What's new
By:
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.

UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

Greg Ambrose said:
There are exceptions of course but I'd say that, overall, the dip in attendance has been a function of the product on the ice.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I have to COMPLETELY disagree with that statement. First of all, you say that attendance is "down" everywhere. So are you saying everyone is "bad?" Why isn't attendance good for teams that are winning also?

Based on what I see and the games I attend, here are just two examples: The Beanpot is down and the Hockey East Tournament is down. Now (with the exception of Notre Dame who brought virtually no fans), are you saying that ALL of these teams are "bad?" Or are you going by "quality" and not the team's record? And if so, how are you objectively quantifying "quality?"

Personally, my belief is that millennials don't seem to care about attending live events. They live in a virtual world. I am constantly seeing them with their heads stuck in their phones (when they ARE at a game) or taking selfies of themselves and their friends and then posting them on social media. There is too much competition for the entertainment dollar today, especially in the cities. And now with technology, even if you are in a rural "outpost," you don't have to "go anywhere" for entertainment. You can download it.

This is not to be critical of anyone. It's just the way the world is today. But to say that it's due to the "product on the ice" I feel is grossly inaccurate.
 
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

I do not "completely disagree" with Greg's statement, as who wants to spend money and time watching a crummy team, when as chickod notes there are so many other things to compete for one's time. Two very good complementary posts by Greg and chickod, IMHO.
 
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

Anyone venturing down to Schneider tonight? My daughter and I are, last time we went a few years back my car broke down at a Providence gas station and had to be towed back to NH by AAA, fun times. Hopefully things go a bit more smoothly tonight, and dare I hope for a UNH upset?
 
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

d.gerry said:
Anyone venturing down to Schneider tonight? My daughter and I are, last time we went a few years back my car broke down at a Providence gas station and had to be towed back to NH by AAA, fun times. Hopefully things go a bit more smoothly tonight, and dare I hope for a UNH upset?
Click to expand...

Hopefully it's not 'get a free bell and ring it like crazy' night (nothing personal PC fans!) like last year...I usually go but not this year. Watching some ECHL at Manchvegas. Probably the UNH v PC game would be better...haha. Hey we've beaten them before down there...it could happen...:)
 
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

HockeyRef said:
Hey we've beaten them before down there...it could happen...:)
Click to expand...

Let's hope. FWIW, I did witness one the best college hockey fights I've even seen down there (not that I'm a fan of or encourage fighting). Basically became a bench clearing brawl at the end of game handshake, it was definitely something to see!
 
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

Greg Ambrose said:
Hey Neil. Lot of good thoughts and questions there. I'll respond to a couple of them. First, attendance, which I think has been inflated the last few years, is a function of how you're playing. Back in the late 80s when UNH stunk, I can recall attending gams where there might be 1500 or 2000 in the stands, with few students. I will say that attendance throughout college hockey is down. None of the Boston schools draw well, Maine doesn't sell out nor does Minnesota. There are exceptions of course but I'd say that, overall, the dip in attendance has been a function of the product on the ice. There are still many great players playing college hockey but, unlike the past when guys like Krog, Gionta, Drury, Montgomery and the like would play for four years then turn pro, now they turn pro after one or two years. Can't say as I blame them since the money is there but it has reduced the quality level of the sport. It also exacerbates the disconnect between player and fan. Kid comes in as a freshman, gets his feet wet after a month or so, the fans start to embrace him and then, two months later is gone never to be seen again. You can't build up fan loyalty to a player or a team, if the key guys on the roster are changing every couple of years.
Click to expand...

chickod said:
I'm sorry, but I have to COMPLETELY disagree with that statement. First of all, you say that attendance is "down" everywhere. So are you saying everyone is "bad?" Why isn't attendance good for teams that are winning also?

Based on what I see and the games I attend, here are just two examples: The Beanpot is down and the Hockey East Tournament is down. Now (with the exception of Notre Dame who brought virtually no fans), are you saying that ALL of these teams are "bad?" Or are you going by "quality" and not the team's record? And if so, how are you objectively quantifying "quality?"

Personally, my belief is that millennials don't seem to care about attending live events. They live in a virtual world. I am constantly seeing them with their heads stuck in their phones (when they ARE at a game) or taking selfies of themselves and their friends and then posting them on social media. There is too much competition for the entertainment dollar today, especially in the cities. And now with technology, even if you are in a rural "outpost," you don't have to "go anywhere" for entertainment. You can download it.

This is not to be critical of anyone. It's just the way the world is today. But to say that it's due to the "product on the ice" I feel is grossly inaccurate.
Click to expand...

