So, from looking at the breakdown of regional attendances, there are a couple of different things that become apparent. First, the top attendees are almost all home teams at their home rinks. The second is the difference between attendance in the vaster west and the more compact east.
So what's the solution? Having some games played at campus sites has been brought up with some frequency, but there are pros and cons to the idea.
Could we potentially go back to the previous system of having a best of three series at campus sites? Unlikely. That would bring up two possibilities. One would turn the Frozen Four into the Elite Eight following the best-of-three, forcing a three-day single-elimination death march to a national championship. That would be difficult to coordinate, with eight different schools getting access to tickets, a quadruple-header on the first day of the competition... it would be a logistical nightmare.
The other option is to have two best-of-three rounds ahead of the Frozen Four, but there are issues with this as well. First, you're looking at a team ending up playing as many as eight contests AFTER the conference tournaments are over, twice the current maximum of four. Second, unless you push the Frozen Four back another week, now fully into mid-April, there's no bye week between the determining of the Frozen Four and the event. Part of the reason the Frozen Four draws well and many regionals don't is simply the timing - fans are more apt to travel long distances when they have more time to plan a trip, and two weeks is better than one.
No, the best option is to keep the tournament single-elimination. But what options do we have to improve on what already exists? Super regionals of eight teams each? Since no teams have byes as they did in the super regional days of the 12-team tournament, you're looking at one day with four games at the same location. As with the Elite Eight notion above, that's a logistical nightmare.
The best option, in my view, has got to be to award the #1 seeds the right to host each regional.
In the west, it seems that the only time crowds come out is if the home team is playing. This is frequently viewed as a negative because it's not always the #1 team that's hosting, and that can put a team that's produced better results over the course of the season behind the 8-ball. So why not just create a system whereby at least the hosts have earned that right through their play, rather than just fortunately being the pre-determined hosts?
Let's look at how last year's regionals might have turned out if this had been the plan in 2013.
1 Quinnipiac
2 Minnesota
3 UMass-Lowell
4 Notre Dame
5 Miami
6 Boston College
7 New Hampshire
8 North Dakota
9 Denver
10 Niagara
11 Minnesota State
12 Union
13 St. Cloud State
14 Wisconsin
15 Yale
-- Canisius
Hamden, CT (TD Bank Sports Center)
1. Quinnipiac
2. New Hampshire
3. Denver
4. Canisius
Minneapolis, MN (Mariucci Arena)
1. Minnesota
2. North Dakota
3. Niagara
4. Yale
Lowell, MA (Tsongas Arena)
1. UMass-Lowell
2. Boston College
3. Union
4. Wisconsin
South Bend, IN (Compton Family Ice Arena)
1. Notre Dame
2. Miami
3. Minnesota State
4. St. Cloud State
This is actually extremely close to what the brackets played out to be in real life. The West Regional in Grand Rapids is exactly the same as it was, only now it's in Minneapolis. The Midwest Regional is also exactly the same, only now it's in South Bend. The two eastern regionals are close, but they have swapped 2-3 matchups. Why? Well, because instead of #2 seed New Hampshire being required to be placed in Manchester as a host, they can instead slot into a more natural position in Hamden.
There's another consideration to ponder as well - Brown was the host in Providence, and nearly made the tournament by winning the ECAC championship, considering that they made the title game. If they'd made the tournament, not only would they have displaced Yale, they'd have been automatically slotted in Providence, requiring conference-mates Quinnipiac to be moved to Manchester and making a mess of the bracket. This is better - because Brown wouldn't have been hosting as a #4 seed in this scenario.
How would this tournament have differed? Well, for one, Yale, having just barely made it into the tournament after imploding in Atlantic City, would be forced to play Minnesota on their home turf instead of the sparse crowd that greeted them in Grand Rapids. Is that fair? It's certainly more fair than Denver's lot in the real tournament, since they got what was basically a home team in New Hampshire, all because they were the pre-selected hosts of that regional. At least in this scenario, Minnesota's earning their home ice.
Perhaps, in a bit of irony, Minnesota fans might have turned out to cheer on Niagara against North Dakota, the way North Dakota fans had cheered Holy Cross to the upset over the Gophers in 2006 in Grand Forks.
