Regional sites - how are they selected?

[directmagna]

Sorry if I'm late to this party and if this horse has already been beaten dead, but, I am curious why the NCAA selects random arena across our fair land - some of which are no where near an interested cawlidge hawkey market (Cincinatti?)

I'm sure this has been discussed: please get me up to speed on this idea: What if the NCAA held the regionals in the arenas of the top 4 ranked (1 seeds) teams? This year it would have been DU, Harvard, UMD and U of M.

The first issue I can see would be it would be difficult to reserve the arenas for the first round of the tourney because the number 1 seeds wouldn't be known until quite late. Is that the main reason the sites are based on the top four seeds? timing/logistics?

OK - well, how about winner of each conference gets to host the regional? - on a rotating basis, the conference champs get to host a regional. So right now there are what, 6 conferences? Each conf. is hosting four out of 6 years, two years off -- in a rotation -- would that make sense?

Again, tricky in the sense that you don't know where you are going until after the conference championships --

How about this idea: regionals are set off of the regular season champ -- this would give a bit more time....

The money is being made with the TV agreements, so the events don't need to be in big expensive buildings - ticket revenue is also not a consideration - so price of tickets should be priced very reasonably - like $30 per seat.

What do you think?

 

[ecemleafs]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

cincinatti is a bizarre location. closest team that ended up in that regional is like 7 hours drive away. geographically it doesnt seem like many colleges would bring a good fanbase to these games.

 

[chickod]

cincinatti is a bizarre location. closest team that ended up in that regional is like 7 hours drive away. geographically it doesnt seem like many colleges would bring a good fanbase to these games.

But they're "growing the game." Next year's Northeast Regional is going to be on the Moon. All the "lunartics" will be there.

 

[CLS]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

Sorry if I'm late to this party and if this horse has already been beaten dead, but, I am curious why the NCAA selects random arena across our fair land - some of which are no where near an interested cawlidge hawkey market (Cincinatti?)

I'm sure this has been discussed: please get me up to speed on this idea: What if the NCAA held the regionals in the arenas of the top 4 ranked (1 seeds) teams? This year it would have been DU, Harvard, UMD and U of M.

The first issue I can see would be it would be difficult to reserve the arenas for the first round of the tourney because the number 1 seeds wouldn't be known until quite late. Is that the main reason the sites are based on the top four seeds? timing/logistics?

OK - well, how about winner of each conference gets to host the regional? - on a rotating basis, the conference champs get to host a regional. So right now there are what, 6 conferences? Each conf. is hosting four out of 6 years, two years off -- in a rotation -- would that make sense?

Again, tricky in the sense that you don't know where you are going until after the conference championships --

How about this idea: regionals are set off of the regular season champ -- this would give a bit more time....

The money is being made with the TV agreements, so the events don't need to be in big expensive buildings - ticket revenue is also not a consideration - so price of tickets should be priced very reasonably - like $30 per seat.

What do you think?

The NCAA does not select random arenas. Venues submit bids. Here’s an example of the specifications for a bid. The NCAA then selects venues from bids that have been submitted. If Cincinnati submits a bid, and nobody else submits and better bid, then the NCAA is stuck with Cincinnati.

The main reason for non-campus neutral sites is not logistics, it is a strong feeling among the coaches for neutral sites.

 

[FiveHole12]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

Sorry if I'm late to this party and if this horse has already been beaten dead, but, I am curious why the NCAA selects random arena across our fair land - some of which are no where near an interested cawlidge hawkey market (Cincinatti?)

I'm sure this has been discussed: please get me up to speed on this idea: What if the NCAA held the regionals in the arenas of the top 4 ranked (1 seeds) teams? This year it would have been DU, Harvard, UMD and U of M.

The first issue I can see would be it would be difficult to reserve the arenas for the first round of the tourney because the number 1 seeds wouldn't be known until quite late. Is that the main reason the sites are based on the top four seeds? timing/logistics?

OK - well, how about winner of each conference gets to host the regional? - on a rotating basis, the conference champs get to host a regional. So right now there are what, 6 conferences? Each conf. is hosting four out of 6 years, two years off -- in a rotation -- would that make sense?

Again, tricky in the sense that you don't know where you are going until after the conference championships --

How about this idea: regionals are set off of the regular season champ -- this would give a bit more time....

The money is being made with the TV agreements, so the events don't need to be in big expensive buildings - ticket revenue is also not a consideration - so price of tickets should be priced very reasonably - like $30 per seat.