I'm going to add a third log to the fire, in addition to the comments highlighted above, which I agree are compelling arguments for the reasons behind the current state of college hockey. How about, "incompetence at the highest levels of NCAA D-1 hockey?" Sure, D-1 hockey has been a poor second cousin behind NCAA D-1 hoops since the middle of the previous century, and while that gap has over time fluctuated, I don't think the gap has ever been as wide as it is now. When ESPN first entered the picture 40 years ago, they made a choice to go after college hoops for ample content reasons to provide cheap but compelling sports entertainment. I'm not sure if a visionary college hockey contemporary to the Big East's Dave Gavitt might have turned the trick - and I do believe that Hockey East was founded to somewhat mimic the approach of exploiting and expanding the best regional rivalries to grow the league's visibility, and turn that into financial success over the airwaves/via cable, and secondly in the stands. The timing certainly speaks for itself.

The first 20 years of Hockey East were arguably the pinnacle of D-1 Hockey in the Eastern region, which of course is attached to the potential big dollar media decisions. The product overall was terrific, and in addition to the BC-BU rivalry and the annual magic of the Beanpot, there was the promise of the explosive UMaine-UNH border war, the local Merrimack-Lowell tussle at what was then the other end of the standings, an emerging new State U program in Amherst, a 3rd wheel in Boston (Northeastern) and a Providence program which also enjoyed early competitive success in the new league. There were coaching personalities galore, not the least of which was the guy playing fast and loose with the rules up in Orono. But Joe Bertagna was not Dave Gavitt. And Bertagna is still in charge, and no one in the conference seems all that troubled by the backwards momentum across the league over the last decade or so.

Listen, I understand, it's difficult coming into a hockey forum and saying that hoops may be a more saleable product, at least from a media perspective. I have to concede that may well be the case. Hockey as a live competitive spectacle arguably has no peer, and we hear and read that from so many newbies who see their first hockey game live and in person. The problem is, getting folks' attention in the first place to explore further was never an easy proposition for a sport that's been at the bottom of the "Big Four" team sports in North America in perpetuity, and may be in the process of being passed by soccer over the next decade as we speak.

I've always felt that the pieces are there in place for Hockey East to lead the way for college hockey's emergence as something more comparable to D-1 hoops. Certainly, this area and the upper Midwest are best positioned. But Hockey East does not have a program which compels viewing in NYC. There is no "hook" either for larger markets like Philly or Baltimore/DC. And everyone who matters in any decision-making capacity in Hockey East is a Boston person. BU and BC continue to dominate the D-1 hockey universe, even when one (or both) might be having an off-year(s). I don't see anyone with a huge driving motivation to upset that applecart.

I don't see a lot of incentive anywhere in the college sports world to make me think any of this is imminent. I wish I felt differently, and I hope to be proven wrong. From the standpoint of the schools, I suspect athletics revenue is a secondary issue behind keeping their schools in good graces to sustain the ongoing federal subsidies that keep them awash with educational revenue, then building more residences to spin further profits on the "hospitality" front. Many probably feel that pushing Hockey at the expense of its other more profitable sports option (hoops) is as worthless as robbing Peter to pay Paul. And when a school like UNH sits on its hands for a decade-plus, ceding large swaths of its fanbase/territory to a minor league pro hockey team … it's hard not to conclude otherwise.

The market has changed, so I agree with Chickod. The product has changed, so I agree with Greg.

Other things have not changed, and it's really those things that would need to change … but won't. :(
 
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

Chuck Murray said:
I'm going to add a third log to the fire, in addition to the comments highlighted above, which I agree are compelling arguments for the reasons behind the current state of college hockey. How about, "incompetence at the highest levels of NCAA D-1 hockey?" Sure, D-1 hockey has been a poor second cousin behind NCAA D-1 hoops since the middle of the previous century, and while that gap has over time fluctuated, I don't think the gap has ever been as wide as it is now. When ESPN first entered the picture 40 years ago, they made a choice to go after college hoops for ample content reasons to provide cheap but compelling sports entertainment. I'm not sure if a visionary college hockey contemporary to the Big East's Dave Gavitt might have turned the trick - and I do believe that Hockey East was founded to somewhat mimic the approach of exploiting and expanding the best regional rivalries to grow the league's visibility, and turn that into financial success over the airwaves/via cable, and secondly in the stands. The timing certainly speaks for itself.

The first 20 years of Hockey East were arguably the pinnacle of D-1 Hockey in the Eastern region, which of course is attached to the potential big dollar media decisions. The product overall was terrific, and in addition to the BC-BU rivalry and the annual magic of the Beanpot, there was the promise of the explosive UMaine-UNH border war, the local Merrimack-Lowell tussle at what was then the other end of the standings, an emerging new State U program in Amherst, a 3rd wheel in Boston (Northeastern) and a Providence program which also enjoyed early competitive success in the new league. There were coaching personalities galore, not the least of which was the guy playing fast and loose with the rules up in Orono. But Joe Bertagna was not Dave Gavitt. And Bertagna is still in charge, and no one in the conference seems all that troubled by the backwards momentum across the league over the last decade or so.

Listen, I understand, it's difficult coming into a hockey forum and saying that hoops may be a more saleable product, at least from a media perspective. I have to concede that may well be the case. Hockey as a live competitive spectacle arguably has no peer, and we hear and read that from so many newbies who see their first hockey game live and in person. The problem is, getting folks' attention in the first place to explore further was never an easy proposition for a sport that's been at the bottom of the "Big Four" team sports in North America in perpetuity, and may be in the process of being passed by soccer over the next decade as we speak.

I've always felt that the pieces are there in place for Hockey East to lead the way for college hockey's emergence as something more comparable to D-1 hoops. Certainly, this area and the upper Midwest are best positioned. But Hockey East does not have a program which compels viewing in NYC. There is no "hook" either for larger markets like Philly or Baltimore/DC. And everyone who matters in any decision-making capacity in Hockey East is a Boston person. BU and BC continue to dominate the D-1 hockey universe, even when one (or both) might be having an off-year(s). I don't see anyone with a huge driving motivation to upset that applecart.

I don't see a lot of incentive anywhere in the college sports world to make me think any of this is imminent. I wish I felt differently, and I hope to be proven wrong. From the standpoint of the schools, I suspect athletics revenue is a secondary issue behind keeping their schools in good graces to sustain the ongoing federal subsidies that keep them awash with educational revenue, then building more residences to spin further profits on the "hospitality" front. Many probably feel that pushing Hockey at the expense of its other more profitable sports option (hoops) is as worthless as robbing Peter to pay Paul. And when a school like UNH sits on its hands for a decade-plus, ceding large swaths of its fanbase/territory to a minor league pro hockey team … it's hard not to conclude otherwise.



The market has changed, so I agree with Chickod. The product has changed, so I agree with Greg.

Other things have not changed, and it's really those things that would need to change … but won't. :(
Click to expand...



Agree with many things here but other factors as well
I want Quinnipiac to be the 12th team in Hockey east as it brings it closer to New York
Has already broadcast some games on SNY in New York

tonight and tomorrow will be first time I can remember that BC_BU regular season games have not sold out
Although both having poor seasons this is not primary reason
Student body composition has changed at both schools
When I went to BU (admittedly a long time ago) 62% of students were from Massachusetts (now 18%)
TV reduces at home attendance even among paid ticket holders
Both schools season ticket holders have a very high average age and losing a portion each year

Even promotion is not helping. BC had a half page ad in Globe yesterday promoting BC game SAT and basketball vs Prov on Tuesday
This is not an issue limited to hockey
College football attendance is down nationally

For those of us who want college hockey to succeed there are no easy answers
The NCAA keeps calling me asking why I have not bought tickets to finals in Buffalo this year
 
Chuck Murray said:
I'm going to add a third log to the fire, in addition to the comments highlighted above, which I agree are compelling arguments for the reasons behind the current state of college hockey. How about, "incompetence at the highest levels of NCAA D-1 hockey?" Sure, D-1 hockey has been a poor second cousin behind NCAA D-1 hoops since the middle of the previous century, and while that gap has over time fluctuated, I don't think the gap has ever been as wide as it is now. When ESPN first entered the picture 40 years ago, they made a choice to go after college hoops for ample content reasons to provide cheap but compelling sports entertainment. I'm not sure if a visionary college hockey contemporary to the Big East's Dave Gavitt might have turned the trick - and I do believe that Hockey East was founded to somewhat mimic the approach of exploiting and expanding the best regional rivalries to grow the league's visibility, and turn that into financial success over the airwaves/via cable, and secondly in the stands. The timing certainly speaks for itself.

The first 20 years of Hockey East were arguably the pinnacle of D-1 Hockey in the Eastern region, which of course is attached to the potential big dollar media decisions. The product overall was terrific, and in addition to the BC-BU rivalry and the annual magic of the Beanpot, there was the promise of the explosive UMaine-UNH border war, the local Merrimack-Lowell tussle at what was then the other end of the standings, an emerging new State U program in Amherst, a 3rd wheel in Boston (Northeastern) and a Providence program which also enjoyed early competitive success in the new league. There were coaching personalities galore, not the least of which was the guy playing fast and loose with the rules up in Orono. But Joe Bertagna was not Dave Gavitt. And Bertagna is still in charge, and no one in the conference seems all that troubled by the backwards momentum across the league over the last decade or so.

Listen, I understand, it's difficult coming into a hockey forum and saying that hoops may be a more saleable product, at least from a media perspective. I have to concede that may well be the case. Hockey as a live competitive spectacle arguably has no peer, and we hear and read that from so many newbies who see their first hockey game live and in person. The problem is, getting folks' attention in the first place to explore further was never an easy proposition for a sport that's been at the bottom of the "Big Four" team sports in North America in perpetuity, and may be in the process of being passed by soccer over the next decade as we speak.

