Terrier520
Sungo
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
Jersey Turnpike should be one of them.
Jersey Turnpike should be one of them.
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.
What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
- Thread starter Numbers
- Start date
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
I'm afraid that alone isn't enough. Rochester, NY, has all the elements you cite, but the regional there several years ago was abysmally attended.
Powers &8^]
I'm afraid that alone isn't enough. Rochester, NY, has all the elements you cite, but the regional there several years ago was abysmally attended.
Powers &8^]
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
So, say, Canisius ends up being able to host. Your choices are 2,100-seat HARBORCENTER or 19,000-seat First Niagara Center, the latter of which may or may not have an open date that weekend. If "atmosphere" is your goal, the FNC isn't going to cut it.
Powers &8^]
So, say, Canisius ends up being able to host. Your choices are 2,100-seat HARBORCENTER or 19,000-seat First Niagara Center, the latter of which may or may not have an open date that weekend. If "atmosphere" is your goal, the FNC isn't going to cut it.
Powers &8^]
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
North Dakota, BU, Miami, Denver, UMD and UNO are all well suited to hosting such a game or series. Don't need to look anything up to know that. I was less than 100% sure about Mankato and MTU, so I checked. Mankato seats 5,280; Tech 4,200. Each is more than adequate for 1/8th of the first round, IMHO. I truly believe that all 8 events would have been successful.
OK, maybe we just got lucky this year. It must be conceded that there are a lot of newer, state-of-the-art arenas on that list. A good project for someone would be to go back and check the top 8 pairwise teams over the last ten years. Maybe you'd uncover a lot of arena problems. Maybe. But just throwing a guess out there, I'm thinking 0-1 problematic cases in a typical season.
And what of that one problem case? Let's take the Canisius situation head-on. Given the lack of a suitable middle-sized arena in Buffalo, I'd grant a waiver and let them host in the HarborCenter. Let's suppose that 1,000 fans get closed out. Fans that generally don't go to the games during the regular season. Few of whom would have been willing to travel to say, Fargo. While I'm not indifferent to the disappointment of someone who gets closed out, the number of those affected isn't large enough to trump the need to fix the current system.
But how about fans of the visiting team who get closed out? Well, one answer is to finish in the Top 8. But even more to the point, ask the players and coaches. Would you rather play one of the most important games of the season in front of a loud, sellout crowd of 2,100? Even if most of the 2,100 were hostile? Or would you rather play in a scrimmage atmosphere, in a larger but mostly empty building? As long as the home ice advantage was earned over the course of the season, I'm confident the answer would be drop the puck, let's play in front of the crowd.
Fair point, and I'm sure it would be easy to come up with the several more hypothetical hosts where there would be no perfect choice. Still, let's not lose track of the practical realities here. No system is going to be perfect. But at least in the West, the current system is badly broken. Year after year, the system is delivering empty arenas that are a losing proposition for all involved. For comparison sake, let's take a look at the campus sites of this year's top 8 teams.
North Dakota, BU, Miami, Denver, UMD and UNO are all well suited to hosting such a game or series. Don't need to look anything up to know that. I was less than 100% sure about Mankato and MTU, so I checked. Mankato seats 5,280; Tech 4,200. Each is more than adequate for 1/8th of the first round, IMHO. I truly believe that all 8 events would have been successful.
OK, maybe we just got lucky this year. It must be conceded that there are a lot of newer, state-of-the-art arenas on that list. A good project for someone would be to go back and check the top 8 pairwise teams over the last ten years. Maybe you'd uncover a lot of arena problems. Maybe. But just throwing a guess out there, I'm thinking 0-1 problematic cases in a typical season.
And what of that one problem case? Let's take the Canisius situation head-on. Given the lack of a suitable middle-sized arena in Buffalo, I'd grant a waiver and let them host in the HarborCenter. Let's suppose that 1,000 fans get closed out. Fans that generally don't go to the games during the regular season. Few of whom would have been willing to travel to say, Fargo. While I'm not indifferent to the disappointment of someone who gets closed out, the number of those affected isn't large enough to trump the need to fix the current system.
But how about fans of the visiting team who get closed out? Well, one answer is to finish in the Top 8. But even more to the point, ask the players and coaches. Would you rather play one of the most important games of the season in front of a loud, sellout crowd of 2,100? Even if most of the 2,100 were hostile? Or would you rather play in a scrimmage atmosphere, in a larger but mostly empty building? As long as the home ice advantage was earned over the course of the season, I'm confident the answer would be drop the puck, let's play in front of the crowd.
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
Yes; violently agreed.
It does put television coverage of the first round at risk, particularly if we insist on playing a 2 of 3 format. But I think that TV coverage of the 2nd Round would actually improve. Given its own weekend, I believe you'd get better channels and more eyeballs for the Round of 8. (4 games)
No question. But I still believe we can do much better than the status quo, even if none of us gets our first choice.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
Did RIT make it to the championship weekend that year?
In several places, attendance will be spiked by who is in the tounament, and the chances people feel about that particular team winning. Take a look at the spike in attendance for the ECAC in 2003, 2005, and 2010. Take a wild guess at who won those years. Atlantic City was a plain dreadful experiment, so I'd consider that to be an outlier.
Did RIT make it to the championship weekend that year?
In several places, attendance will be spiked by who is in the tounament, and the chances people feel about that particular team winning. Take a look at the spike in attendance for the ECAC in 2003, 2005, and 2010. Take a wild guess at who won those years. Atlantic City was a plain dreadful experiment, so I'd consider that to be an outlier.
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
It was 2007, which is the first year RIT was in the AHA. They finished first but were ineligible for the postseason as the second year of their transition.
But of course, even if RIT had been eligible and had won the championship, there's no guarantee they would have been placed in the East Regional, this year's Providence experience notwithstanding.
Powers &8^]
It was 2007, which is the first year RIT was in the AHA. They finished first but were ineligible for the postseason as the second year of their transition.
But of course, even if RIT had been eligible and had won the championship, there's no guarantee they would have been placed in the East Regional, this year's Providence experience notwithstanding.
Powers &8^]
bigblue_dl
Armed
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
I don't think I've seen anyone suggest this....and I'm not even sure I'd like it (in fact, I don't think I would support it), but I'll throw it out there for the conversation.
What if we stop going by PWR for the entire country. Sure, you can calculate it based on games from the whole country, but when we're actually picking teams, we have 2 PWR rankings, the West and the East. Top 8 west teams (with autobids for the WCHA, NCHC and BIG10) and top 8 east teams (with autobids for the ECAC, HE, and AH) make the tournament. Then have 2 insular west regionals, and 2 insular east regionals. We'd guarantee fans and teams less travel, and that should lead to better atmosphere, even if we do have regionals in places like Green Bay or Grand Rapids, or South Bend, because all 4 teams at each regional would at least be from the right side of the country (ok, maybe ignore Penn State and Robert Morris, and Air Force). Then every Frozen 4 would have 2 east teams and 2 West teams.
edit:
This year you'd have these teams in the tourney, with these potential matchups (couldn't have the rule about not playing your conferencemate in round 1)
East:
1. Boston U
2. Harvard
3. Boston College
4. Yale
5. Quinnipiac
6. Providence
7. Colgate
8. RIT
Manchester:
1. Boston U vs. 8. RIT
4. Yale vs. 5. Quinnipiac
Providence:
2. Harvard vs. 7. Colgate
3. Boston College vs. 6. Providence
West:
1. MSU-Mankato
2. North Dakota
3. Miami
4. Denver
5. Minnsota-Duluth
6. Michigan Tech
7. Nebraska-Omaha
8. Minnesota
South Bend:
1. MSU-Mankato vs. 8. Minnesota
4. Denver vs. 5. Minnesota-Duluth
Fargo:
2. North Dakota vs. 7. Nebraska-Omaha
3. Miami vs. 6. Michigan Tech
Yes, this year is lopsided, and the PWR have more higher ranked west teams, leading to 1 west team dropped, and 1 east added, compared to the current format. But I think that this would even out over the seasons.