What do you think?

Here you go.... NCAA Site Selection Process and Information.
All you want to know about regional site selection.

 

[bravohankins]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

cincinatti is a bizarre location. closest team that ended up in that regional is like 7 hours drive away. geographically it doesnt seem like many colleges would bring a good fanbase to these games.

Miami University is 40 miles from Cincy and they are the host school.

Don't like Cincy, then get your school to submit a bid!! Fargo and Cincy keep ending up as hosts because NOBODY but UND and Miami ever submit bids.

BGSU hosted with the Huntington Center in Toledo a few years back and it was a financial disaster.....so now they won't bid to host any more regionals.

The whole NCAA regionals set up is a failure, the games are sparsely attended. NCAA games played on campus were so much better in the 70's and 80's. Sold out arenas with loud, partisan crowds.
However the coaches don't like that. Much easier for the lower seeded teams to win a one game showdown at a neutral site than to go into another teams arena and take two of three on the road.

 

[JB]

Miami University is 40 miles from Cincy and they are the host school.

Don't like Cincy, then get your school to submit a bid!! Fargo and Cincy keep ending up as hosts because NOBODY but UND and Miami ever submit bids.

BGSU hosted with the Huntington Center in Toledo a few years back and it was a financial disaster.....so now they won't bid to host any more regionals.

The whole NCAA regionals set up is a failure, the games are sparsely attended. NCAA games played on campus were so much better in the 70's and 80's. Sold out arenas with loud, partisan crowds.
However the coaches don't like that. Much easier for the lower seeded teams to win a one game showdown at a neutral site than to go into another teams arena and take two of three on the road.

I really think they need to go back to 2 regional locations. 8 teams at each. Friday, Saturday, Sunday 2 games each day.

 

[davyd83]

I really think they need to go back to 2 regional locations. 8 teams at each. Friday, Saturday, Sunday 2 games each day.

Which arena has 8 locker rooms suitable for college teams & training staffs. How do you structure playing and practice time for 8 teams? How much wear and tear is there on your ice over a four day period between 7 games, & 14 practices? That sort of thing is fine for a peewee tournament.

 

[joecct]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

4 regional sites at the home ice of the #1 seeds.

Yea travel can be interesting for some places (Alaska, Bemidji, Potsdam/Canton), but the pros could outweigh the cons.

 

[BC/HE]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

The NCAA controls ticket prices and allocates the funding how they desire. If they slashed ticket prices for the regionals they could easily fill the arenas with just one local team. On campus sites would not work because the NCAA gets the money from the ticket sales and the host team would essentially lose out except as home ice advantage.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

The NCAA controls ticket prices and allocates the funding how they desire. If they slashed ticket prices for the regionals they could easily fill the arenas with just one local team. On campus sites would not work because the NCAA gets the money from the ticket sales and the host team would essentially lose out except as home ice advantage.

The NCAA does not control the prices. A host candidate basically bids on a regional and the bid that assures the NCAA the most money wins, providing the prospective host can agree to all of the items the NCAA requires. The NCAA sets a floor and a ceiling on the ticket price and the host selects whatever price point will maximize the revenue. You'll sell 4000 $75 dollar tickets and make more money than if you sell 7000 $40 tickets. Allegedly educated and experienced marketing people are involved in this process but you can't always tell from the results.

I don't know why higher seeded teams hosting on campus would not work. For instance, even if Minnesota made no money from holding the games in Minneapolis, the home ice advantage alone would make that a better deal for them. As it is, higher seeds now get NO advantage other than a weaker team and last change. They'd get that at home PLUS their own fans filling most of the barn. The "host team" would not lose anything because the cost of running the games would be borne by the NCAA, just as it is now with the supposed neutral sites.

I also think we're long passed the notion that 4 team regionals will ever draw crowds unless they are on campus or basically in a teams own city. How far away is Lowell from Manchester? 30 miles? 40? Yet that game had a stated attendance of around 4600 and there were not 4600 there because that included some Minn and Cornell fans who bought all session passes and did not go on Sunday. And I actually think many of us thought it was a pretty good sized crowd. And yes I know Fargo drew a full house on Friday but North Dakota fans will drive some distance to see their team, almost the exception that proves the rule. But what about the regional final between UND and Yale in Grand Rapids some years ago? The announced attendance was 1900 but I happen to know for a fact they scanned fewer than 1000 tickets that day. We can either continue to hold the regionals as they are because it is probably generally the most "fair" way to do it, but we will never consistently have even good atmosphere in most buildings. Or we can say atmosphere matters most and find ourselves back on campus sites.

