NCAA Change the Tourney

[HockeyMan2000]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

The problem is not that fans are saying, "I would go, but there just aren't enough teams playing."

Who are you speaking for? lol. I don't go because I don't think it's worth my time and money as it currently is constituted. Looks like I'm not alone in that sentiment -- 2 regionals was a more attractive product than how they're doing it now. Going to 8 regionals is never going to happen.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

One reason I have no problem with the superregionals is that I have absolutely no problem with a 12-team field. But even if it stays at 16, there's no reason why it automatically follows that all tickets are for the entire weekend.

Granted, you wouldn't do this if ticket sales were strong, but they're not. Obviously. So why not offer a discounted package deal (say 75-80% of face) for the entire superregional, to cater to the fans who do want to go to a college hockey event. Then starting a week or so before the event, start selling daily passes. Maybe $99 for the superregional, or $37.50 for a daily pass. Adjust as necessary to maximize revenue.

eta: If you want to sell college hockey to new fans, that means selling the product to people watching on TV (at first). One way to do that is to sell the traditions, rivalries, crazy fans, etc. At a good Frozen Four, college hockey almost sells itself. When I watched the BC-CC game last night on ESPNU, my God . . . I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away from that telecast if I'm not an Eagle or Tiger fan. Yawn. No noise, no energy, poorly mic-ed pep band, empty blue plastic seats as far as the eye can see. Bleh.

[cg_siouxfan]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

I agree with this one million percent! Let me ask most of you why you like hockey in the first place. I am willing to bet it is because you grew up in an area where you could PLAY - I mean outdoors, not by paying $100 to go to some "organized" program in a rink. .

This may have been true 20-25 years ago, but I played inside before I ever played outdoors. I love playing outside, but it's not how kids are introduced to hockey anymore.

People usually play hockey because a parent played the game, or because it's part of the culture where they live.

[chickod]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

Yes, 8 regionals, each at the higher seeded team. The problem is not that fans are saying, "I would go, but there just aren't enough teams playing." They are saying, "I can't drive 9 hours and spend 2 nights in a hotel room just to see my team play 1 or 2 games." Reducing the number of regionals increases the amount of travel, and travel is what is keeping fans away right now.

Let's have 16 regionals with one team each...

[chickod]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

People usually play hockey because a parent played the game, or because it's part of the culture where they live.

But that's my point. It's not "part of the culture" when only a tiny percentage of the population actually plays it. Maybe YOU had the money to play indoors, but in order for a sport to "latch on," it has to be available to EVERYONE. I know you're not being "elitist," but that's almost what it would sound like to some poor kid who doesn't have the means to play. How many NBA or soccer players grew up wealthy? If you don't have the numbers, it will never get into the mainstream. It's part of the CULTURE where they live because EVERYONE CAN PLAY!!!

[johnk]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

Yes, 8 regionals, each at the higher seeded team. The problem is not that fans are saying, "I would go, but there just aren't enough teams playing." They are saying, "I can't drive 9 hours and spend 2 nights in a hotel room just to see my team play 1 or 2 games." Reducing the number of regionals increases the amount of travel, and travel is what is keeping fans away right now.

Absolutely disagree with this whole premise. 2 sites with 8 teams is the way to go. More fans with less cost and you can keep it to major college hockey sites unlike St. Louis every year. The finals at each region with 4 teams vying for 2 Frozen Four slots would be very exciting and you would feel you ae getting your moneys worth. If I'm going to travel I want more games not less.

[Alton]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

Who are you speaking for? lol. I don't go because I don't think it's worth my time and money as it currently is constituted. Looks like I'm not alone in that sentiment -- 2 regionals was a more attractive product than how they're doing it now. Going to 8 regionals is never going to happen.

I am speaking for the 30,000 fans of Michigan, UNO, Colorado College and Boston College who could have filled the seats in St. Louis twice over but didn't.

Why won't 8 regionals happen? I guess calling them "regionals" is confusing people--I am talking about a first round best-of-3 series at the higher seed to go from 16 teams to 8, followed by a quarterfinal round the next weekend to go from 8 teams to 4. If a change is made, this is the change that will be made.

An 8-team regional is logistically impossible (ice time for participating teams could not be accommodated). The travel is too much with 4 regionals, the answer is not taking the number down to 2.

[Khryx]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

The issue is the places bidding for the regionals and frozen four. It isn't just the NCAA deciding. The locations have to bid for them. If they don't bid the NCAA either has to go with one of the bidders or solicit one to bid (which I don't know if they are allowed to do). Are there times when optimal locations are bidding and are not chosen I am sure but I don't think this happens too much. I say this because of how often some of the regionals turn up at the same places. I think a lot of the problem here is the better locations aren't bidding.

As for the frozen four, I think the non-traditional sites have actually helped the exposure of college hockey but only slightly. The Big Ten conference is going to be another step, in the right or wrong direction still remains to be seen and I know this can be debated at length (see other boards for it, please don't get into this here).

As for changing the structure, I agree that one vital element that has to remain is keeping the off week for travel plans. The biggest expense / deterrent for fans attending is the cost (both time off and money). Travel/hotel tends to trump the tickets so having additional time is vital for attendance. I didn't attend a regional this year despite having attend 4 of the last 10. The reason? Expense and I don't think much of St. Louis as a city based upon my one trip there. It looks like others felt the same way.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

I am speaking for the 30,000 fans of Michigan, UNO, Colorado College and Boston College who could have filled the seats in St. Louis twice over but didn't.

