Toggle sidebar

2024-25 NCAA Division I Hockey Thread

I thought Bucci was going to cry when Denver won . What a bunch of eastern homers that broadcast crew were .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dakota Sioux
The WMU Broncos are headed to the NCAA Championship game via a 3-2-2OT win over Denver.

The parity between teams in this years tourney is unreal. A razor thin margin in most all of the games and overtime being the norm. Too late for me to stay up for the delayed start to Penn St and BU. So as an improper Bostonian thru and thru... GO BU!
 
  • Like
Reactions: JMCx4
Rob said:
DU coach David Carle is another important voice that would like to see the top teams act as hosts instead of the current regional format.
Click to expand...

Transcription of Coach Carle's statements are rough, but I think I get his points. My first thought is how the subset of college hockey fans who traditionally "follow the game" by traveling to the Frozen Four tourney every year would feel if they weren't able to attend, due to smaller arena sizes or more tickets allocated to the host team on their home campus. Seems like the proponents of the change want to limit access by the "outsiders" who have grown the popularity of the game at large.
 
JMCx4 said:
Transcription of Coach Carle's statements are rough, but I think I get his points. My first thought is how the subset of college hockey fans who traditionally "follow the game" by traveling to the Frozen Four tourney every year would feel if they weren't able to attend, due to smaller arena sizes or more tickets allocated to the host team on their home campus. Seems like the proponents of the change want to limit access by the "outsiders" who have grown the popularity of the game at large.
Click to expand...

The group of fans who "follow the game" by traveling to the Frozen Four each year, if I had to bet, is less than 10% of the paid attendance. And it's not like tickets for the championship game are hard to come by on StubHub right now. There are thousands available below face value.

Your so-called "outsiders" haven't really grown the game. I'd argue that they don't even exist, which is why, by and large, regional sites are so poorly attended.

NCAA Division I hockey, save for the Big 10 and a couple others, is largely played by schools where hockey is the No. 1 athletic attraction. They are often remotely located, and regional sites aren't in places where people WANT to go for a weekend (no one says, '"Hey, can't wait to go to Bridgeport for the NCAA Regional!"). Campus sites would be better for tournament games through the Frozen Four business-wise and atmosphere-wise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JMCx4, Dakota Sioux and swoopster
I have to agree with Eddie on this. There aren't that many of those true NCAA hockey fans. I follow because I played there and I follow even if my school is nowhere to be seen. Coming from Boston its easy to root from somebody, pretty much anybody in the New England area.

Back on point. There has to be some changes made. I don't know if giving the top seeds home rink advantage is fair. First these games are played during the spring break period which can affect student body attendance.
Second, Many schools are located in remote areas away from any major population centers. Even in hockey hotbed cities like my Boston, has a hard time filling the Garden if a local team isn't involved.

Do we do like the football programs do, create "Bowl" cities in southern states? I don't think it would work. I don't have a solution, but feel for the players on Saturday night giving their all for a national championship in front of a less then filled rink.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JMCx4 and CrazyEddie20
CrazyEddie20 said:
The group of fans who "follow the game" by traveling to the Frozen Four each year, if I had to bet, is less than 10% of the paid attendance. And it's not like tickets for the championship game are hard to come by on StubHub right now. There are thousands available below face value.

Your so-called "outsiders" haven't really grown the game. I'd argue that they don't even exist, which is why, by and large, regional sites are so poorly attended.

NCAA Division I hockey, save for the Big 10 and a couple others, is largely played by schools where hockey is the No. 1 athletic attraction. They are often remotely located, and regional sites aren't in places where people WANT to go for a weekend (no one says, '"Hey, can't wait to go to Bridgeport for the NCAA Regional!"). Campus sites would be better for tournament games through the Frozen Four business-wise and atmosphere-wise.
Click to expand...
It's a no brainer and should of been at campus sites long ago
 
OK, hypothetically the West Regional game is at North Dakota, as in this instance they a 1-4 seed with home ice advantage. How good will the draw be for the non ND games, say a Umass vs UConn, and what if the final regional doesn't have ND playing in it?

What if a team is seeded 1-4 and has a 3500 seat arena? All food for thought.
 
swoopster said:
OK, hypothetically the West Regional game is at North Dakota, as in this instance they a 1-4 seed with home ice advantage. How good will the draw be for the non ND games, say a Umass vs UConn, and what if the final regional doesn't have ND playing in it?

What if a team is seeded 1-4 and has a 3500 seat arena? All food for thought.
Click to expand...
In the 80s, they did a two-game total goals series with the team scoring the most goals advancing in the first two rounds. This placed a premium on scoring early and often, though it's not really the best way to determine a winner.

If they did the first two rounds as best-of-three series at the campus site of the higher seed, with the road team getting the last change in game two, the NCAA could potential benefit significantly from the home crowds in each round and avoid sparsely attended games played between two teams from outside the local area.

You likely boost ticket sales in each of the first two rounds while avoiding telecasts showing thousands upon thousands of empty seats in arenas no one wants to travel to anyway, like Bridgeport, Manchester, Worcester, and Albany...
 
  • Like
Reactions: JMCx4
Changes you say?

How about capping ages of eligible players? Or making it so you have to enroll by a certain age to maintain eligibility?

A few teams have 24 and 25 year olds playing against 18 and 19 year olds.

Would also help to limit the amount of times you can transfer in a NCAA career. It should be that way for all NCAA sports, to be honest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: swoopster
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom