Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
petey23

Far too early, but what the hell...Bracketology

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, franchise said:

I'd think the players would prefer a pro-UND crowd vs an arena with 200 people.

Agreed. If I were a BU player last year the victory would have felt that much sweeter with all the UND fans there.  The bottom line is that as long as Fargo/Sioux Falls regionals sell well UND will keep bidding and they will keep coming here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, streetsahead said:

Agreed. If I were a BU player last year the victory would have felt that much sweeter with all the UND fans there.  The bottom line is that as long as Fargo/Sioux Falls regionals sell well UND will keep bidding and they will keep coming here.

We were at the same hotel as the team and I had the pleasure of sharing a hot tub with them after the sting of that defeat.  They were all VERY complementary of the crowd and the atmosphere.  They thought it was awesome to play in front of that 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

How does the sweet feeling compare to the guilt of knowing they shouldn't have even been on the ice for the second OT because it was over in the first?

If my math is correct, I think big win in hostile crowd - guilt for BS offsides call on opposing goal = regular win. It felt like a regular win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jdub27 said:

I tend to agree with you.

REA to Xcel Energy Center: 325 miles. Estimated time: 4 hours, 43 minutes (assuming good traffic).
REA to Target Center: 314 miles. Estimated time: 4 hours, 33 minutes (assuming good traffic).
REA to Denny Sanford Premier Center: 316 miles. Estimated time: 4 hours, 28 minutes (there is no traffic).

 

On I-29 in SD the Speed Limit 80 miles an hour. Could be faster. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bale31 said:

I had a big long response to that earlier and then remembered that very important detail. It's not necessarily just about whether they can sell tickets. It's about the guaranteed money. It's a heck of a lot harder to justify those costs when you have a 2,000 arena rather than a 10,000 or even 4,000 seat arena. I'm certain any #1 seed COULD sell out their arena, but would it be enough to cover the costs of hosting the NCAA?

The NCAA definitely isn't strapped for cash.  Heck, they make over a BILLION dollars every year from the NCAA basketball tournament.  And that is just from CBS/Turner.  Doesn't even take into account ticket sales.  I get it they don't want to lose money on their events.  But I think that other sports tournaments (mainly basketball) make up for the loses in other sports ncaa tournaments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cberkas said:

If a team wants to complain that a lower seed is hosting a regional then that team can put in to host a regional and stop crying about it.

Nothing says that St. Could, Duluth, And Mankato can’t host a regional in Minneapolis-St. Paul.

Correct. and then UND would still get accused of home ice advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bale31 said:

I had a big long response to that earlier and then remembered that very important detail. It's not necessarily just about whether they can sell tickets. It's about the guaranteed money. It's a heck of a lot harder to justify those costs when you have a 2,000 arena rather than a 10,000 or even 4,000 seat arena. I'm certain any #1 seed COULD sell out their arena, but would it be enough to cover the costs of hosting the NCAA?

Sure you might have a team with an Arena with seating of around 2K, but there a several arenas much bigger that will offset that.  Looking at last year as an example.  Average Attendance per Regional was 4870.  If you take the average capacity of the #1 seeds that made the tournament it is 6472.  That is with Harvard that only have capacity of 2776.  I'd have to believe most years total attendance is going to be greater having #1 seeds host.  Besides the fact they are not paying travel expenses for the #1 seed to travel.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

The NCAA definitely isn't strapped for cash.  Heck, they make over a BILLION dollars every year from the NCAA basketball tournament.  And that is just from CBS/Turner.  Doesn't even take into account ticket sales.  I get it they don't want to lose money on their events.  But I think that other sports tournaments (mainly basketball) make up for the loses in other sports ncaa tournaments. 

I get that, but they make requirements of individual schools. The NCAA covers themselves and forces the schools to take the risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Big Green said:

Sure you might have a team with an Arena with seating of around 2K, but there a several arenas much bigger that will offset that.  Looking at last year as an example.  Average Attendance per Regional was 4870.  If you take the average capacity of the #1 seeds that made the tournament it is 6472.  That is with Harvard that only have capacity of 2776.  I'd have to believe most years total attendance is going to be greater having #1 seeds host.  Besides the fact they are not paying travel expenses for the #1 seed to travel.

 

Right....but you're thinking logically. The NCAA isn't going to take on that philosophy. They are going to look at individual schools and tell them they need to guarantee $XXX,XXX regardless of the size of the arena. That could potentially mean ratcheting up the cost of tickets or the school is going to have to cough up the money on their own.

I'm not saying I agree with that philosophy, that's just the philosophy that's historically been taken on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bale31 said:

Right....but you're thinking logically. The NCAA isn't going to take on that philosophy. They are going to look at individual schools and tell them they need to guarantee $XXX,XXX regardless of the size of the arena. That could potentially mean ratcheting up the cost of tickets or the school is going to have to cough up the money on their own.

I'm not saying I agree with that philosophy, that's just the philosophy that's historically been taken on. 

Look how the NCAA does it for FCS football.  A seeded team gets a bye and a guaranteed home playoff game.  If they keep winning and they are the higher seed, they are awarded the game.  No requirement to bid.  No demand from the NCAA saying they need to make a profit.  No matter if it is a 19000 seat Fargodome or 3300 seat Wagner College Stadium, that higher seed has earned the right to host.  Why can't it be like that for NCAA hockey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 90siouxfan said:

Just throwing this out there, but couldn't the NCAA set a minimum seating capacity to host, say 4K.  If your on campus rink does not qualify, then you are required to submit an alternative plan, perhaps partnering with a school in the same predicament?

Or if school doesn't have the capacity it could find arena that is bigger and open or it moves to the #2 seed.

Let's be honest, though.  Regionals won't change and it's not the NCAA.  It's a majority of the teams.  Didn't we try and force this at the coaches meeting and got shot down? East coast loves the set up they have now and many other teams that are used to not playing in front of fans would like to keep it that way.  It's an advantage for them.  Facts are we are talking about 1 regional with an issue that only has an impact on 4 of the teams (1 being beneficial).  All the east coast teams will take their chances on them not being sent that far to play.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

Look how the NCAA does it for FCS football.  A seeded team gets a bye and a guaranteed home playoff game.  If they keep winning and they are the higher seed, they are awarded the game.  No requirement to bid.  No demand from the NCAA saying they need to make a profit.  No matter if it is a 19000 seat Fargodome or 3300 seat Wagner College Stadium, that higher seed has earned the right to host.  Why can't it be like that for NCAA hockey?

 Pretty sure they have a guarantee for those games too. At least the did for MSU football a couple years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also go into the decision is the fact that not all teams have a rink that has 4 locker rooms that can host 4 college hockey teams, they have to have space for equipment, and other things they bring more than a typical youth team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, petey23 said:

Correct. and then UND would still get accused of home ice advantage.

well yes but we do have signs that say Ralph Engelstad Arena East (x) and West (magness) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×