What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

[ericredaxe]

Is that because you won't travel an hour or two to Worcester, Providence, Manchester, Bridgeport, or some other eastern venue to see your team play? Or because you think your team will suck and won't be there?

I will go to a regional if BU plays in Worcester or Manchester with a game time that does not require taking significant time off of work and with a ticket price point that at least somewhat resembles college hockey pricing.

I think BU will have a good chance of making the tournament this year, but I'm pretty confident that one of the above will not fall in line.

Bridgeport / Albany go beyond the radius that I'd travel for a regional game.

 

[FiveHole12]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

I will go to a regional if BU plays in Worcester or Manchester with a game time that does not require taking significant time off of work and with a ticket price point that at least somewhat resembles college hockey pricing.

I think BU will have a good chance of making the tournament this year, but I'm pretty confident that one of the above will not fall in line.

Bridgeport / Albany go beyond the radius that I'd travel for a regional game.

I'm guessing I could travel to Bridgeport or Albany, and all costs considered (tickets, hotel, food, etc.), be around the same price, or less, than it would cost me to head north and ski for the weekend. So, I'm guessing this is more of a personal preference? And that's OK... to each his own. You get to go skiing AND watch the games (or record them) on the tube.

Bottom line... fannies in the seats really don't matter to the powers that be, or to the venues for that matter, as long as there is $$ being made. My guess, there'd be more fannies in the seats without the TV coverage, but they must be making $$ even with the TV coverage.

It is what it is, but I personally don't like the idea of campus sites. Keep it as it is, a national tournament at neutral sites. They need to keep the regionals at sites that have a history of good attendance and keep it cost effective for them so they can continue to host in the future.

 

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

Is the push for change stalled? if anything, that's an understatement. But interesting questions remain:

1. Will the NCAA Committee receive any Western bids that fully comply with current policies?

2. How far will the Committee bend the policies to "protect the gate" in the West, yet still comply with the spirit of the current rules? (Obviously the answer to #1 will have a major impact on the available options.)

 

[CLS]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

Is the push for change stalled? if anything, that's an understatement. But interesting questions remain:

1. Will the NCAA Committee receive any Western bids that fully comply with current policies? ...

And, of course a subsidiary question, if they don't, what requirements are they willing to be flexible on? There is a place on the bid document asks if the bidder will comply with all the listed requirements, and one of the responses is "No, with exceptions," which would indicate that they're at least willing to consider exceptions. The two key ones being number of seats (1) one of the documents specifies 5,000) and (2) what appears to be an unwritten rule (at least I couldn't find it scanning the two bid documents that are mentioned in the article) of "no home ice". If they are willing to be flexible on the number of seats, they should have published a smaller number or eliminated it entirely, because if there are any venues that have less than 5,000 seats but are otherwise suitable, they might submit a bid. Publishing the number might cause them not to.

We know there will be no regionals in South Carolina or Mississippi (Confederate flag) or Nevada (sports wagering)

 

[ericredaxe]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

I'm guessing I could travel to Bridgeport or Albany, and all costs considered (tickets, hotel, food, etc.), be around the same price, or less, than it would cost me to head north and ski for the weekend. So, I'm guessing this is more of a personal preference? And that's OK... to each his own. You get to go skiing AND watch the games (or record them) on the tube.

Bottom line... fannies in the seats really don't matter to the powers that be, or to the venues for that matter, as long as there is $$ being made. My guess, there'd be more fannies in the seats without the TV coverage, but they must be making $$ even with the TV coverage.

Partially true is is preference. Cost wise, I already have access to a "free" place to stay to ski, so the cost difference for me is greater to do an overnight for a game.

Part of it too is the atmosphere... there something de-motivating to me about going to a game in a 1/3 full arena.

I agree with you though... regional game attendance is lower on the NCAA priority list than other items (TV contracts etc) otherwise they would have changed something by now. (They can't be that dumb can they?)

 

[joecct]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

I thought South Carolina was back in the NCAAs good graces.

 

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

And, of course a subsidiary question, if they don't, what requirements are they willing to be flexible on? There is a place on the bid document asks if the bidder will comply with all the listed requirements, and one of the responses is "No, with exceptions," which would indicate that they're at least willing to consider exceptions. The two key ones being number of seats (1) one of the documents specifies 5,000)...

