The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

[johnk]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

I also do not like the idea of super regionals as it cuts the field to eight teams if I am correct.

It would still be 16 teams. 2 sites with 8 teams instead of 4 with 4.

 

[LTsatch]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

It would still be 16 teams. 2 sites with 8 teams instead of 4 with 4.

Got it, thanks John. That's alot of teams in one town. Would they play two weekends? Sounds like a scheduling nightmare as well, possibly more midweek games, working out a fair rest period between games could be an issue as well.

 

[Steve_MN]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

Got it, thanks John. That's alot of teams in one town. Would they play two weekends? Sounds like a scheduling nightmare as well, possibly more midweek games, working out a fair rest period between games could be an issue as well.

The plans I've heard for this generally involve a three-day event. Say it's the West and Midwest regions playing at the Xcel Center. Midwest plays two regional semis on Friday, West plays two semis Saturday, and both have the regional final on Sunday.

EDIT: Having said that, I know the X can handle an 8 team event in two days, just look at the MN High School tournament this weekend. 4 games each Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

 

[johnk]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

Got it, thanks John. That's alot of teams in one town. Would they play two weekends? Sounds like a scheduling nightmare as well, possibly more midweek games, working out a fair rest period between games could be an issue as well.

2 games Friday night. 2 Saturday. Winners of Friday Night play game 1 on Sunday and winners of Saturday play game 2 on Sunday.

 

[UnionHockeyManiac]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

After ticketmaster fees, it comes out to the following prices for each regional:

$102.40 for St. Paul
$96.50 for Worcester
$80.40 for Bridgeport
$47.52 for Cincy

 

[MplsSioux]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

I would think logistics and planning are the greatest barrier to having the regional sites determined by the one seed location. The seeds may change on the last week, not nearly enough time for the host to plan such an event. Can you imagine BC saying "Hey we need to reserve the Garden in April, beause we might be there depending on how well we do this year". I don't think the facilities could just put aside a day, just in case. Ticket sales would also have to be limited to the final week as well.

I also do not like the idea of super regionals as it cuts the field to eight teams if I am correct.

But..why would BC reserve the Garden? They would reserve their home rink, which is Conte Forum. I would think that would definitely be possible to reserve.

 

[MCgrad07]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

Not many teams would change their venues, however a team like Maine might want Portland

 

[The Exiled One]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

Until the popularity of the college hockey overall improves, why stay with this model that obviously doesn't work? What part of this system seems like it is effective? The ticket prices are prohibitive to draw in non-traditional fans, the locations in the West that aren't St. Paul and Grand Forks have been total disasters, the Eastern regionals rarely top 6,000 in attendance, and now this year they seem to want to destroy the bracket integrity and put the 5 seed in the region with the 1 seed.

Under the current setup, what I think would be cool to see (but will never happen) is having SCSU as host of the west regional at the Target Center and Minnesota as host of the midwest regional at the Xcel Center. Assuming both hosts make it, attendance at the Xcel would be great and attendance at the Target Center would be decent as long as they get a Wisconsin, UND, or UMD in there. The Target Center would already be set up for hockey from the week before. Also, whomever of Wisconsin, SCSU, UND, or UMD gets placed in the Target Center would FINALLY get to play in front of a large contingent of their own fans without playing against Minnesota on their home ice!

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

Under the current setup, what I think would be cool to see (but will never happen) is having SCSU as host of the west regional at the Target Center and Minnesota as host of the midwest regional at the Xcel Center. Assuming both hosts make it, attendance at the Xcel would be great and attendance at the Target Center would be decent as long as they get a Wisconsin, UND, or UMD in there. The Target Center would already be set up for hockey from the week before. Also, whomever of Wisconsin, SCSU, UND, or UMD gets placed in the Target Center would FINALLY get to play in front of a large contingent of their own fans without playing against Minnesota on their home ice!

So, the Wolves would take a two week road trip to accomodate two college hockey tournaments? Absurd.

 

[The Exiled One]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

So, the Wolves would take a two week road trip to accomodate two college hockey tournaments? Absurd.

Fine, ignore the part about leaving the ice up for the week, but I maintain that the rest of the idea is still good.

 

[johnk]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

The plans I've heard for this generally involve a three-day event. Say it's the West and Midwest regions playing at the Xcel Center. Midwest plays two regional semis on Friday, West plays two semis Saturday, and both have the regional final on Sunday.

EDIT: Having said that, I know the X can handle an 8 team event in two days, just look at the MN High School tournament this weekend. 4 games each Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

I actually think the best way to do this would be to find 2 locations in the east and 2 in the west that are witihn an hour or so of each other. Play the 2 east regions semifinals in one day and than have 2 games at one of the sites the next day. For example: In the East, 2 games Sat afternoon in Worcester, 2 games Sat night in Manchester and 2 games Sunday at Manchester. Not sure if there are enough locations to do this but you could get in done in 2 days with minimal travel.

 

[manurespreader]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

This might not be the perfect thread for this discussion.
Regarding campus regionals, I think you have to be careful not to give a home team too much advantage. Minnesota would have a huge advantage. Not only are they home, but they get to have the advantage of the olympic ice. This is not all that small of a thing. Teams from NHL rinks would have a tough enough time, but adding the rink size to it amounts to giving the home team about a goals worth of help.

I understand the attendance issue, but it's much more important to me that we have a fairly contested tourney.

The price is an issue for sure, as is the fact that since the regionals aren't in the same spot, it's hard to generate local interest. Maybe if Green Bay for instance or Milwaukee hosted regularly, it would build repeat local business. It can't just be the fans of a team that makes it, there aren't enough of them that are willing to travel -200-300 miles for a game. And btw the issue is really only with the midwest. everyone else is ok.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

I understand the attendance issue, but it's much more important to me that we have a fairly contested tourney.

If fairness is the driving criterion (it aint, but it should be) then the host system has got to go. No 3 or 4 should ever be playing at home.

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

This might not be the perfect thread for this discussion.
Regarding campus regionals, I think you have to be careful not to give a home team too much advantage. Minnesota would have a huge advantage. Not only are they home, but they get to have the advantage of the olympic ice. This is not all that small of a thing. Teams from NHL rinks would have a tough enough time, but adding the rink size to it amounts to giving the home team about a goals worth of help.

I understand the attendance issue, but it's much more important to me that we have a fairly contested tourney.

So is the same true for teams that play on Olympic ice that are then forced to play on NHL ice in the NCAA's? Are they at a 1 goal disadvantage in the current format of the tournament? Why give the home ice advantage to a team that didn't earn it? To you that seems to be acceptable. While we're at it, why doesn't the NCAA force the teams playing on Olympic ice to go to NHL ice, since the regular season games are putting the visitors at the same supposed disadvantage?

 

[mnpokecheck]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

Under the current setup, what I think would be cool to see (but will never happen) is having SCSU as host of the west regional at the Target Center and Minnesota as host of the midwest regional at the Xcel Center. Assuming both hosts make it, attendance at the Xcel would be great and attendance at the Target Center would be decent as long as they get a Wisconsin, UND, or UMD in there. The Target Center would already be set up for hockey from the week before. Also, whomever of Wisconsin, SCSU, UND, or UMD gets placed in the Target Center would FINALLY get to play in front of a large contingent of their own fans without playing against Minnesota on their home ice!

Oh Jan, really.....more of the Marcia, Marcia, Marcia.....

 

[The Exiled One]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

Oh Jan, really.....more of the Marcia, Marcia, Marcia.....

To be fair, I lumped us in with Cindy, Bucky, and the Wioux. It wasn't meant to be a pro-Husky idea or an anti-Gopher idea, it was a regional-attendance and bracket-integrity idea.

 

[manurespreader]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

So is the same true for teams that play on Olympic ice that are then forced to play on NHL ice in the NCAA's? Are they at a 1 goal disadvantage in the current format of the tournament? Why give the home ice advantage to a team that didn't earn it? To you that seems to be acceptable. While we're at it, why doesn't the NCAA force the teams playing on Olympic ice to go to NHL ice, since the regular season games are putting the visitors at the same supposed disadvantage?

it is a disadvantage if you are an olympic team to go to an nhl size rink yes. Though I would say that the adjustment for a big ice team going down is easier than for an nhl size team going up. But yeah, if you host, it's an advantage no question. Is it a 1 goal advantage on a small rink,? not quite but it's worth something yes. That's why neutral sites are a better, more fair test.


I like the super regional solution in general.

 

[unh1982]

it is a disadvantage if you are an olympic team to go to an nhl size rink yes. Though I would say that the adjustment for a big ice team going down is easier than for an nhl size team going up. But yeah, if you host, it's an advantage no question. Is it a 1 goal advantage on a small rink,? not quite but it's worth something yes. That's why neutral sites are a better, more fair test.


I like the super regional solution in general.

I disagree, playing on a larger sheet of ice gives you more time and space. You can develop bad habits regarding puck movement as it takes time for plays to develop. when you move down to a smaller surface their is no time and space, things move much faster, especially with decision making. If you are not used to , your in for a rude awakening.

 

[LTsatch]

Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`

But..why would BC reserve the Garden? They would reserve their home rink, which is Conte Forum. I would think that would definitely be possible to reserve.

May be too small if some populat teams make it. A better example is Yale or Quinnipiac, no way they can host at home, probably 75 percent of the D-1 schools would have to host somewhere other than their home barns due to capacity limitations. You can't reserve the larger sites needed a week in advance.

 

[BigAl]

To solve these 3 main issues I say all four one seeds get home ice. Before the season every school needs to submit to the NCAA what rink they will use. So if BC wants to you the Garden or Minny wants to use the Xcel and can get it more power to them. At this point the N$$A is not making more money in Cincinnati opposed to Ann Arbor (probably less) so that's go on campus.

I'm sorry but this will never happen. Think of the tussle the NCAA and Boston have had over the ice for a frozen four. We're talking about just the frozen water with paint in between it.

We all seem to agree change is necessary in some degree but I'm starting to realize little change will ever happen. Only a select amount of schools can host regionals on campus. Ones that can will get regionals in the near future.

My big beef is the ridiculousness of a 1 seed being sent across the country because a 4 seed in there conference is hosting. I get the risk involved with hosting a regional and that's the reward but why are we gunna send Union to Cincinnati if Yale gets in. When do we begin to value a teams 35 games they've played over the course of a season over a school that chose to hop in bed with the NCAA. I think we sometimes devalue the regular season too much in some regards. 35 games give us a better picture than 4 and that's why I will always be in favor of protecting the teams that deserved it throughout their regular season