 

[joecct]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

For 11 years (81-91) the NCAA early rounds were on campus (you could go back to 77 for the CCHA-WCHA playin if you want). I believe the rinks were packed. There were upsets in almost every year.

Why they went away from that is beyond me.

 

[Bronco]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

For 11 years (81-91) the NCAA early rounds were on campus (you could go back to 77 for the CCHA-WCHA playin if you want). I believe the rinks were packed. There were upsets in almost every year.

Why they went away from that is beyond me.

Apparently nobody remembers the constant complaining when Michigan hosted a regional at Yost nearly every season.

 

[joecct]

Apparently nobody remembers the constant complaining when Michigan hosted a regional at Yost nearly every season.

I have no problem with a #1 seed hosting. A #4 seed is a different story.

If UAA can win 2 at BC (1991), anything is possible. The odds favor a home team in a one and done, but you never know.

 

[JB]

Which arena has 8 locker rooms suitable for college teams & training staffs. How do you structure playing and practice time for 8 teams? How much wear and tear is there on your ice over a four day period between 7 games, & 14 practices? That sort of thing is fine for a peewee tournament.

In the old format it was 6 teams. Over 2 days.

I didn't say it would be easy. You can look at the reasons why not or find solutions.

 

[FireKnight]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

For 11 years (81-91) the NCAA early rounds were on campus (you could go back to 77 for the CCHA-WCHA playin if you want). I believe the rinks were packed. There were upsets in almost every year.

Why they went away from that is beyond me.

I believe it was the Clarkson Pep Band's fault.

 

[davyd83]

In the old format it was 6 teams. Over 2 days.

I didn't say it would be easy. You can look at the reasons why not or find solutions.

Logistics would be a nightmare. Very few buildings are set up to accommodate 8 teams at once.

 

[davyd83]

I have no problem with a #1 seed hosting. A #4 seed is a different story.

If UAA can win 2 at BC (1991), anything is possible. The odds favor a home team in a one and done, but you never know.

For #1 seeds to host, how many buildings would be able to block out that time 3-6 month in advance?

 

[johnk]

Which arena has 8 locker rooms suitable for college teams & training staffs. How do you structure playing and practice time for 8 teams? How much wear and tear is there on your ice over a four day period between 7 games, & 14 practices? That sort of thing is fine for a peewee tournament.

It would only be 6 games over 3 days. I feel this is the best solution. Only 4 locker rooms needed.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Regional sites - how are they selected?

For 11 years (81-91) the NCAA early rounds were on campus (you could go back to 77 for the CCHA-WCHA playin if you want). I believe the rinks were packed. There were upsets in almost every year.

Why they went away from that is beyond me.

Generally speaking I think there was good attendance at those games. But you overstate the "upsets" part of it.

In those eleven seasons, of the 44 teams to make the Frozen Four, 35 of them were #1 or #2 seeds in the East or West, or in other words, in the group of the top four overall seeded teams in the tournament. In the early years of that format, there were a couple of years where teams 1-4 from the West won all four series, but that wasn't what people wanted either, even if some of those series were considered "upsets."

In the final four years of that format ('88-91), when the field was expanded to 12 teams, it was even more telling. #1 or #2 seeds (again, the top four overall seeded teams) made up 14 of the 16 Frozen Four participants. I think that four year history made up everyone's mind of the need to move to neutral sites.

What ultimately happened is when they expanded the field to 12 teams, they realized that it was simply too great a task for a team to go on the road, on back to back weekends, and beat a higher seeded team. While there may have been a couple of upsets where a #5 or #6 seeded team in either the East or West won the first round road series, they never could get past the second.

Now, maybe having the top seed host a four team regional would work, although I think there are a couple of problems that will have to be addressed. First, availability of the rinks on short notice. Second, how do we handle team accomodations? It's one thing to go to Boston or Minneapolis on a weeks notice, but now three teams are going to show up in Grand Forks?

Third, I think you'll find that if you have to win two games, smart money is going to be on the home team to do it. It'll be one thing for a #3 seed to upset a #2, but then have to play the #1 at home the next night is a tall order.

If we just add a weekend to it and let the higher seeded teams host each series, upsets are going to drop off dramatically due to home ice advantage, and the requirement that you beat the higher seeded team twice in their rink.