I feel there needs to be clarification on the whole campus site issues:
1. Allow campus locations to be regional sites.
- appears that the best mid size arenas in the Midwest/west are actual campus sites
- how to handle host school - place there if seeded, regardless, or just if they're a #1 seed?
2. Have schools seeded 1-8 host a series on campus (this is what used to happen)
- would need an additional week to go from eight to four
What would be the preference here?
This might be a dumb question/suggestion, but why not remove schools as eligible hosts in the bidding process altogether and instead limit it to the venues themselves and/or promoters? Not enough money to be made already to garner more attention than is currently generated?
There are plenty of neutral sites in the Midwest/west it's just that most of them are not within a couple hours of enough teams like our east. I made a list in the frozen four thread but I can post here too.
Here is my breakdown of neutral venues:
CO: Denver, Loveland
SD: Sioux Falls, Rapid City
Ralston, Lincoln, Kearney
MN: St Paul,
Theif River Falls, Minneapolis
IA: Sioux City,
Waterloo, Des Moines, Urbandale, Dubuque, Cedar Rapids
WI: Madison, Green Bay, Milwaukee, Milwaukee
MO: St Louis, Independence, Kansas City
IL: Moline, Rockford, Rosemont, Bloomington, Chicago
MI: Kalamazoo, Muskegon, Grand Rapids,
Plymouth, Saginaw, Flint, Detroit
OH: Cleveland, Cincinnati, Toledo, Columbus, Youngstown
IN: Indianapolis, Fort Wayne
Johnstown, Reading, Allentown, Hershey, Wilke-Barre, Erie, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia
Strike through - too small
underlined - too big
"I find that the most trouble encountered with quotes on the internet is figuring out their authenticity"
Suppose you did cut the schools out of the bidding process and the support roles. At present, most of those functions are being performed by people on university salaries. Push those costs on the venues/promoters, and bidding becomes even less attractive.
For an example of what kind happen if you don't follow these rules, see Middlebury announcer the last time that school hosted the D3 national championship.
Even if a PA Announcer delivers a fully neutral performance, some will perceive bias because of the announcer' regular season affiliation. Or, on isolated occasions, an announcer may actually fail to live up to his obligation of neutrality. Either scenario may cause pushback.
But I offered this example as "the exception that proves the rule." Generally speaking, support staff at tournaments don't draw objections simply because they usually work at one of the member schools. In other words, excluding the schools from administrative roles at the tournaments wouldn't make them more neutral. Less viable, yes. More neutral, no.
Last edited by pgb-ohio; 04-20-2017 at 05:03 PM.
The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved.
North Dakota Hockey:
It does seem to me that getting rid of the school host could accomplish some good by removing the current requirement that if a host school makes the tournament, they have to be sent to the region they host. For example, this year, the NCAA could have sent Providence College to some other regional if they thought it was unfair to Harvard to have to play a lower seeded Providence College in Providence. Or, in the Fargo/Sioux Falls example, if UND made the tournament as a fourth seed, the NCAA could send UND to another regional. Of course if they’re really concerned with attendance, they might choose not to do this, but at least it gives them a choice.
If you could get the west regional alternating between the Xcel in St Paul and where ever North Dakota wants to host (either Fargo or Sioux Falls). I personally prefer Sioux Falls bc its bigger and would be easier to get tickets (I think).
Then you just need to find one more venue that works. I would think if Wisconsin continues to return to previous form, we could see the Badgers hosting in Madison at Alliant Energy Center. That just leaves one regional to fill every other year.
Most likely options: Cincinnati, Allentown, somewhere in Michigan hosted by Mich. or Western? I could also see one of the NCHC teams seeing if Target Center is up for it in a year where its not at Xcel.
On another note, what are typical USHL ticket prices?
As a preface, let's remember that in any sort of business partnership, a lot of the particulars are negotiable. That certainly includes deals between a host university and an outside venue. As such, deals will vary from one to the next, geography notwithstanding.
Next, let me use OSU Hockey's experience as an illustration. When we hosted the FF in 2005, it was our show. Our people handled communications functions, game management roles, tickets, off-ice officials, the works. OK, that event was on campus. But when OSU Hockey hosted CCHA Playoff games and Holiday tournament games at Nationwide Arena, it was very much the same thing. No doubt some Nationwide staffers had to work those events, but it still very much OSU's show.
As another example, I've attended number of tournament games at The X, hosted by the University of Minnesota. Now I don't have the same ties to the MN Dept. of Athletics, so this observation comes from outsider looking in. But as far as I could tell, it was the same situation. Gopher fingerprints were everywhere; same PA announcer, same off-ice officials, and so on.
From those experiences and others, I've long assumed that this was the normal situation. But I guess I have to allow for the possibility that this is a normal Western situation, but that things are fundamentally different in the East.
Anyhow, in the arrangement I'm used to seeing, the host school provides a lot of sweat equity. The cash value may not be huge, but it isn't trivial either. And don't underestimate the fact that "easy to run" vs. "huge staff headaches" is going to come into play when decision-makers decide which events to take on. For extremely lucrative events, maybe venue management says "never mind, just let us take care of those things." But for events that are just barely viable, the deal may collapse like a house of cards without the sweat equity contributed by the host school.
I'll acknowledge that it's highly likely that permanent (or semi-permanent) hosts handle a higher percentage of the work than "one-off" hosts. Maybe that explains some portion of the different experience.
Finally, proximity isn't irrelevant, because travel isn't free. But university staff members can and do travel to work at out-of-town locations. Less common, but not particularly unusual.
No need for an overly broad "solution." Just change the current requirement. Schools already host events that their own teams aren't competing in. Example: NCAA Men's Hoops. Eliminating host schools to accomplish this goal would needlessly leave staff resources on the sidelines.It does seem to me that getting rid of the school host could accomplish some good by removing the current requirement that if a host school makes the tournament, they have to be sent to the region they host. For example, this year, the NCAA could have sent Providence College to some other regional if they thought it was unfair to Harvard to have to play a lower seeded Providence College in Providence. Or, in the Fargo/Sioux Falls example, if UND made the tournament as a fourth seed, the NCAA could send UND to another regional. Of course if they’re really concerned with attendance, they might choose not to do this, but at least it gives them a choice.
Abandon the "national tournament" for the regionals. Rank the "east" 1-8, rank the "west" 1-8, and have 2 regionals in the east, since that works. In the west, have a super regional, with 8 teams, to determine the 2 west teams going to the F4. This can be done permanently in MSP, at either the X or TC, or rotating between the 2. Of course, the NCAA won't don this.
Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.
RIP - Kirby