I don't think I've seen anyone suggest this....and I'm not even sure I'd like it (in fact, I don't think I would support it), but I'll throw it out there for the conversation.
What if we stop going by PWR for the entire country. Sure, you can calculate it based on games from the whole country, but when we're actually picking teams, we have 2 PWR rankings, the West and the East. Top 8 west teams (with autobids for the WCHA, NCHC and BIG10) and top 8 east teams (with autobids for the ECAC, HE, and AH) make the tournament. Then have 2 insular west regionals, and 2 insular east regionals. We'd guarantee fans and teams less travel, and that should lead to better atmosphere, even if we do have regionals in places like Green Bay or Grand Rapids, or South Bend, because all 4 teams at each regional would at least be from the right side of the country (ok, maybe ignore Penn State and Robert Morris, and Air Force). Then every Frozen 4 would have 2 east teams and 2 West teams.
edit:
This year you'd have these teams in the tourney, with these potential matchups (couldn't have the rule about not playing your conferencemate in round 1)
East:
1. Boston U
2. Harvard
3. Boston College
4. Yale
5. Quinnipiac
6. Providence
7. Colgate
8. RIT
Manchester:
1. Boston U vs. 8. RIT
4. Yale vs. 5. Quinnipiac
Providence:
2. Harvard vs. 7. Colgate
3. Boston College vs. 6. Providence
West:
1. MSU-Mankato
2. North Dakota
3. Miami
4. Denver
5. Minnsota-Duluth
6. Michigan Tech
7. Nebraska-Omaha
8. Minnesota
South Bend:
1. MSU-Mankato vs. 8. Minnesota
4. Denver vs. 5. Minnesota-Duluth
Fargo:
2. North Dakota vs. 7. Nebraska-Omaha
3. Miami vs. 6. Michigan Tech
Yes, this year is lopsided, and the PWR have more higher ranked west teams, leading to 1 west team dropped, and 1 east added, compared to the current format. But I think that this would even out over the seasons.
Last edited:
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
That's not a national tournament
Gotta
Have mix
From the start in every game, every region
East staying amongst themselves would suck ***
That's not a national tournament
Gotta
Have mix
From the start in every game, every region
East staying amongst themselves would suck ***
SCSU Euro
Well-known member
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
The East and the West each year should get the chance to put forth 3 or 4 FF teams. It would water down the tournament in lopsided years both in the top 8 and as far as the top teams from each side
The East and the West each year should get the chance to put forth 3 or 4 FF teams. It would water down the tournament in lopsided years both in the top 8 and as far as the top teams from each side
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
That's not a national tournament
GottaHave mixFrom the start in every game, every region
East staying amongst themselves would suck ***
That's not a national tournament
GottaHave mixFrom the start in every game, every region
East staying amongst themselves would suck ***
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
Looking at rink capacities, I don't think minimum capacities would be an issue any time in the foreseeable future.
Number of Div. 1 teams with capacities under 1,800, assuming OSU plays in their 1,415-seat facility:
5 - Four are from Atlantic Hockey. The other is OSU.
Number of Div. 1 teams with capacities under 2,000:
8 - Seven are from Atlantic Hockey. The other is OSU.
Given the PWR's reliance on RPI, I think the odds of an AH team finishing in the top-8 will be extremely low until the system undergoes a major revamp.
I'll note that I only had numbers for regular season home rinks, and I don't know if/how many other schools would face a situation similar to OSU.
For example, I suspect UConn would also have issues. Their on-campus rink holds 2,000.
The point I'm making is that playing in small rinks really isn't an issue. I would also say that given the number of "traditional power" programs that play in rinks that seat 6,000 plus, the total attendance is very likely to exceed what we see with the current regional format (even accounting for the occasional small-rink host).
Just in case anyone is interested...
AH: AVG - 1875 / median 1400 / range 1000 - 4300 / 45% (5/9) 1800+
ECAC: AVG - 3175 / median 3000 / range 2100 - 5217 / 58% (7/12) 3000+
WCHA: AVG - 4506 / median 4350 / range 2490 - 6600 / 70% (7/10) 4000+
HE - AVG - 6221 / median 5600 / range 2549 - 15635 / 83% (10/12) 4000+, 50% 6000+
BIG: AVG - 7465 / median 6200 / range 1415 - 15325 / 83% (5/6) 5700+ *assumes OSU playing at the OSU Ice Rink
NCHC: AVG - 6392 / median 6300/ range 3200 - 11634 / 75% 5000+ *using capacity for UNO's new rink currently under construction
All Div. 1: AVG - 4939 / median 4200 / 69.5% (41/59) 3000+
Looking at rink capacities, I don't think minimum capacities would be an issue any time in the foreseeable future.
Number of Div. 1 teams with capacities under 1,800, assuming OSU plays in their 1,415-seat facility:
5 - Four are from Atlantic Hockey. The other is OSU.
Number of Div. 1 teams with capacities under 2,000:
8 - Seven are from Atlantic Hockey. The other is OSU.
Given the PWR's reliance on RPI, I think the odds of an AH team finishing in the top-8 will be extremely low until the system undergoes a major revamp.
I'll note that I only had numbers for regular season home rinks, and I don't know if/how many other schools would face a situation similar to OSU.
For example, I suspect UConn would also have issues. Their on-campus rink holds 2,000.
The point I'm making is that playing in small rinks really isn't an issue. I would also say that given the number of "traditional power" programs that play in rinks that seat 6,000 plus, the total attendance is very likely to exceed what we see with the current regional format (even accounting for the occasional small-rink host).
Just in case anyone is interested...
AH: AVG - 1875 / median 1400 / range 1000 - 4300 / 45% (5/9) 1800+
ECAC: AVG - 3175 / median 3000 / range 2100 - 5217 / 58% (7/12) 3000+
WCHA: AVG - 4506 / median 4350 / range 2490 - 6600 / 70% (7/10) 4000+
HE - AVG - 6221 / median 5600 / range 2549 - 15635 / 83% (10/12) 4000+, 50% 6000+
BIG: AVG - 7465 / median 6200 / range 1415 - 15325 / 83% (5/6) 5700+ *assumes OSU playing at the OSU Ice Rink
NCHC: AVG - 6392 / median 6300/ range 3200 - 11634 / 75% 5000+ *using capacity for UNO's new rink currently under construction
All Div. 1: AVG - 4939 / median 4200 / 69.5% (41/59) 3000+
Last edited:
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
Was so focused on the big picture, the possibility of OSU needing an exemption to host hadn't really occurred to me. OHSAA Boys Hoops is, in fact, this weekend at the Schott. Still, the Schott would be available on Sunday, which would work fine for a single elimination format. But if the NCAA went with the 2 of 3 format, yeah, we'd have an unpleasant problem to address.
Was so focused on the big picture, the possibility of OSU needing an exemption to host hadn't really occurred to me. OHSAA Boys Hoops is, in fact, this weekend at the Schott. Still, the Schott would be available on Sunday, which would work fine for a single elimination format. But if the NCAA went with the 2 of 3 format, yeah, we'd have an unpleasant problem to address.
Very likely true.
Possibly Wisconsin.
Agreed. Truly believe that campus sites would increase the number of fans attending, and should be at least revenue neutral even with lower ticket prices -- whether or not a handful of small rinks wind up in the mix.
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
And some more numbers for those interested...
Here are the top 8 seeds going back to 2005 and their rink capacities.