Would attendance be an issue, though? We can cross Minneapolis and South Bend off the concern list right away - those arenas are past and future regional spots already. How much better can we expect the crowds to be when we're guaranteed that the home team will be there?
What about Lowell and Hamden? Tsongas seats about 6,500 for hockey, while the TD Bank Sports Center sells out at 4,074. Both of those figures are lower than the actual crowd sizes in Providence and Manchester.
That's why there's no easy fix for the regional problem - because it's largely an east vs west issue. Eastern regionals at larger neutral sites don't frequently have a problem selling at least a decent number of tickets, and home rinks in the east are frequently smaller than their western counterparts.
But in balancing the desire to have important games played in front of large crowds, ticket sales, bracket integrity, and the single-elimination tournament, it's the only idea that really works. We can't guarantee that every year we'll have two of the #1 seeds from the east and two from the west.
Even then, you're not guaranteeing results, especially if the #4 team upsets the #1 team on their home ice. Two #1s were upset last year by #4s that ended up in the Frozen Four. If Yale still beats Minnesota at Mariucci, you'd still probably have enough North Dakota fans coming out the next night, but what about Miami-St. Cloud in South Bend? It's probably not well attended. But that's the chance you take in order to balance all those various factors.
What about small rinks hosting regionals? Union's doing pretty well this year, what if they were to be a #1 seed, forcing four teams to play for the right to go to the Frozen Four in that tiny dump in Schenectady? There's no easy solution, as we've already said. It's not like Union (and RPI, for that matter) can just have the Times Union Center on hold for that weekend, just in case. Quinnipiac and Yale can't just ask the Webster Bank Arena in Bridgeport to keep some dates open for them.
It's not perfect. But it's at least merit-based, more likely to produce full rinks, and hopefully, up the excitement for teams seeking to reach the Frozen Four.
Showing posts with label regionals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label regionals. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
Wednesday, January 1, 2014
Regional History
To understand the problem with the NCAA regionals, first we have to understand where they've come from So a little history lesson is in order.
Regionals are a relatively new concept in the history of the NCAA tournament. For the first 30 years or so, there were only four teams that qualified for the tournament in the first place, so no additional games were required to determine the Frozen Four once qualification was over. The concept was very simple during this time - two teams from the east, two teams from the west. Every year, no exceptions.
In the late 1970s, there was some experimentation with play-in games to determine the second semifinalist from one or both of the two regions - especially due to the advent of the CCHA and its automatic bid to the tournament - but it wasn't until the tournament expanded to eight teams for the 1980-81 season (and four teams from both regions) that the pre-Frozen Four element of the national tournament became a real thing.
From 1981 through 1987, the quarterfinal round consisted of two-game series of inter-regional matchups, played at the higher seed. The team that scored the most goals in the two games advanced to the Frozen Four, with overtime taking place in the second game if the two teams had scored the same number of goals. RPI hosted two first round series during this time period, infamously falling to North Dakota at the Field House in 1984 and defeating Lake Superior State the next year on the way to winning the national championship.
The tournament expanded again to 12 teams in the 1987-88 season, which required the awarding of byes in order to get down to four teams for the Frozen Four. Initially, the top four seeds earned a free pass to the quarterfinal round, with the remaining eight teams competing in the first round - still a two-game, most goals series hosted by the higher seed. The winners would then travel the following weekend to the four highest seeds, and compete in yet another two-game, most goals series, with the winners advancing to the Frozen Four.
That lengthened the tournament by an entire week, pushing the Frozen Four into the month of April for the first time. The following season, and for the next three years between 1989 and 1991, the two-game series that had previously comprised the first and quarterfinal rounds became best of three series, turning the national tournament into a battle of attrition. For instance, Boston University in 1990 played seven NCAA games before losing in the semifinals at the Frozen Four.
So for 30 years, there wasn't much beyond the Frozen Four, and for another 10, series were played at the higher seeds on campus. In 1992, the first neutral-site regionals took place ahead of the Frozen Four in Albany. Six teams were sent to the East Regional in Providence, while six were sent to the West Regional in Detroit. The top two teams in each regional were given a bye to the second round of the regional, while the other four played each other in the first round, the winners advancing to take on the top seeds the next day.
That's pretty much how things played out for the next 10 years. However, there was a perceived problem in the west, as a number of West Regionals were hosted in campus rinks - in 1994 (Michigan State), 1995 (Wisconsin), 1996 (Michigan State), 1998 (Michigan), 1999 (Wisconsin), 2000 (Minnesota), and 2002 (Michigan). Each of those seasons, with the exception of 1996, 1999, and 2000, saw the home team playing on its own ice sheet. In 1998 and 2002, Michigan teams that hadn't earned a bye to the second round won twice on their home ice and earned a trip to the Frozen Four. (The East didn't have the same problem, as the Regional basically alternated between Albany and Worcester for most of the 1990s.)
With the expansion of the tournament to 16 teams in time for the 2002-03 season, the NCAA basically had two options. They could either continue the East/West regionals, seeding eight teams in each regional and eliminating the bye, or expand to four regional sites per season, seeding four teams per site playing three games to determine a regional champion that advances to the Frozen Four. They chose the latter, and since 2003, the tournament has proceeded in that fashion.
The problem? Practically since the very beginning, most regionals have been practically devoid of spectators, with some major exceptions coming only when a notable host team is present.
The record for attendance at a regional final came in 2006 at the West Regional as North Dakota took on Holy Cross in... Grand Forks, North Dakota. For the geographically challenged, that's where UND's campus is, and the game took place on their home ice surface at Ralph Engelstad Arena. 11,492 took in the Fighting Sioux's victory over a Holy Cross team fresh off the biggest upset in the recent history of the tournament. One has to wonder how many of the 11,153 at that game were Sioux fans cheering fervently against their hated rivals from Minnesota.
In fact, five of the top six best attended regional finals involved a team either playing on its home ice surface or within 10 miles of its campus. All of these occurred in the west, and involved one or both of Minnesota, North Dakota, or Wisconsin. The one exception was the 2007 West Regional in Denver, which drew 11,217 for a game between Minnesota and North Dakota in a regional that also included Michigan, played in an easy-to-travel-to city with teams that have large followings.
But these are the exceptions and not the rule. The median regional final attendance is somewhere around 6,250, and in most cases, special circumstances - the right teams in the right place - are necessary to drive that figure up.
Take the 2010 East Regional in Albany, for instance. It featured Denver as the top seed, Cornell as the second seed, New Hampshire as the third seed, and RIT as the fourth seed. It was seen as a bit of a compromise situation for Denver to be in Albany, since they would have to fly to whatever region they went to, and the other three teams, from relatively nearby schools, would be able to draw some fans, especially considering that those three schools have solid fanbase sizes.
The end result? For starters, Denver played an ostensible road game in front of an almost entirely pro-RIT crowd and lost a close one, 2-1. But the total attendance? Between DU-RIT and Cornell-UNH, the total listed attendance was 4,073. Surely not all of those people were at both games, played in a building that holds over 14,000 for hockey, creating a pretty dead atmosphere. Only 3,737 were on hand to watch RIT earn a trip to the Frozen Four the next night. By comparison, last year's RPI-Union game in the same building drew a shade under 6,000, but the upper bowl was closed and tickets were included in both schools' season ticket package.
Which draws us back to the west. In the Midwest and West regionals, outside of the aforementioned 2007 West Regional, no regional final has ever cleared the median average without having a team with significant local interest involved, and with the exception of the 2008 West Regional in Colorado Springs, none have ever even cleared 5,000.
Tonight, we'll post the attendance figures from each of the 43 regional finals that we have figures for - the 2011 West Regional in St. Louis was unreported. That was almost certainly due to the paltry crowd that was in attendance for a game between Michigan and Colorado College in a building that seats over 19,000. Draw your own conclusions on what makes for worthwhile attendance.
Regionals are a relatively new concept in the history of the NCAA tournament. For the first 30 years or so, there were only four teams that qualified for the tournament in the first place, so no additional games were required to determine the Frozen Four once qualification was over. The concept was very simple during this time - two teams from the east, two teams from the west. Every year, no exceptions.
In the late 1970s, there was some experimentation with play-in games to determine the second semifinalist from one or both of the two regions - especially due to the advent of the CCHA and its automatic bid to the tournament - but it wasn't until the tournament expanded to eight teams for the 1980-81 season (and four teams from both regions) that the pre-Frozen Four element of the national tournament became a real thing.
From 1981 through 1987, the quarterfinal round consisted of two-game series of inter-regional matchups, played at the higher seed. The team that scored the most goals in the two games advanced to the Frozen Four, with overtime taking place in the second game if the two teams had scored the same number of goals. RPI hosted two first round series during this time period, infamously falling to North Dakota at the Field House in 1984 and defeating Lake Superior State the next year on the way to winning the national championship.
The tournament expanded again to 12 teams in the 1987-88 season, which required the awarding of byes in order to get down to four teams for the Frozen Four. Initially, the top four seeds earned a free pass to the quarterfinal round, with the remaining eight teams competing in the first round - still a two-game, most goals series hosted by the higher seed. The winners would then travel the following weekend to the four highest seeds, and compete in yet another two-game, most goals series, with the winners advancing to the Frozen Four.
That lengthened the tournament by an entire week, pushing the Frozen Four into the month of April for the first time. The following season, and for the next three years between 1989 and 1991, the two-game series that had previously comprised the first and quarterfinal rounds became best of three series, turning the national tournament into a battle of attrition. For instance, Boston University in 1990 played seven NCAA games before losing in the semifinals at the Frozen Four.
So for 30 years, there wasn't much beyond the Frozen Four, and for another 10, series were played at the higher seeds on campus. In 1992, the first neutral-site regionals took place ahead of the Frozen Four in Albany. Six teams were sent to the East Regional in Providence, while six were sent to the West Regional in Detroit. The top two teams in each regional were given a bye to the second round of the regional, while the other four played each other in the first round, the winners advancing to take on the top seeds the next day.
That's pretty much how things played out for the next 10 years. However, there was a perceived problem in the west, as a number of West Regionals were hosted in campus rinks - in 1994 (Michigan State), 1995 (Wisconsin), 1996 (Michigan State), 1998 (Michigan), 1999 (Wisconsin), 2000 (Minnesota), and 2002 (Michigan). Each of those seasons, with the exception of 1996, 1999, and 2000, saw the home team playing on its own ice sheet. In 1998 and 2002, Michigan teams that hadn't earned a bye to the second round won twice on their home ice and earned a trip to the Frozen Four. (The East didn't have the same problem, as the Regional basically alternated between Albany and Worcester for most of the 1990s.)
With the expansion of the tournament to 16 teams in time for the 2002-03 season, the NCAA basically had two options. They could either continue the East/West regionals, seeding eight teams in each regional and eliminating the bye, or expand to four regional sites per season, seeding four teams per site playing three games to determine a regional champion that advances to the Frozen Four. They chose the latter, and since 2003, the tournament has proceeded in that fashion.
The problem? Practically since the very beginning, most regionals have been practically devoid of spectators, with some major exceptions coming only when a notable host team is present.
The record for attendance at a regional final came in 2006 at the West Regional as North Dakota took on Holy Cross in... Grand Forks, North Dakota. For the geographically challenged, that's where UND's campus is, and the game took place on their home ice surface at Ralph Engelstad Arena. 11,492 took in the Fighting Sioux's victory over a Holy Cross team fresh off the biggest upset in the recent history of the tournament. One has to wonder how many of the 11,153 at that game were Sioux fans cheering fervently against their hated rivals from Minnesota.
In fact, five of the top six best attended regional finals involved a team either playing on its home ice surface or within 10 miles of its campus. All of these occurred in the west, and involved one or both of Minnesota, North Dakota, or Wisconsin. The one exception was the 2007 West Regional in Denver, which drew 11,217 for a game between Minnesota and North Dakota in a regional that also included Michigan, played in an easy-to-travel-to city with teams that have large followings.
But these are the exceptions and not the rule. The median regional final attendance is somewhere around 6,250, and in most cases, special circumstances - the right teams in the right place - are necessary to drive that figure up.
Take the 2010 East Regional in Albany, for instance. It featured Denver as the top seed, Cornell as the second seed, New Hampshire as the third seed, and RIT as the fourth seed. It was seen as a bit of a compromise situation for Denver to be in Albany, since they would have to fly to whatever region they went to, and the other three teams, from relatively nearby schools, would be able to draw some fans, especially considering that those three schools have solid fanbase sizes.
The end result? For starters, Denver played an ostensible road game in front of an almost entirely pro-RIT crowd and lost a close one, 2-1. But the total attendance? Between DU-RIT and Cornell-UNH, the total listed attendance was 4,073. Surely not all of those people were at both games, played in a building that holds over 14,000 for hockey, creating a pretty dead atmosphere. Only 3,737 were on hand to watch RIT earn a trip to the Frozen Four the next night. By comparison, last year's RPI-Union game in the same building drew a shade under 6,000, but the upper bowl was closed and tickets were included in both schools' season ticket package.
Which draws us back to the west. In the Midwest and West regionals, outside of the aforementioned 2007 West Regional, no regional final has ever cleared the median average without having a team with significant local interest involved, and with the exception of the 2008 West Regional in Colorado Springs, none have ever even cleared 5,000.
Tonight, we'll post the attendance figures from each of the 43 regional finals that we have figures for - the 2011 West Regional in St. Louis was unreported. That was almost certainly due to the paltry crowd that was in attendance for a game between Michigan and Colorado College in a building that seats over 19,000. Draw your own conclusions on what makes for worthwhile attendance.
Monday, December 30, 2013
Regionally Speaking
Popular opinion had it that North Dakota, the perennial NCAA tournament program which is more often than not a solid part of the national championship discussion, was probably going to beat a Yale team that had backed into the tournament after a dreadful ECAC tournament showing in Atlantic City. Even though the Bulldogs had just upset one of the tournament favorites, Minnesota, luck was supposed to run out on Cinderella the next night.
Through 50 minutes, it was looking good for the favorites. They hadn't been able to unleash a great many shots on Jeff Malcolm, but a Corban Knight goal from the first period was still holding up for a 1-0 lead. Clarke Saunders had been magnificent in turning away shot after shot, accumulating 25 in the first two periods alone.
Then, Yale took momentum and wouldn't let go, shocking the college hockey world in the process. A goal with 7:35 left tied it. Then a power play tally about two and a half minutes later put the Bulldogs in front. Another two and a half minutes later, it was 3-1, and 90 seconds after that, an empty netter put the seal on a 4-1 victory that ended North Dakota's season and put Yale, for the first time in several decades, in the Frozen Four on their way to their first national championship.
With a comeback on that magnitude, you think you'd probably hear a pin-drop in the arena, especially given North Dakota's fanbase, well-known as one of the largest and best traveling in the country. Truth be told, one probably could have heard a pin-drop in Van Andel Arena in Grand Rapids, Michigan that day. The problem is, you could probably have heard it at the opening puck drop. And during Knight's goal. And during the second period as well.
Only 1,918 people were in attendance for one of the biggest victories in the very, very long history of Yale hockey, sitting in a building capable of seating close to 11,000.
Earlier in the year, a reported sellout crowd of 3,500 had watched the Bulldogs win an exhibition game over the Russian Red Stars in a 10-2 laugher. Yale punched its ticket to the Frozen Four in front of fewer fans than had seen their poor play in Atlantic City, a location much maligned in the ECAC for its inability to draw fans. They'd played in front of fewer fans on only four occasions before during the year - in two games at the Ivy Shootout to start their season at Brown, neither game coming against a home team that draws notoriously poor crowds to start with, in a road game at Holy Cross, and then in a road game at... Brown. Even their game at similarly light-crowd-drawing Colgate managed 1,962.
The game set the record for the lowest official attendance at an NCAA regional final since the tournament expanded to 16 teams in 2003. The very next day, in Toledo, Ohio, St. Cloud State ended a drought for its long-suffering fans by earning its first ever Frozen Four berth, taking down the ostensible local team in Miami before only 2,460 fans. If not for the poor turnout in Grand Rapids the previous day, that would have been the record for smallest regional final crowd. The original record? Set in 2012 in Green Bay, Wisconsin between Ferris State and Cornell at 3,102.
RPI took on Denver in the middle of a snowstorm a couple of weeks ago, and managed an attendance of 2,703, which was bigger than two NCAA tournament regional finals last season.
Six of the 10 smallest regional final crowds ever have come in the last four seasons, and if the attendance figures for the 2011 West Regional final in St. Louis had been released, it is thought that it would also rank in that bottom 10. None of these crowds eclipsed 4,000 attendees, which means RPI/Union games in Albany and Troy during the regular season have regularly been beating out games that determine Frozen Four participants. So while regional attendance has never been earth shattering - only three finals have ever cleared 10,000 - of late it has certainly appeared to be getting worse.
Over the next four days, we'll be taking a look at regionals past, present, and future, and discuss just what can be done about major NCAA games frequently being played in front of practically no one.
Through 50 minutes, it was looking good for the favorites. They hadn't been able to unleash a great many shots on Jeff Malcolm, but a Corban Knight goal from the first period was still holding up for a 1-0 lead. Clarke Saunders had been magnificent in turning away shot after shot, accumulating 25 in the first two periods alone.
Then, Yale took momentum and wouldn't let go, shocking the college hockey world in the process. A goal with 7:35 left tied it. Then a power play tally about two and a half minutes later put the Bulldogs in front. Another two and a half minutes later, it was 3-1, and 90 seconds after that, an empty netter put the seal on a 4-1 victory that ended North Dakota's season and put Yale, for the first time in several decades, in the Frozen Four on their way to their first national championship.
With a comeback on that magnitude, you think you'd probably hear a pin-drop in the arena, especially given North Dakota's fanbase, well-known as one of the largest and best traveling in the country. Truth be told, one probably could have heard a pin-drop in Van Andel Arena in Grand Rapids, Michigan that day. The problem is, you could probably have heard it at the opening puck drop. And during Knight's goal. And during the second period as well.
Only 1,918 people were in attendance for one of the biggest victories in the very, very long history of Yale hockey, sitting in a building capable of seating close to 11,000.
Earlier in the year, a reported sellout crowd of 3,500 had watched the Bulldogs win an exhibition game over the Russian Red Stars in a 10-2 laugher. Yale punched its ticket to the Frozen Four in front of fewer fans than had seen their poor play in Atlantic City, a location much maligned in the ECAC for its inability to draw fans. They'd played in front of fewer fans on only four occasions before during the year - in two games at the Ivy Shootout to start their season at Brown, neither game coming against a home team that draws notoriously poor crowds to start with, in a road game at Holy Cross, and then in a road game at... Brown. Even their game at similarly light-crowd-drawing Colgate managed 1,962.
The game set the record for the lowest official attendance at an NCAA regional final since the tournament expanded to 16 teams in 2003. The very next day, in Toledo, Ohio, St. Cloud State ended a drought for its long-suffering fans by earning its first ever Frozen Four berth, taking down the ostensible local team in Miami before only 2,460 fans. If not for the poor turnout in Grand Rapids the previous day, that would have been the record for smallest regional final crowd. The original record? Set in 2012 in Green Bay, Wisconsin between Ferris State and Cornell at 3,102.
RPI took on Denver in the middle of a snowstorm a couple of weeks ago, and managed an attendance of 2,703, which was bigger than two NCAA tournament regional finals last season.
Six of the 10 smallest regional final crowds ever have come in the last four seasons, and if the attendance figures for the 2011 West Regional final in St. Louis had been released, it is thought that it would also rank in that bottom 10. None of these crowds eclipsed 4,000 attendees, which means RPI/Union games in Albany and Troy during the regular season have regularly been beating out games that determine Frozen Four participants. So while regional attendance has never been earth shattering - only three finals have ever cleared 10,000 - of late it has certainly appeared to be getting worse.
Over the next four days, we'll be taking a look at regionals past, present, and future, and discuss just what can be done about major NCAA games frequently being played in front of practically no one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
