factor, IMO the biggest factor, affecting attendance is the FF participants. Suppose the FFFF includes Michigan, Michigan State, and a couple of schools with an army of supporters that travel well, say North Dakota and New Hampshire. Would a packed Ford Field mean that college hockey is in good shape? On the other hand, suppose that the FFFF is four schools with small fan bases and no pep bands. Would and empty silent house, mean that hockey is in bad shape?

Providence sized arenas are clearly too small. A lot of people got shut out at Providence and Albany. But here is no evidence that NHL sized rinks are too small. If you have the right ingredients (e.g. Milwaukee), all the seats are filled and the rink is lively. If you don’t have the right ingredients (e.g. Columbus) all the seats may be sold, but many of them may be empty.

But to put the FF in a facility that is both so much bigger and so unconventional distorts the system. For one thing, the fact that it’s so unconventional will cause some long time participants sit it out; and you pretty much narrow the “only if my team makes it” purchasers down to people who think that tickets will be very hard to get (which in my opinion is a really dumb assumption). So the success of the tournament is not so much a measure of the strength of college hockey; it’s a measure of popularity of having the FF in a football facility. Of course, the attendance will be inflated somewhat by people who are attracted by the novelty and “event” nature of venue, but once again, that’s not a measure of the strength of college hockey.

 

[blockski]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

But for these people to get hooked, you have to reach out to hockey fans...not people that aren't hockey fans. Hockey itself is a very niche sport. It's not a sport that attracts the masses like say football or basketball. Hockey is a niche, the same way lacrosse, rugby, polo, curling, and triathlons are. These sports have a fierce fan base, but not nearly the casual fan base that basketball and football have. And even hockey fans that are NHL fans are not easy to convert to the college game. I have a buddy that works for the Wild that could care less about college hockey. He says the NHL is the only form of hockey he cares to watch.

Really, I like college hockey fans and how loyal they are. I'd rather see 15,000 passionate fans in an arena than 30,000 meh fans.

I'm not sure I totally agree.

Hockey is indeed a niche sport, but remember we're talking about college hockey. There are plenty of random sports fans that will root for the college first, regardless of the sport being played. The trick, then, is to get them to a game and use the excitement as the hook.

This, however, is a different kind of growth. It grows the fanbase for a team that already exists. It takes some serious foresight for a school to specifically plan to create that kind of atmosphere.

I think this is why people are always excited about a school like Penn State or Syracuse popping up for the rumors of a new team, as schools like that would be able to tap a fanbase that will get behind them with just a modest level of success.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

Moving the event would imply that the NCAA made a wrong decision, and they've never come across as the mistake admitting type. The obvious answer is to make the tickets cheaper this year, (no demand, inferior sightlines, craptastic economy, etc.) but that's something else that the NCAA doesn't do well.

 

[bcshater]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

If the FFFF is a success will the NCAA look for other domed football stadiums to host the event? Since the FF has not been scheduled for any cities past 2012 a successful FFFF may open the event to domed football stadiums such as the new Dallas stadium. Trying to think of other domed football stadiums, maybe Seattle but having the event there does not seem realistic as Seattle does not come across as a hockey town.

OK, thinking about this some more Dallas may not even be an option due to not have any college teams relatively close by playing hockey ( but I am submitting this post anyway ). My take on this issue is that the FFFF will be the only venue where having the event in a domed football stadium is even realistic due to:

a) Detroit being "Hockey Town"

b) The interest of college hockey in the Midwest

c) The proximity of fans of schools such as Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin and Miami of Ohio who may buy up tickets in the anticipation of their teams making it to Detroit in April.

 

[Zudnic]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

So are you boycotting your beloved BC Eagles on Jan 8th when they play BU at Fenway? Is that a gimmick? It is sold out, by the way

I am going. I halfheartedly tried to get tix and I'm going because a friend has an extra. I think if I am going to complain about outdoor games I owe it to myself to experience it at least once. I am not expecting it to be very fun and I am not expecting to see the game - I'll tape it in hi-def and actually watch it later.

 

[kdilks]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

c) The proximity of fans of schools such as Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin and Miami of Ohio who may buy up tickets in the anticipation of their teams making it to Detroit in April.

Have you ever looked at a map before?

 

[The Rube]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

Have you ever looked at a map before?

.

 

[umassfan49]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

Have you ever looked at a map before?

If he had he would know that Wisconsin is about the only logical school he mentioned for a team being in a sense, nearby. Michigan and Michigan State are certainly close to Detroit, and even his mention of Ohio State wasn't too far off. As for North Dakota and Minnesota, St Paul next year is a good one for that.

 

[slurpees]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

c) The proximity of fans of schools such as Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin and Miami of Ohio who may buy up tickets in the anticipation of their teams making it to Detroit in April.

you are aware that minneapolis is a whopping 14 miles closer to detroit than boston is, right? the only "proximity schools" (in that someone says hey let's hop in the car and drive up to the game) would be the michigans, ND, ohio state and miami sort of, and maybe wisconsin though that's still 430 miles. minnesota and north dakota, while they'd still travel very well, are no more in proximity than bu, bc, and unh.

my question with regards to the setup is why they immediately jumped to a center-stage rink setup. they only last year went to this setup for basketball after many years of putting the court in the end of the field and throwing up temporary bleachers. if the ncaa wants to expand the FF, why not go for this, make the seating 40-50k, have better sightlines in comparison to putting it in the center and see if that sells out?

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

If the FFFF is a success will the NCAA look for other domed football stadiums to host the event? Since the FF has not been scheduled for any cities past 2012 a successful FFFF may open the event to domed football stadiums such as the new Dallas stadium. Trying to think of other domed football stadiums, maybe Seattle but having the event there does not seem realistic as Seattle does not come across as a hockey town.

Really? Those are the only 2 domes you can think of? How about Carrier Dome, RCA Dome, Astrodome, Metrodome, Georgia Dome, Superdome, St. Louis (forgot the name), etc, etc. The NCAA could have it in nothing but domed football stadiums if it wanted to.

 

[stickboy1956]

Re: Problems for Ford Field?

I haven't read every post in this thread - I saw the first post:

Does anyone have a link to anything published besides this forum that the NCAA is considering moving the game from Ford Field?

There are many pros/cons to hosting the event at Ford Field but the premise of the thread was that there may be a change of venue.

Anyone have any evidence?