Why won't 8 regionals happen? I guess calling them "regionals" is confusing people--I am talking about a first round best-of-3 series at the higher seed to go from 16 teams to 8, followed by a quarterfinal round the next weekend to go from 8 teams to 4. If a change is made, this is the change that will be made.

An 8-team regional is logistically impossible (ice time for participating teams could not be accommodated). The travel is too much with 4 regionals, the answer is not taking the number down to 2.

It is if you realize that a 16-team field is a failure.

edit:

insert mandatory "it isn't good like it used to be" "get off my lawn" old man grumble.

[Alton]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

Absolutely disagree with this whole premise. 2 sites with 8 teams is the way to go. More fans with less cost and you can keep it to major college hockey sites unlike St. Louis every year. The finals at each region with 4 teams vying for 2 Frozen Four slots would be very exciting and you would feel you ae getting your moneys worth. If I'm going to travel I want more games not less.

You are not a typical fan. I guarantee that nobody on this board is a typical fan. People who follow their team are following their team, and are indifferent or mildly interested in the other games. They don't want to buy a ticket to 6 games, spend 2-3 nights in a hotel room, and buy a plane ticket or drive 9 hours to watch their team lose game 1 when there isn't even a champion crowned at the end of the weekend. Picture this--
ST. LOUIS REGIONAL
Friday--Michigan v Nebraska-Omaha, Boston College v Colorado College
Saturday--North Dakota v Rensselaer, Denver v Western Michigan
Sunday--Friday winners, Saturday winners

Now...of the 7,000 or so Michigan fans who watched a majority of the team's games this year, how many do you think would have showed up to St. Louis for this format? I think the answer is obviously, "not as many the 2,000 or so Michigan fans that were there for the actual St. Louis Regional yesterday." How many of those Michigan fans show up for the games Saturday? Sorry, this doesn't fly. How does this format increase attendance? It reduces attendance! I would be much more interested, but everybody I know whose lives don't revolve around college hockey for 5 months a year would be much less interested.

[CLS]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

As the posts have already shown, coming up with an alternative that’s better than the current format is not as easy as it sounds. If the main problem with the current format is attendance, then I’m willing to put up with that (especially when it means that I, as a fan, can decide at the last minute that I want to go). IMO, home ice is more of an advantage than the higher seed deserves and/or should need, particularly given that the formula used to determine the seeding is so controversial. And even then, there might have logistical problems, such as multi-use facilities having conflicts with other events.

I think “atmosphere” a bigger deal for the fans than for the players. If the incentive of playing in a national tournament – even if they play in front of an empty rink – isn’t enough to get them motivated, then perhaps they don’t deserve to be there. Participants in most NCAA national championship tournaments don’t play in front of packed houses.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

How does this format increase attendance? It reduces attendance!

I'll concede your point for the sake of argument. But even if it reduces attendance from each school by 30%, doubling the number of participating schools will yield a net improvement in attendance, unless my math is horribly off.

Question regarding logistics: If you have two games each day, you can definitely get in ice time for the teams playing that day. Would it be that terrible for the teams not playing that day to get ice time at an alternate location?

edit:

Maybe you mean aggregate attendance. But going from 4 regional sites to 2 also saves a good chunk of change. I doubt it reduces profits.

[flyund]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

How about this go back to two regionals east and west rotate the regionals from the same places in hockey cities say Denver, the Twin Cities and Chicago in the west. and New York City, Providence and Boston in the East. All easy cities to get to with plenty of things to do between games.

[Alton]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

I think “atmosphere” a bigger deal for the fans than for the players. If the incentive of playing in a national tournament – even if they play in front of an empty rink – isn’t enough to get them motivated, then perhaps they don’t deserve to be there. Participants in most NCAA national championship tournaments don’t play in front of packed houses.

But participants in most NCAA national championship tournaments don't ever play in front of packed houses. Hockey players, on the other hand, do. Until the regionals, when they play in front of empty seats. Obviously, they don't have to. But we make them do it, in the name of "fairness." If we are interested in "fairness," why are so many of the regionals so close to participating teams? The fairest regionals would be in Atlanta, Miami, Dallas and Phoenix. Why aren't people lobbying for the regionals to be there? I assume the answer is obvious: we want people to go to the games. Unfortunately for "fairness," the people who go to the games are rooting for one team or the other.

Why not abandon the pretense that we are trying to be fair--we're not--and put the first round in the arenas of teams that have earned it? If they don't want to host, they don't have to put in a bid, but they should have first choice. Just like lacrosse, baseball, softball, volleyball, field hockey and soccer; it's the most common way that the NCAA runs a tournament.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: NCAA Change the Tourney

I think “atmosphere” a bigger deal for the fans than for the players. If the incentive of playing in a national tournament – even if they play in front of an empty rink – isn’t enough to get them motivated, then perhaps they don’t deserve to be there. Participants in most NCAA national championship tournaments don’t play in front of packed houses.

I think that's absolutely true. I'm looking at this from a fan's perspective. I used to never miss regionals. Since the move to 4 4-team regionals, I've attended exactly twice. It's just not that compelling.