Maybe using smaller venues is a way out of this mess. How about this for a Western Regional?

Host: U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame in Eveleth, MN

Venue: Eveleth Hippodrome (Guessing Capacity is 3,000)

Ticket Allocation: Each school receives 350 tickets for family, close friends & insiders. 400 tickets apiece go to local partner high schools. The local partners provide pep bands, cheerleaders and screaming fans. All 400 tickets go to high school students who are missing school in order to be there.

Hypothetical Tournament Field: NCAA Team/Partner High School
Maine Black Bears/Eveleth Golden Bears
Dartmouth Big Green/Coleraine Greenway Green Wave
Ohio State Buckeyes/Hibbing Bluejackets (think NHL)
Western Michigan Broncos/International Falls Broncos

So there you go. Packed house at a historic site. Great atmosphere. Maybe even great TV. Tons of material for pre-game and between periods -- feature stories from the nearby Hall of Fame.

OK, that's a pretty fanciful package. But I've got to believe that there are smaller facilities that could, with proper mobilization of the local hockey community, deliver a respectable turnout. (as a percentage of capacity)

...If they are willing to be flexible on the number of seats, they should have published a smaller number or eliminated it entirely, because if there are any venues that have less than 5,000 seats but are otherwise suitable, they might submit a bid. Publishing the number might cause them not to.

True. And just why are we requiring that the games be played in front of empty seats? Of course that isn't anyone's intent. But all too often it is the natural result of the current policies.

 

[CLS]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

I thought South Carolina was back in the NCAAs good graces.

Quite possible. Perhaps the document is outdated. It appears to be a pdf of a printed document, so it may not be current.

 

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

OK, I had a little too much fun with my hypothetical Western Regional a couple of posts ago. Let's drop the stuff about the partner high schools and matching nicknames. Taking what remains, is there an idea with potential here?

The Hockey Hall of Fame should be about as neutral as you can get for a host. While the remote location might discourage some ticket buyers, the chance to visit the Hall on the same trip might actually attract some new interest. I'm guessing that most fans, particularly from the East, have never been to the U.S. Hall.

Remember you've only got 3,000 seats to fill. Immediate family, fiancés, BFFs and super fans would actually make a dent all by themselves. Minnesota's Iron Range is certainly hockey country, and I've got to believe you'd sell some tickets locally. The Hipp might not be packed to the rafters, but I'm fairly confident you wouldn't have the mausoleum atmosphere that's plagued so many regionals in the West.

My question to the Board is this: As a neutral fan, would you consider traveling for an NCAA Regional/Hockey Hall of Fame combo? It wouldn't take all that many out-of-town neutrals to fill the rest of the building. Perhaps 1,000.

Thoughts/Reactions?

 

[joecct]

OK, I had a little too much fun with my hypothetical Western Regional a couple of posts ago. Let's drop the stuff about the partner high schools and matching nicknames. Taking what remains, is there an idea with potential here?

The Hockey Hall of Fame should be about as neutral as you can get for a host. While the remote location might discourage some ticket buyers, the chance to visit the Hall on the same trip might actually attract some new interest. I'm guessing that most fans, particularly from the East, have never been to the U.S. Hall.

Remember you've only got 3,000 seats to fill. Immediate family, fiancés, BFFs and super fans would actually make a dent all by themselves. Minnesota's Iron Range is certainly hockey country, and I've got to believe you'd sell some tickets locally. The Hipp might not be packed to the rafters, but I'm fairly confident you wouldn't have the mausoleum atmosphere that's plagued so many regionals in the West.

My question to the Board is this: As a neutral fan, would you consider traveling for an NCAA Regional/Hockey Hall of Fame combo? It wouldn't take all that many out-of-town neutrals to fill the rest of the building. Perhaps 1,000.

Thoughts/Reactions?

Fly to MSP. Drive to Duluth. Hang a left. 2.5 hrs from MSP. Questionable weather? Plus the games are on TV.

Nope, especially if I have a Frozen Four trip in mind in 2 weeks time.

 

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

Fly to MSP. Drive to Duluth. Hang a left. 2.5 hrs from MSP. Questionable weather? Plus the games are on TV.

Nope, especially if I have a Frozen Four trip in mind in 2 weeks time.