I've always felt that the pieces are there in place for Hockey East to lead the way for college hockey's emergence as something more comparable to D-1 hoops. Certainly, this area and the upper Midwest are best positioned. But Hockey East does not have a program which compels viewing in NYC. There is no "hook" either for larger markets like Philly or Baltimore/DC. And everyone who matters in any decision-making capacity in Hockey East is a Boston person. BU and BC continue to dominate the D-1 hockey universe, even when one (or both) might be having an off-year(s). I don't see anyone with a huge driving motivation to upset that applecart.

I don't see a lot of incentive anywhere in the college sports world to make me think any of this is imminent. I wish I felt differently, and I hope to be proven wrong. From the standpoint of the schools, I suspect athletics revenue is a secondary issue behind keeping their schools in good graces to sustain the ongoing federal subsidies that keep them awash with educational revenue, then building more residences to spin further profits on the "hospitality" front. Many probably feel that pushing Hockey at the expense of its other more profitable sports option (hoops) is as worthless as robbing Peter to pay Paul. And when a school like UNH sits on its hands for a decade-plus, ceding large swaths of its fanbase/territory to a minor league pro hockey team … it's hard not to conclude otherwise.

The market has changed, so I agree with Chickod. The product has changed, so I agree with Greg.

Other things have not changed, and it's really those things that would need to change … but won't. :(
Click to expand...

Did you mean Lou Lamoriello not Dave Gavitt. Gavitt was Big East
 
chickod said:
I'm sorry, but I have to COMPLETELY disagree with that statement. First of all, you say that attendance is "down" everywhere. So are you saying everyone is "bad?" Why isn't attendance good for teams that are winning also?

Based on what I see and the games I attend, here are just two examples: The Beanpot is down and the Hockey East Tournament is down. Now (with the exception of Notre Dame who brought virtually no fans), are you saying that ALL of these teams are "bad?" Or are you going by "quality" and not the team's record? And if so, how are you objectively quantifying "quality?"

Personally, my belief is that millennials don't seem to care about attending live events. They live in a virtual world. I am constantly seeing them with their heads stuck in their phones (when they ARE at a game) or taking selfies of themselves and their friends and then posting them on social media. There is too much competition for the entertainment dollar today, especially in the cities. And now with technology, even if you are in a rural "outpost," you don't have to "go anywhere" for entertainment. You can download it.

This is not to be critical of anyone. It's just the way the world is today. But to say that it's due to the "product on the ice" I feel is grossly inaccurate.
Click to expand...

You better reread my post. My main point regarding attendance all over college hockey is the fact that the great players don’t stick around for more than a year or two. Last year BU lost a half dozen kids off the team from a year before. Couple that with the fact that a lot of elite kids now don’t even play college but go to major juniors instead means that college hockey has been impacted. I’m not going to get into millennials bashing because I have zero knowledge of what makes today’s 20 year olds tick but from just observing attendance at the Whit I would say the biggest drop off has been adults, empty nesters and young families with kids. These people have entertainment dollars to spend and it appears more and more have found other places to spend them.
 
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

Greg Ambrose said:
You better reread my post. My main point regarding attendance all over college hockey is the fact that the great players don’t stick around for more than a year or two. Last year BU lost a half dozen kids off the team from a year before. Couple that with the fact that a lot of elite kids now don’t even play college but go to major juniors instead means that college hockey has been impacted. I’m not going to get into millennials bashing because I have zero knowledge of what makes today’s 20 year olds tick but from just observing attendance at the Whit I would say the biggest drop off has been adults, empty nesters and young families with kids. These people have entertainment dollars to spend and it appears more and more have found other places to spend them.
Click to expand...
Ticket prices are a factor as well. Saturday vs. Providence bench seats for a family of four are $56, a significant increase from the good old days.
 
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

cavbim said:
Did you mean Lou Lamoriello not Dave Gavitt. Gavitt was Big East
Click to expand...

Nope … I said what I meant. Bertagna was not/is not/will never be the visionary for Hockey East that Dave Gavitt (RIP) was for the Big East. It's hurt HE in the past, and it's killing them now, more than ever.
 
Darius said:
Ticket prices are a factor as well. Saturday vs. Providence bench seats for a family of four are $56, a significant increase from the good old days.
Click to expand...

Tell me about it, made the trip down to Providence, $49 for two tickets.
 
Re: UNH 2018-19: Souza The Opportunity

Great compete level for the ‘Cats in the second, especially considering Pierson, Kelleher and Maass are all sitting in the stands. Had some very good chances, and the shorty was set up by a great spin around pass. Hoping they can pull this one out. Start of the 3rd now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top