Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 254

Thread: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

  1. #61
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,922

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    Quote Originally Posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
    For the life of me I can't imagine why anyone bids on an NCAA regional. Anyone who has ever read the host manual knows why I think that. You have to guarantee the NCAA a minimum amount of money and if you don't sell enough tickets or merchandise to do so, you pay out of your own pocket. After you reach the minimum guarantee, it isn't like you get to keep the rest. No, you have to share most of the revenue you generated with the NCAA. After you give them their cut of left over revenue after you met the minimum, hopefully you have enough left over to pay all of the expenses. If not, your loss. If by some miracle you actually then still have some money left over, the sharing ain't over yet. You STILL have to share some of it with the NCAA.
    But yet every regional does have a host school so why not my school doing it? As I said, Ohio State can take a financial hit better than nearly any other university in the country and the benefit? Pretty obvious to me, if we make the tourney we can't get dumped wherever the NCAA committee pleases.
    And if fans don't come to support their teams there then shame on them.

  2. #62
    Never Forget!
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    3,534

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    A measure to shrink the tournament and move back to super regionals or on-campus sites will not be approved. The coaches want those extra at-large berths too much to give that up. I might be misremembering but I believe one of the stipulations of moving to a 16 team tournament was automatic qualification for smaller conferences like the AHA and CHA. If the tournament shrinks not only are (3) at-large spots gone but the AHA would lose the qualifier. Without a chance to ever compete in the national tournament how many of those schools will decide a better investment would be a lax, volleyball, crew or some other sport that costs a fraction of ice hockey?

    I think another stipulation was going to 4 neutral site regionals. The NCAA always wants to promote growth (of revenue at least) and it sees that as neutral regionals. If the NCAA could generate more money by moving to super regionals or going back to campus the NCAA would promote this. That the NCAA hasn't is a good indication it sees no problem with the status quo.

  3. #63
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,922

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    Quote Originally Posted by ticapnews View Post
    I think another stipulation was going to 4 neutral site regionals. The NCAA always wants to promote growth (of revenue at least) and it sees that as neutral regionals. If the NCAA could generate more money by moving to super regionals or going back to campus the NCAA would promote this. That the NCAA hasn't is a good indication it sees no problem with the status quo.
    Given what the NCAA charges at the regional's for just a tee shirt it's very easy to believe their interest is in money more than anything else.

  4. #64

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    20904/13677/07677/07621
    Posts
    38,768
    Quote Originally Posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post
    If Ohio State was to host they could handle a financial loss better than most schools. They have more money than the Pope but usually spend it on the wrong things.
    So does the Pope.

  5. #65

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    20904/13677/07677/07621
    Posts
    38,768
    Quote Originally Posted by pgb-ohio View Post
    I'm sympathetic to this. My favorite campus sites plan is single elimination all the way through.
    OK. On campus of the top 4 seeds? It's a neutral site except for the game(s) v the host squad (similar to women's BB)

  6. #66
    \../ \../
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Patiently awaiting changes I know are not coming.
    Posts
    2,593

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    Quote Originally Posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post
    But yet every regional does have a host school so why not my school doing it? As I said, Ohio State can take a financial hit better than nearly any other university in the country and the benefit? Pretty obvious to me, if we make the tourney we can't get dumped wherever the NCAA committee pleases.
    And if fans don't come to support their teams there then shame on them.
    If OSU bid to host and there were no other "viable" sites bidding, I suppose they could host one on-campus. Of course nothing would prevent them from hosting using Nationwide Arena and obviously they'd have a home crowd advantage there too. It's also a nicer hockey venue. I bet if they build up a good run of nationally contending teams -- which I'm betting they do as long as the current coach is there -- you will see OSU hosting at some point.

  7. #67
    \../ \../
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Patiently awaiting changes I know are not coming.
    Posts
    2,593

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    Quote Originally Posted by pgb-ohio View Post
    I appreciate that you took the time to dig out the official numbers. But as you know, there are various ways to count attendance.

    It's not unreasonable to have multiple numbers, and to publicly report only the most favorable one. After all, businesses routinely have one set of books for shareholders, and another for the IRS.

    Of course the number that really matters to the NCAA is cash in the till. Which may or may not explain the reported attendance.

    Reported attendance generally reflects PR considerations. In normal cases, the reported number has some basis in reality, perhaps with a little padding. But there have been cases in the sports world where unused, complimentary tickets are counted in the announced total -- resulting in a number that strains credibility. There's also no doubt in my mind that some reported attendance totals are just outright lies.

    Don't know exactly how this applies to the hockey regionals; I'm not claiming inside knowledge. But I will say that when it comes to the Toledo Regional, I absolutely, positively believe WeAreNDHockey's account.
    I always like to relate the following if anyone does not believe that attendance figures are often a figment of someone's imagination. My cousin is a newspaper sportswriter. Once while covering a mid-major men's college basketball game played before a crowd that may have numbered 200 people, (in a modern building that seats 11,500 officially for basketball) he overheard a conversation between the school's Sports Information Director and a subordinate. The subordinate asked what the attendance was for the official boxscore. The SID, seeing the reality was as pitiful as it appeared to be, said "just make something up, say there were around 1500."

  8. #68
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Marquette, MI
    Posts
    6,687
    Quote Originally Posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
    If OSU bid to host and there were no other "viable" sites bidding, I suppose they could host one on-campus. Of course nothing would prevent them from hosting using Nationwide Arena and obviously they'd have a home crowd advantage there too. It's also a nicer hockey venue. I bet if they build up a good run of nationally contending teams -- which I'm betting they do as long as the current coach is there -- you will see OSU hosting at some point.
    The availability of the Schottenstein is the big question.

  9. #69
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Marquette, MI
    Posts
    6,687
    Quote Originally Posted by ticapnews View Post
    A measure to shrink the tournament and move back to super regionals or on-campus sites will not be approved. The coaches want those extra at-large berths too much to give that up. I might be misremembering but I believe one of the stipulations of moving to a 16 team tournament was automatic qualification for smaller conferences like the AHA and CHA. If the tournament shrinks not only are (3) at-large spots gone but the AHA would lose the qualifier. Without a chance to ever compete in the national tournament how many of those schools will decide a better investment would be a lax, volleyball, crew or some other sport that costs a fraction of ice hockey?

    I think another stipulation was going to 4 neutral site regionals. The NCAA always wants to promote growth (of revenue at least) and it sees that as neutral regionals. If the NCAA could generate more money by moving to super regionals or going back to campus the NCAA would promote this. That the NCAA hasn't is a good indication it sees no problem with the status quo.
    Six team Super Regionals are also a logistical nightmare than not many venues can handle.

  10. #70
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Niskayuna, N.Y.
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by davyd83 View Post
    Six team Super Regionals are also a logistical nightmare than not many venues can handle.
    I'm confused by this. What cant they handle? Its 4 teams each day. I'm all for an 8 team super-regional with 2 games x 3 days. Cost for 2 arenas vs 4 has to be lower and guaranteed higher attendance. Only need 2 tv crews. Missing the logistical issues.

  11. #71
    cetihcra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Denver, Colorado -- VT awhile back
    Posts
    2,592

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    Quote Originally Posted by johnk View Post
    I'm confused by this. What cant they handle? Its 4 teams each day. I'm all for an 8 team super-regional with 2 games x 3 days. Cost for 2 arenas vs 4 has to be lower and guaranteed higher attendance. Only need 2 tv crews. Missing the logistical issues.
    NCAA requires off-day practices and game-day morning skates for all teams. One of many logistical issues.

    r

  12. #72
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Niskayuna, N.Y.
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by cetihcra View Post
    NCAA requires off-day practices and game-day morning skates for all teams. One of many logistical issues.

    r
    Game times of 5 and 830. Have a 2nd local facility for teams not playing that day. Next?
    Last edited by johnk; 03-26-2019 at 06:02 PM.

  13. #73
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    The Rafters of The Schott & The OSU Ice Rink
    Posts
    6,199

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    Quote Originally Posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
    I always like to relate the following if anyone does not believe that attendance figures are often a figment of someone's imagination. My cousin is a newspaper sportswriter. Once while covering a mid-major men's college basketball game played before a crowd that may have numbered 200 people, (in a modern building that seats 11,500 officially for basketball) he overheard a conversation between the school's Sports Information Director and a subordinate. The subordinate asked what the attendance was for the official boxscore. The SID, seeing the reality was as pitiful as it appeared to be, said "just make something up, say there were around 1500."
    My reference to unused comp tickets being included in the attendance total is also a "fly on the wall" story. I've had conversations with people from a number of campuses, and have come to believe this sort of thing is pretty common.

    How might that apply to the regionals? Suppose lots of tickets are genuinely distributed to corporate friends & sponsors, but go mostly unused. If that's what's going on, there's some integrity involved because sponsor $$ are actually in the till. Trouble is, no-shows do nothing to enhance the event itself. (Note that this one is pure guesswork.)

    Quote Originally Posted by davyd83 View Post
    The availability of the Schottenstein is the big question.
    I can understand why someone from out-of-state would think that, based on the comments on this board. But it really isn't true in the case of the regionals. The much maligned high school tournaments take over the Schott for the three weekends that correspond to the hockey conference tournaments. The high school stuff is over now. With a year or more of lead time and guaranteed games, availability isn't the issue. Keep reading...

    Quote Originally Posted by WeAreNDHockey View Post
    If OSU bid to host and there were no other "viable" sites bidding, I suppose they could host one on-campus. Of course nothing would prevent them from hosting using Nationwide Arena and obviously they'd have a home crowd advantage there too. It's also a nicer hockey venue. I bet if they build up a good run of nationally contending teams -- which I'm betting they do as long as the current coach is there -- you will see OSU hosting at some point.
    The believable scenario, for me, starts with getting the long awaited hockey-only building. From there, the NCAA grants a "new building waiver" and allows a campus site. Depending on who you talk to, the hoped-for venue capacity "should" range from 5,000 - 10,000. Then let's say the feared turnout level materializes, and we've got 1,800 fans in the building. (Meaning we get unlucky, and the Buckeyes don't qualify that year.) That's a problem, both financially and for the program's reputation. But it would fit in with the results from elsewhere in the Midwest. We could weather that storm.

    But what about 1,800 fans in an 18,000 seat NHL venue? You're talking about a worst-ever regional, in a world where the bar is already extremely low. A horrific embarrassment for the University. Much worse than just losing some cash. I want no part of it.

    Hockeybuckeye is one of the very best OSU fans. I do feel a little badly about disagreeing with him on this. But the arena options currently available in Central Ohio are either too big or too small. I also highly doubt that our fanbase would travel well enough to be a "host team crowd" in another part of Ohio. A significant percentage of our crowd consists of young families & others looking for affordable sports entertainment -- not opportunities to travel.

    Bottom Line? With the current NCAA regional format and facility constraints, OSU would be playing against a hopelessly stacked deck. I say the smart money stays on the sidelines.
    Last edited by pgb-ohio; 03-26-2019 at 06:23 PM.

  14. #74
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Marquette, MI
    Posts
    6,687
    Quote Originally Posted by johnk View Post
    I'm confused by this. What cant they handle? Its 4 teams each day. I'm all for an 8 team super-regional with 2 games x 3 days. Cost for 2 arenas vs 4 has to be lower and guaranteed higher attendance. Only need 2 tv crews. Missing the logistical issues.
    Teams arrive a day ahead. They all need dressing rooms, equipment storage and training facilities. You need six full spaces to begin. Or do you prefer teams pack up all their equipment each day? You also need practice time for each team each day. What would the ice be like after a minimum of four sessions per day? I’ve been in more than 75 rinks from NHL to peewee. Not many are well equipped for 6 teams at once.

  15. #75
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,922

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    Quote Originally Posted by pgb-ohio View Post
    Hockeybuckeye is one of the very best OSU fans. I do feel a little badly about disagreeing with him on this. But the arena options currently available in Central Ohio are either too big or too small. I also highly doubt that our fanbase would travel well enough to be a "host team crowd" in another part of Ohio. A significant percentage of our crowd consists of young families & others looking for affordable sports entertainment -- not opportunities to travel.
    Why thank you Mr.PGB, I feel humbled by the compliment.
    Perhaps for those who want that old time hockey feel we could host at the Fairground Coliseum as long as those attending don't mind feeling that they're in a Slapshot sequel?

  16. #76
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Weston
    Posts
    588
    Quote Originally Posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post
    Why thank you Mr.PGB, I feel humbled by the compliment.
    Perhaps for those who want that old time hockey feel we could host at the Fairground Coliseum as long as those attending don't mind feeling that they're in a Slapshot sequel?
    Only if the players are allowed to fight in the tunnel.

  17. #77
    Drunkard
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Promised Land
    Posts
    17,553

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    Actual averages for regional attendance since we went to 16 teams for the 2003 tourney:

    City Games Avg. Attendance
    Albany, NY 15 4613
    Allentown, PA 3 6702
    Amherst, MA 3 3562
    Ann Arbor, MI 3 6792
    Bridgeport, CT 15 6623
    Cincinnati, OH 9 4837
    Colorado Springs, CO 6 5881
    Denver, CO 3 11183
    Fargo, ND 6 5265
    Fort Wayne, IN 3 3823
    Grand Forks, ND 3 11266
    Grand Rapids, MI 15 4404
    Green Bay, WI 9 5161
    Madison, WI 3 9917
    Manchester, NH 21 7360
    Minneapolis, MN 9 8764
    Providence, RI 12 6425
    Rochester, NY 3 3765
    Sioux Falls, SD 3 8000
    South Bend, IN 3 3982
    st. Louis, MO 3 5024
    St. Paul, MN 12 7625
    Toledo, OH 3 2812
    Worcester, MA 27 7090
    Grand Total 192 6330
    Last edited by ExileOnDaytonStreet; 03-26-2019 at 10:00 PM.

  18. #78
    Drunkard
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Promised Land
    Posts
    17,553

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    I think ultimately travel is the only major factor for these things.

    Having SCSU in St Paul doesn’t make or break numbers, but having the Gophers there sure does. See also: Wisconsin in Green Bay, Michigan in Grand Rapids, etc.

  19. #79
    Drunkard
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Promised Land
    Posts
    17,553

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    https://twitter.com/exileondaytonst/...203857920?s=21

    The last true home rink host was Notre Dame in 2015, and Minnesota in 2009 before that. (A few visits to St Paul and Providence are pretty close to home for some, but are technically neutral ice by the most boring of definitions)

    See a trend on that front?

    Not saying “higher seed hosts” is the answer (it isn’t), but letting Wisconsin or NoDak or DU/CC host in their own rinks would help with attendance.

    … if they make the tourney…

  20. #80
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    The Rafters of The Schott & The OSU Ice Rink
    Posts
    6,199

    Re: Annual thread in which the absurdity of the current regional system is discussed

    Quote Originally Posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post
    ...Perhaps for those who want that old time hockey feel we could host at the Fairground Coliseum as long as those attending don't mind feeling that they're in a Slapshot sequel?
    Quote Originally Posted by pdt1081 View Post
    Only if the players are allowed to fight in the tunnel.
    Probably not the right optics for the NCAA.

    I've actually thought about the Coliseum. Ironically it's about the right the size. But even if the powers-that-be were initially deked by the newfangled name -- The Ohio Expo Center -- the inspection just wouldn't go well.

    Do they even make ice in that facility these days? Ever? It's been years since I've been to the building for anything other than the State Fair. Granted, it still puts on a good horse show.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •