Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.
Thinking includes: (1) factoring travel costs, (2) factoring that a percentage of seats will not be filled by people paying full price [students, comps, promotions], (3) factoring that few nonconference opponents fill the seats, (3) factoring that the extra home opponents will require a guarantee or a return trip with associated costs, etc.
But, I already addressed that and your response was wildly optimistic speculation that would not be borne out by the past attendance histories of the schools in question.
Do you know what games that the NCHC and Big Ten teams lose due to not visiting Alaska? The 2 worst dates and 2 least pallatable opponents on the schedule. These are the games scheduled on Wednesdays, or over Christmas break. These are the series you pay an AHA team to come take a 2 day beating for. It should be noted, these could be 4 separate games, a palatable conference opponent being played on a weekday due to schedule congestion and an unpalatable opponent taking up a late fall weekend due to conference scheduling.
You know what, for us nuts, and probably for some of the coaches and players, more games is almost always better. Bottom line-wise, I do not think that the extra games are worth the hassle of Alaska, and the best programs agree with me.
5,000 seat home arena + $25/ticket x 2 games = $250,000 revenue. There is no way to overstate that. Whut? $20 a ticket? Ok then ... $200,000 in revenue. You only have 2,500 seats? Gee, looks like you only make an extra $125,000 from having 2 extra home games. What was last years WCHA Final Five check that everyone creamed their jeans about? Oh yeah, 120 grand.Being able to schedule 2 more games out of conference only matters if you can (a) get those extra games at home and hosting extra home games are profit generators, or (b) sell those games for a large guarantee. Consistently.
I think the number of teams for whom the Alaska games are a palatable advantage for is wildly overstated on these boards.
Maybe thinking is a different thing there in Boston than it is way out west?
Thinking includes: (1) factoring travel costs, (2) factoring that a percentage of seats will not be filled by people paying full price [students, comps, promotions], (3) factoring that few nonconference opponents fill the seats, (3) factoring that the extra home opponents will require a guarantee or a return trip with associated costs, etc.
But, I already addressed that and your response was wildly optimistic speculation that would not be borne out by the past attendance histories of the schools in question.
Do you know what games that the NCHC and Big Ten teams lose due to not visiting Alaska? The 2 worst dates and 2 least pallatable opponents on the schedule. These are the games scheduled on Wednesdays, or over Christmas break. These are the series you pay an AHA team to come take a 2 day beating for. It should be noted, these could be 4 separate games, a palatable conference opponent being played on a weekday due to schedule congestion and an unpalatable opponent taking up a late fall weekend due to conference scheduling.
You know what, for us nuts, and probably for some of the coaches and players, more games is almost always better. Bottom line-wise, I do not think that the extra games are worth the hassle of Alaska, and the best programs agree with me.