Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

    Originally posted by claver2010 View Post

    Also the prices are simply absurd.
    The Bridgeport regional is $70 for 3 high level hockey games, for a New York City area entertainment value, I think it is a bargain.

    Another thing not mentioned in this thread is that alot of the reason for teams staying home in March is mid term exams. Remember they are in college, not living on a bus traveling Canada eating per-diem meals.
    YALE HOCKEY
    2013 National Champions

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

      Originally posted by LTsatch View Post
      The Bridgeport regional is $70 for 3 high level hockey games, for a New York City area entertainment value, I think it is a bargain.

      Another thing not mentioned in this thread is that alot of the reason for teams staying home in March is mid term exams. Remember they are in college, not living on a bus traveling Canada eating per-diem meals.
      I grew up 15 minutes from BPT, it's not NYC area. That's like saying Springfield, MA is Boston area.

      Also could someone explain to me having the NE regional final at 8:00 EST while the Western is at 5:00? It would seem so easy to switch the 2 and have them both start at 5 locally.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

        Originally posted by claver2010 View Post
        Also could someone explain to me having the NE regional final at 8:00 EST while the Western is at 5:00? It would seem so easy to switch the 2 and have them both start at 5 locally.
        it's a mind blowing decision. I would love to know the reasoning behind it.....
        *****

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

          Originally posted by Caustic Undertow View Post
          First, a preface: I love college hockey. I tell my daughters stories about college hockey. I love the fans, the atmospheres, the road trips. I have watched a fair amount of Major Junior hockey in my time and I find it to be good but college hockey to be a superior product overall, and a far better focus of attention. I want college hockey to grow and I want Major Junior to recede a bit in importance, and whenever a college recruit jumps to the CHL I gnash my teeth.

          All that said, we are about to enter into our annual rite of spring, the Decidedly Underwhelming First Two Rounds of the NCAA Tournament. Millions of fans across the country will neglect to fill out brackets, forget to watch on tv (if they get it) or not bother to stream the games over the internet. Millions of fans will not hear Barry Melrose not know what he is talking about when he tries to analyze a college game, and will not watch games played in front of thousands of people who did not bother to travel to the regionals.

          College Hockey has a playoff problem.

          It's not a Frozen Four problem; the Frozen Four is a marvelous event that has a dedicated, rabid base of fans who will always attend, solid organization, stable finances, and a product that competes with and beats the CHL's crown jewel, the Memorial Cup.

          But College Hockey does not have a good playoff system.

          Conference playoffs

          It's hard to even know what the "playoffs" are. Are they one-weekend best-of-three conference series that rarely produce upsets and even more rarely produce important results? Among the most shocking playoff results ever happened this year as Bowling Green defeated Northern Michigan and top CCHA seed Ferris State on the road in games that were seen by zero people on television and perhaps 10-12,000 paid fans *total*. Congratulations, BG; your reward is to have hundreds of people watch you lose twice at the Joe.

          Conference playoffs produce nice events like the Final Five, but the early rounds are little more than academic exercises. They are not pivotal or decisive. Michigan has made it to the Joe 24 years in a row. This is not a symptom of a challenging, worthwhile playoff structure.

          The NCAA Hockey Tournament

          Or are the "playoffs" this weekend? Good seats are available in Green Bay to watch Michigan and Cornell fans, perhaps a couple thousand of them, trade witty chants that won't be loud enough to be heard on television. Denver and Ferris will also play and few will watch. Empty seats will be everywhere.

          The regional system is dreadful. Occasionally a regional lucks out and draws a lot of fans--and the rest of the fans scream in consternation as their higher-seeded team winds up "earning" a road game. Numerous top seeds have seen their seasons end in front of a rowdy audience of enemy fans. The alternative is a truly neutral site, which is so neutral that nobody can come to the game.

          The adversary has this right

          In our perpetual game of tug-of-war with the CHL, the Playoff Problem is a black eye on our sport. All but a small handful of Major Junior teams make the playoffs, which means virtually all players are guaranteed at least one, full, seven-game series a year. Some of them wind up being short, brutal affairs, but at least two of the losses were in front of the home fans. Good teams go on long, NHL-like playoff runs involving travel, running story lines, rivalries, and crackling action.

          Players grow up dreaming of playing in 7-game series in the NHL, and they get a nice facsimile of the experience before they even turn 20. I've been to OHL playoff games, and they are wonderful. Genuinely good hockey with genuinely good atmosphere. It's a major checkmark in the CHL box.

          This is the most important time of the year?

          On Friday Ferris State and Denver will play the most important game of their season, and they'll be lucky if 2000 people in the arena actually care about the result. The atmosphere will completely bely the gravity of the game they are playing, and will be dwarfed by even average home regular season games. What a let-down for Denver, which just played three intense games at the Final Five in front of over 10,000.

          Worse, the winner will turn around the very next day and play Michigan or Cornell. Suppose it's Michigan vs. Denver: A matchup with history. A matchup with exciting match ups and great players. In sum, a matchup that is worth talking about.

          But we won't talk about it, because we won't have time. The Regional schedule turnaround means that there is barely time to debrief from the previous game and begin to address the next one; great story lines are ignored, anticipation is killed, and the first-round win is devalued by preventing fan bases and players from appreciating it. Ferris State has one NCAA tournament win, and 24 hours after that win their season was over.

          Time for Change

          We need a new system. A system that provides excitement, anticipation, and real fan participation. A system that rewards teams for making the postseason. A system that does not punish high seeds for not having the luck to be hosting their own regional. A system that showcases our sport instead of embarrassing it.

          I am not advocating for a Major Junior-type system. I believe it is possible, within the traditions and framework of college sports, to produce a much better system for the tournament than the one that currently exists. This post is not dogmatic about what that option is, but if you were to ask, I would say this: Play the games at the home sites of the high seeds.

          Other options may be floated and may work. What is clear is that the system we now have does not work, not even close. It is hurting our sport. It needs to change. College Hockey has a playoff problem. Fix it. Change the Tournament.
          The Lehigh vs. Duke playoff B-Ball game last week had no "history" whatsoever but it sure didn't harm the popularity of the NCAA basketball playoffs. The future success of the NCAA DI college hockey championships probably lies in the expansion of T.V. coverage rather than enticing a few thousand more fans to buy tickets. Like it or not this is increasingly the electronic age.
          Last edited by Osorojo; 03-19-2012, 10:12 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

            Originally posted by HockeyMan2000 View Post
            But it's also more expensive and harder to get there (Anaheim certainly was for someone on the east coast). I look at weather as being less a consideration when you get into early April. The other day it was warmer in the Northeast and Midwest than it was in Florida. If it's the middle of winter that's one thing, but going to a "warm weather city" by the time you get into spring isn't that big of an enticement to me. I think the NCAAs ought to stick to traditional northeast/midwest cities and leave it at that personally; give one fanbase a break most years by having it within driving distance for a fair amount of fans.
            Going to a "warm weather city" once a decade doesn't seem like that big of deal to me. Given that the F4 requireds an NHL sized (18k+) you are down to maybe 30 or 35 arenas where it can be held (unless you want to go with the football stadium again). Cut out anything that isn't in the US hockey footprint and you have maybe 15 locations that will work: Boston, NYC area, Philly, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Denver, St. Paul, Chicago would be the best. Also have Buffalo, Columbus, St. Louis, Washington DC, Nashville, Milwaukee which would work but either push the geographic bound or are not the most exciting locations for non-hockey activities on a regular basis.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

              A agree something is wrong. Personally, I will never attend another NCAA tournament after Air Force was sent to Worcester in 2008 when there was a Regional at the World Arena here in the Springs (Especially considering the #4 seed wound up winning it.) I would almost rather see the tournament winners, plus a couple of at-large teams, play an 8-4-2-1 bracket, best 2 out of three, over three weekends. I like the idea of not starting the regular season until November, which would push conference play until after football ends the first week of Dec., and the playoffs until after bouncyball is over and everyone looks around for something else to follow (for me its college baseball, but that may not be for everyone).

              The current regional format isn't working, and you would think that even a money-grubbing organization like the NCAA would be able to figure that out.
              2010-2011 Atlantic Hockey Pick 'Em Champion!
              2013 Atlantic Hockey Postseason Pick 'Em Champion!
              Air Force Falcons
              2007 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA West Regional
              2008 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA Northeast Regional
              2009 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA East Regional Final
              2011 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA East Regional
              2012 Atlantic Hockey Champions, NCAA Northeast Regional

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

                Random thoughts:

                Yes to claver's suggestion that conferences - not schools - host.

                Yes to scheduling the occasional FF in an out of the way place. I go every year, and it keeps it interesting. St. Paul and Boston are nice, and I wouldn't want them out of the rotation, but they're old news. I'd rather have the occasional oddball location just to keep things fresh. Provided there is some value to the location as a general destination (sorry Columbus ).

                Regionals started to s*** when the NCAA went to 4 of them. Practically speaking, 'm not sure there's anything to be done about this. We bat this around on the board every year. But in my mind the correlation is clear.
                1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1995 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2012(!)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

                  I officially became an "un-fan" of the NCAA regional system after the 2009 regionals. And since then, I have become a fan of the idea of a best-of-3 at the higher seeds rink, with a guaranteed percentage of tickets held for the visiting team that's higher than for a usual game. I don't what is normal, but I think anywhere from 20%-30% of tickets to be held for the visiting school. If they go unsold, they can be turned back in for sale by the home school. I think it rewards the higher seed for having a better regular season and I feel a best-of-3 determines a little more "fair" of an outcome with the better team advancing.

                  One of the biggest problems I see is with venues. You're having to keep an open date for an arena that probably has a higher chance of not happening. It's one thing for a Mariucci to keep an open date as you just don't book ice time, but it's a different thing with an Omaha or Madison, who have hosted NCAA basketball & other events because it's a shared venue. And does the Frozen Four stay the same? You have a regional playoff that's a best of series, but suddently you decide the top 4 team in one & done?

                  I guess one good thing about the current set up is that it's one & done from the start. But I do agree that I'd like to see something a little different. In my opinion, it seems like the NCAA sees the success & interest level of the basketball tournament and thinks that because it's a great model for that sport that it should work for all other sports as well.

                  I like the discussion though. I'm sure there are many that don't agree with me as well. Discussion is good.
                  "I wagered a large sum on the performance of that scholar athlete."

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

                    Originally posted by Caustic Undertow View Post
                    ...

                    We need a new system. A system that provides excitement, anticipation, and real fan participation. A system that rewards teams for making the postseason. A system that does not punish high seeds for not having the luck to be hosting their own regional. A system that showcases our sport instead of embarrassing it.

                    ...
                    Great discussion. Thanks, CU, for starting it with excellent concerns and ideas.

                    My random 2 cents.

                    I think the season does start too early. I would prefer a November start with NC games and with conference games starting at or after Thanksgiving. (Come to think of it, that's what the Ivy 6 in the ECAC do...Probably the kiss of death)

                    We've been talking alot about what to do with the ECAC playoffs and, in particular, finals, on another thread. I kind of like the idea of going back to campus locations in what are generally smaller venues (so they are not empty). At least the local fan base will consider attending...

                    A major eye-opener for me with respect to the ECAC finals in Atlantic City was the improvement in streaming technology. We all discovered last week that the ECAC powers that be had failed to secure a national tv contract. My first reaction, like everyone else's, was to be outraged. Not only were we showcasing our conference in front of thousands of empty seats in a garbage dump city with no place in the hockey world, there wasn't even any tv. I have to say the excellent streaming video produced by RPI TV totally turned me around on the tv question. The production was excellent, including video quality, camera work, announcers and on screen graphics. It was a seriously excellent production. Yes, I was charged $9 or $9.95 a game, but won't these charges go down if and when subscribers increase and/or advertising is attracted? The only detraction was that I couldn't figure out how to run the picture from my computer to the tv, but isn't this a problem that already has a solution or will soon enough? So I can easily imagine a day coming when every playoff game will be televised (streamed) and league officials will have to consider what this will do to live attendance (especially in remote areas).

                    I kinda like the idea of returning to two regional venues with a six game package and two winners.

                    I don't like the idea so much of non-hockey locales for the Frozen Four, but I am intrigued by Tampa as a choice. There is fairly decent hockey interest in the area (since Lightning won the Cup), there are lots of Canadian snow birds in the area, as well as spring vacationers and college kids on spring break. Air travel to Orlando and Tampa is pretty easy from almost everywhere in the country and fares are pretty competitive. Plus, as mentioned, its not a bad place to plan a vacation around. If properly promoted I can see Tampa being a sweet place to hold the event.
                    Last edited by Eph72; 03-19-2012, 11:16 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

                      Originally posted by Eph72 View Post
                      I kinda like the idea of returning to two regional venues with a six game package and two winners.
                      I'm not used to people agreeing with me on this

                      I'm inspired to present the 2012 D1 Ice Hockey Regionals (that weren't):

                      EAST
                      1. BC (bye)
                      2. Union (bye)
                      3. Minnesota
                      4. Ferris State
                      5. BU
                      6. WMichigan

                      Ferris State v BU -- winner plays BC
                      Minnesota v WMich -- winner plays Union

                      WEST
                      1. Michigan (bye)
                      2. North Dakota (bye)
                      3. Miami
                      4. Minnesota-Duluth
                      5. Maine
                      6. Air Force

                      Miami v Air Force -- winner plays North Dakota
                      UMD v Maine -- winner plays Michigan

                      Look at those things. They're stacked. I'd be excited to see either one.
                      Last edited by amherstblackbear; 03-19-2012, 12:31 PM.
                      1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1995 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2012(!)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

                        I agree with you guys, except for part of what you said.

                        And I disagree with AFHockeyFan on principle.
                        Last edited by West Texas Wolverine; 03-19-2012, 11:32 AM.
                        Still anticipating the all-CCHA Frozen Four

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

                          Originally posted by Eph72 View Post


                          I kinda like the idea of returning to two regional venues with a six game package and two winners.
                          What about two regional sites, but it goes Thursday/Saturday & Friday/Sunday?

                          Example: St. Paul & Buffalo host. Midwest starts on Thursday, West starts on Friday, and then the Midwest winners play Saturday & the West winners play Sunday. Same thing happens with two eastern regionals in Buffalo. Would probably be a little easier for travel knowing that there are only two potential sites compared to four, people can make a weekend out of it, would be easier to get rid of tickets instead of having to eat them (the Sunday's could be the toughest), and would most likely get better attendance overall.

                          A huge current problem I see is western venues. Xcel can do well with the right teams, and Denver can do well also. But the others seem to have trouble unless one specific team is in (Wisconsin in Green Bay). I think combining them into one place over a four day period gives you good possibilities of potential bids by schools with NHL venues (St. Paul, Detroit, Columbus, Chicago, St. Louis & Denver would all be good options, and potentially UAH hosting in Nashville?)

                          I don't know; probably something I'm totally not considering....just tossing out ideas.
                          "I wagered a large sum on the performance of that scholar athlete."

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

                            Originally posted by SOTA View Post
                            What about two regional sites, but it goes Thursday/Saturday & Friday/Sunday?

                            ...
                            A possible advantage of Thurs-- Sat and/or Fri--Sun is that fans of the winning semi-finalists who don't attend the early games could still get to the finals (and pick up tickets from the departing losing semifinalists). If ticket resales were computerized, this would be easy to do...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

                              Originally posted by SOTA View Post
                              What about two regional sites, but it goes Thursday/Saturday & Friday/Sunday? . . . .
                              Seems to me a better setup would be three days – Region A semifinals Friday, Region A finals and Region B semifinals Saturday, Region B finals Sunday.

                              Thursday is too early to start. The teams and fans wouldn’t have time to make travel plans. Also, I think fans may be willing to have the off day for the Frozen four, but I doubt they’d want to spend the time and money for the Regionals.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: College Hockey's Playoff Problem.

                                Originally posted by amherstblackbear View Post
                                I'm not used to people agreeing with me on this

                                I'm inspired to present the 2012 D1 Ice Hockey Regionals (that weren't):

                                EAST
                                1. BC (bye)
                                2. Union (bye)
                                3. Ferris State
                                4. Minnesota
                                5. BU
                                6. Denver

                                Ferris State v Denver -- winner plays Union
                                Minnesota v BU -- winner plays BC

                                WEST
                                1. Michigan (bye)
                                2. North Dakota (bye)
                                3. Miami
                                4. Minnesota-Duluth
                                5. Maine
                                6. Air Force

                                Miami v Air Force -- winner plays North Dakota
                                UMD v Maine -- winner plays Michigan

                                Look at those things. They're stacked. I'd be excited to see either one.
                                Poor Western Michigan. They win the CCHA Auto-bid and then get left out of the tourney...all the while Air Force gets a bid.
                                North Dakota
                                National Champions: 1959, 1963, 1980, 1982, 1987, 1997, 2000, 2016

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X