I am using their current rinks. I already have those capacities, and I don't want to go back to look up when the switches were made/what the capacities were for the old buildings.
2014
ND-5022 MN-10000 BC-7884 WI-15325 FSU-2490 UML-6003 QU-3086 UNi-2225
2013
QU-3086 BC-7884 MN-10000 UND-11634 ND-5022 MIA-3200 UML-6003 UNH-6110
2012
MI-5800 FSU-2490 UND-11634 MN-10000 BC-7884 UMD-6600 MIA-3200 UNi-2225
2011
UND-11634 DU-6026 MIA-3200 MER-2549 YA-3486 UNi-2225 BC-7884 MI-5800
2010
MIA-3200 BSU-4373 BC-7884 UND-11634 DU-6026 COR-4267 WI-15325 STC-5159
2009
NE-4666 ND-5022 BU-6221 UND-11634 DU-6026 UMD-6600 YA-3486 MI-5800
2008
UNH-6110 CC-7343 MI-5800 STC-5159 UND-11634 DU-6026 MIA-3200 BC-7884
2007
CLA-3000 STC-5159 MN-10000 MI-5800 UNH-6110 BC-7884 ND-5022 BU-6221
2006
WI-15325 COR-4267 BU-6221 MIA-3200 MN-10000 UND-11634 MSU-6470 HAR-2776
2005
DU-6026 UNH-6110 MN-10000 COR-4267 MI-5800 CC-7343 UND-11634 BC-7884
And some more numbers for those interested...
Here are the top 8 seeds going back to 2005 and their rink capacities.
I am using their current rinks. I already have those capacities, and I don't want to go back to look up when the switches were made/what the capacities were for the old buildings.
2014
ND-5022 MN-10000 BC-7884 WI-15325 FSU-2490 UML-6003 QU-3086 UNi-2225
2013
QU-3086 BC-7884 MN-10000 UND-11634 ND-5022 MIA-3200 UML-6003 UNH-6110
2012
MI-5800 FSU-2490 UND-11634 MN-10000 BC-7884 UMD-6600 MIA-3200 UNi-2225
2011
UND-11634 DU-6026 MIA-3200 MER-2549 YA-3486 UNi-2225 BC-7884 MI-5800
2010
MIA-3200 BSU-4373 BC-7884 UND-11634 DU-6026 COR-4267 WI-15325 STC-5159
2009
NE-4666 ND-5022 BU-6221 UND-11634 DU-6026 UMD-6600 YA-3486 MI-5800
2008
UNH-6110 CC-7343 MI-5800 STC-5159 UND-11634 DU-6026 MIA-3200 BC-7884
2007
CLA-3000 STC-5159 MN-10000 MI-5800 UNH-6110 BC-7884 ND-5022 BU-6221
2006
WI-15325 COR-4267 BU-6221 MIA-3200 MN-10000 UND-11634 MSU-6470 HAR-2776
2005
DU-6026 UNH-6110 MN-10000 COR-4267 MI-5800 CC-7343 UND-11634 BC-7884
Last edited:
Terrier520
Sungo
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
Wrong Boston.
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
I imagine Wisconsin would host at Dane County Coliseum if there were conflicts with the Kohl Center. I didn't mention them as DCC has more than enough seats.
I imagine Wisconsin would host at Dane County Coliseum if there were conflicts with the Kohl Center. I didn't mention them as DCC has more than enough seats.
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
will edit
****, you caught that quick
will edit
Re: What if the Committee Decides to Makes Changes to the Tournament Design?
USCHO
http://www.uscho.com/team/new-hampshire/mens-hockey/
USCHO
http://www.uscho.com/team/new-hampshire/mens-hockey/
scoreboard
Registered User
I believe it has been mentioned before on USCHO that UNH counts everybody in the building at the time of the game. They include the staff, officials, etc.. as well as the number of paid seats for attendance purposes. Thus the difference in capacity.