Appreciate the reply. Your position is perfectly rational. Trouble is, if everyone makes that all-too-reasonable calculation, the empty buildings will continue.

It would be good to hear from fans who could get to Eveleth without a flight. That's at least 10 schools. And if anyone else has a creative idea for a neutral site regional, by all means step up to the podium. Could be there's still an idea out there that will make things better.

But I am skeptical. Limiting the impact of home crowds by holding the games elsewhere, and expecting neutral fans to pick up the slack? The longer this conversation goes, the clearer it seems to me that the whole notion is fundamentally flawed.

I proposed a smaller building and limited expectations to 1,000 neutral college hockey fans. The response? One diplomatic thumbs down, accompanied by deafening silence. Feels revealing.

 

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

But I am skeptical. Limiting the impact of home crowds by holding the games elsewhere, and expecting neutral fans to pick up the slack? The longer this conversation goes, the clearer it seems to me that the whole notion is fundamentally flawed.

I proposed a smaller building and limited expectations to 1,000 neutral college hockey fans. The response? One diplomatic thumbs down, accompanied by deafening silence. Feels revealing.

The notion is flawed only because people are not at all interested in seeing teams that aren't "their own." At the end of the day, I think this is the real issue. I was in attendance in South Bend for this years midwest regional but I would estimate fewer than 200 of Notre Dame's 2500 season ticket holders bothered to show up since ND crapped the bed.

Piggybacking on that issue is the that attending live sports is no longer the draw to young people that it was even 10 years ago. So if the game requires any effort at all to attend, say more than an hour's drive, it becomes a very unattractive prospect as far as entertainment. Forget long drives. Forget flying. That is for the diehards. And even then, you can't assume anything. My group of fans thought long and hard about making the drive East in 2011 when Notre Dame played in New Hampshire but in the end decided it was not doable. I would count myself one of the biggest college hockey fans around. Not Notre Dame hockey, college hockey. Same story for the 2014 regional at the X. Too much of a drive and too expensive to fly on just a few day's notice for most of my group.

There are certainly ancillary reasons people are staying away, reasons that many of us agree on. Ticket prices always are one of the first mentioned. Cincinnati had some of the cheapest tickets in a decade for their 2014 regional and saw far more people than Toledo got just a year earlier. That would tell me anecdotally at least there is some chance that cheap tickets would drive a better crowd. But even then I doubt the impact would be huge. Especially since the very idea of live sports as entertainment is taking a huge hit. Would a $15 all session pass have filled the building? Unlikely. How cheap can the tickets be with the financial guarantee the NCAA requires?

I also think the empty seats may be breeding more empty seats. I think some people have gone to these games with the expectations that the buildings would pulse with energy since the games are so "important" and the teams in theory are all among the sport's best. Then they go to games like those in Toledo in 2013 and are nearly lulled to sleep by the stale and downright serene atmosphere. I believe this experience dampens the enthusiasm to the point that when it comes to next season, people are like "meh, I'll catch it on ESPNU."

At the end of the day I don't think anymore there are solutions that will work, especially in the 2 western regions. You will not get neutral fans. Fans of participating teams will be limited to those who happen to live within an easy drive of the rink. And people still largely won't show up to the game not involving their team in the first or second game. Knowing this I wish the NCAA would simply cease trying to create any sort of atmosphere. No host teams assured of playing in their rink. No tweaking of the seeds and claiming any reason for it other than attendance. Pick the teams transparently as they do, assign the seeds and place them 1-16, 2-15, 8-9 etc, and let the team that plays best for 4 games win.

 

[ericredaxe]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

people are not at all interested in seeing teams that aren't "their own."

I also think the empty seats may be breeding more empty seats.

I think you are correct. These are the two key issues. Many people MIGHT be interested in seeing a game as a "neutral" fan, but not in a 1/3 full arena with zero energy / atmosphere.

 

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

The notion is flawed only because people are not at all interested in seeing teams that aren't "their own." At the end of the day, I think this is the real issue. I was in attendance in South Bend for this years midwest regional but I would estimate fewer than 200 of Notre Dame's 2500 season ticket holders bothered to show up since ND crapped the bed.

Piggybacking on that issue is the that attending live sports is no longer the draw to young people that it was even 10 years ago. So if the game requires any effort at all to attend, say more than an hour's drive, it becomes a very unattractive prospect as far as entertainment. Forget long drives. Forget flying. That is for the diehards. And even then, you can't assume anything. My group of fans thought long and hard about making the drive East in 2011 when Notre Dame played in New Hampshire but in the end decided it was not doable. I would count myself one of the biggest college hockey fans around. Not Notre Dame hockey, college hockey. Same story for the 2014 regional at the X. Too much of a drive and too expensive to fly on just a few day's notice for most of my group.

This is exactly the kind of thing I had in mind, and you said it well.

I also think the empty seats may be breeding more empty seats. I think some people have gone to these games with the expectations that the buildings would pulse with energy since the games are so "important" and the teams in theory are all among the sport's best. Then they go to games like those in Toledo in 2013 and are nearly lulled to sleep by the stale and downright serene atmosphere. I believe this experience dampens the enthusiasm to the point that when it comes to next season, people are like "meh, I'll catch it on ESPNU."

Very true, and a key point IMHO. "Stale and downright serene atmosphere" is a nicely crafted phrase, BTW.

I'll add some personal testimony on this point. Back in 2013, my original plan was to attend the regional final game in Toledo. I had a conflict that prevented me from traveling for the Saturday games, but was available to travel Sunday. It's 140 miles from Columbus to Toledo. Yes, a roundtrip without lodging makes for a full day. Still, the commute is comfortably doable and doesn't spoil the fun IMO.

But here's the rub. For the Saturday games I was able to join the telecast in progress. Maybe I shouldn't have been surprised, but I was shocked by the totally empty stands. To say nothing of the staleness and serenity involved. Now I knew it was going to be an easy ticket, and was planning to make the purchase on a walk-up basis. But the scene I saw on TV was a sucker punch to the gut.

Long story short, I cancelled my travel plans and watched Sunday's game on TV. Trust me, it takes a LOT to get me to cancel hockey plans. A few years ago, I missed a game due to major "flu-like symptoms." Back in 1992, I gave up tickets to the Albany FF to go on a ski trip. Still second guessing the 1992 decision. You get the idea. But I've never second guessed the decision to skip that Sunday in Toledo.

At the end of the day I don't think anymore there are solutions that will work, especially in the 2 western regions. You will not get neutral fans. Fans of participating teams will be limited to those who happen to live within an easy drive of the rink. And people still largely won't show up to the game not involving their team in the first or second game. Knowing this I wish the NCAA would simply cease trying to create any sort of atmosphere. No host teams assured of playing in their rink. No tweaking of the seeds and claiming any reason for it other than attendance. Pick the teams transparently as they do, assign the seeds and place them 1-16, 2-15, 8-9 etc, and let the team that plays best for 4 games win.

So just give everybody the same 25% chance of landing at the closest regional, applying the pairwise numbers with complete rigidity? For example, UND only lands in Fargo if they beat the statistical odds and win the lottery? From the perspectives of neutrality and fairness, perhaps this would be for the best. And yet it would also go a long way to assuring that the regionals were all serene, all the time.

Tough to accept, and yet this plan does have more integrity than the status quo. For that reason, it just may be the lesser of the evils. Over the long haul -- say a generation -- maybe truly neutral regionals would develop their own fan base. Though you'd probably need to go with permanent regional sites for that to have any chance.

Once again, something to ponder.

 

[LtPowers]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

Over the long haul -- say a generation -- maybe truly neutral regionals would develop their own fan base. Though you'd probably need to go with permanent regional sites for that to have any chance.

Well, if we're playing the long game, the best bet is to focus on increasing the size of the college hockey fanbase. Or at least that of hockey in general.


Powers &8^]

 

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

Well, if we're playing the long game, the best bet is to focus on increasing the size of the college hockey fanbase. Or at least that of hockey in general.

As a broad guiding principle, that's a definite yes. But that principle needs to be kept in mind and applied when designing specific events.

Bringing a regional to a non-traditional site, experiencing a mostly empty building, then leaving after 1 year? That will do nothing to grow the fanbase, IMHO. But with permanent sites, maybe there's a chance. By permanent, I don't mean that a particular arena would have the absolute right to keep a regional forever, regardless of performance. But perhaps a 5 year, renewable contract would be appropriate.

Compare with the College World Series. I don't know the specific historical details of that event. But obviously there was a Year 1 and a Year 2 in Omaha, and I've got to believe that the current level of local support greatly exceeds those early years. The point being that appropriate marketing and patience for a few seasons while interest grows may be absolutely necessary conditions for success.

Perhaps we can find 4 "Hockey Friendly Omahas" and give them each a 5 year deal?

 

[purpleinnebraska]

As a broad guiding principle, that's a definite yes. But that principle needs to be kept in mind and applied when designing specific events.

Bringing a regional to a non-traditional site, experiencing a mostly empty building, then leaving after 1 year? That will do nothing to grow the fanbase, IMHO. But with permanent sites, maybe there's a chance. By permanent, I don't mean that a particular arena would have the absolute right to keep a regional forever, regardless of performance. But perhaps a 5 year, renewable contract would be appropriate.

Compare with the College World Series. I don't know the specific historical details of that event. But obviously there was a Year 1 and a Year 2 in Omaha, and I've got to believe that the current level of local support greatly exceeds those early years. The point being that appropriate marketing and patience for a few seasons while interest grows may be absolutely necessary conditions for success.

Perhaps we can find 4 "Hockey Friendly Omahas" and give them each a 5 year deal?

I like this idea, but you still have the "5 day notice - just traveled to the conference championship - maybe thinking of a Frozen 4" issues. I'm not sure there is a solution to low regional attendance, but likewise I'm not sure it's that big of a problem

 

[CLS]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

...Perhaps we can find 4 "Hockey Friendly Omahas" and give them each a 5 year deal?

I'd say 2 in the west. You effectively have that in the east already, except it's every other year. Worcester has been hosting alternate years for as long as I remember, as has Manchester since it came on line. One potential permanent Western location is obvious, an appropriately sized rink in the Twin Cities area.

You probably wouldn't be increasing the college hockey fan base, but I bet it'd be otherwise successful.

 

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

I like this idea, but you still have the "5 day notice - just traveled to the conference championship - maybe thinking of a Frozen 4" issues...

You partially missed my drift. I'm suggesting that we largely give up on getting people to travel to the regionals, and agree that the 5 day notice problem is at the heart of the matter.

Instead, we'd try to develop small but loyal local fanbases for the regionals themselves. More specifically, 1,000 - 2,000 fans who would go year after year, regardless of the participating teams. Have affordable tickets. Grant priority points if you like. Give 4 smaller communities the chance to be in the spotlight on an annual basis, even if it's only on ESPNU.

Think Williamsport, PA & Little League World Series. Think Akron, OH & the Soap Box Derby. On further review, maybe Omaha is actually too big a city for this concept.

I'd say 2 in the west. You effectively have that in the east already, except it's every other year. Worcester has been hosting alternate years for as long as I remember, as has Manchester since it came on line.

Maybe that's why the Eastern regionals have enjoyed a degree of success. Or at least been much less bad. Suppose Worcester and Manchester became permanent hosts. In your view, would that have the potential to grow those regionals?

One potential permanent Western location is obvious, an appropriately sized rink in the Twin Cities area. You probably wouldn't be increasing the college hockey fan base, but I bet it'd be otherwise successful.

Maybe, but it goes against the grain of this particular idea. I'm talking about smaller communities that would embrace the regionals as a special event. Something they really look forward to every year, regardless of the teams. Something to circle on the calendar.

In contrast, there's already a ton of hockey going on in the Twin Cities at all levels, including D-1 Conference Tournaments. Despite the obvious size and quality of the MSP Hockey community, I wonder if the time, energy and money are really there for yet another annual hockey event.

I'm thinking more along the lines of Northern Minnesota; The U.P.; Colorado Springs. Even Alaska. Not the large metro areas where there's already a ton to do with hockey dollars, and entertainment dollars generally.

Note: I assume it's obvious, but my intent here is to think outside the box. Maybe there's an audience available in the smaller communities, maybe not. But somehow we've got to try something new, at least in the West.

 

[pgb-ohio]

Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?

I'm not sure there is a solution to low regional attendance, but likewise I'm not sure it's that big of a problem

My many posts on this thread bear witness to the fact I think it's a big problem. Can't agree there's "no solution," nothing at all that could make things better; but it sure has been a difficult nut to crack.