MafiaMan Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Schlossman article I've only been saying this for about 10 years...I'm sure the NCAA bigwigs probably won't even consider this option, though. I've always felt small schools get the short straw with a great regular season, only to have to venture to Boston, New Hampshire, St Paul, Milwaukee, and other larger cities with either a hostile environment or NO environment. College hockey would change for the better if changes were made to the NCAA tournament format. Does anyone have opinons strongly in favor of this or strongly opposed? I can recall some miserable regional tournaments, like the 1999 regional in Madison where a crowd of what looked like 250 people watched the Sioux lose to Boston College. Wisconsin didn't make the tournament that year and the old "Great Dane" was a morgue. Not to continue to pick on Wisconsin, but their 2006 NCAA champions won the title without having to leave their state border for a regional or the Frozen Four. Ranking the teams 1-16 makes sense, only if the 1-8 seeds can play at home. My two cents... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 ... only if the 1-8 seeds can play at home. If only ... hmmm ... what could possibly stop a higher seed from hosting an NCAA tournament home game ... hmmm ... 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 If only ... hmmm ... what could possibly stop a higher seed from hosting an NCAA tournament home game ... hmmm ... Sica sorry I went to give you a positive and hit the wrong button I will make it up to you sorry... I was thinking the same thing unless we win the Nickname fight with the NCAA this might cost the Sioux because more times than not they are going to be the host school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runninwiththedogs Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Does UND just have to cover everything using the logo or nickname? Or are they barred from hosting simply because of the nickname? What would they do in that situation (in hockey or football or whatever)? Leave it to UND to find another venue? Go to the other school's campus? Can I write something that is not a question? No? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Does UND just have to cover everything using the logo or nickname? Or are they barred from hosting simply because of the nickname? What would they do in that situation (in hockey or football or whatever)? Leave it to UND to find another venue? Go to the other school's campus? Can I write something that is not a question? No? If the NCAA insists on enforcing their policy it would mean UND can't host or wear our awesome Fighting Sioux logo... stay tuned... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 My opinion is that the four number one seeds should host the regionals in their buildings. They've earned it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Maybe this has been talked about somewhere and I missed it but what is going to happen to the WCHA Final Five when Minnesota and Wisconsin leave? Has there been any speculation? I wonder if the X would be as excited hosting it when Minnesota and Wisconsin aren't around? Of course we could host it...wait a minute... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmksioux Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Maybe this has been talked about somewhere and I missed it but what is going to happen to the WCHA Final Five when Minnesota and Wisconsin leave? Has there been any speculation? I wonder if the X would be as excited hosting it when Minnesota and Wisconsin aren't around? Of course we could host it...wait a minute... UND can host the Final Five as it is not an NCAA event... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 UND can host the Final Five as it is not an NCAA event... My fault, I keep forgetting that...conference yes...NCAA no. Hard to keep the sanctions straight for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runninwiththedogs Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Here's the problem I see: schools with smaller arenas could end up hosting. Let's say UMD is, like, the 9th seed. And Yale is the 8th seed. So we have to play Yale. A team whose arena has a capacity of 3500. They packed in 7800 fans at the stupid Bridgeport arena, and those were almost all Yale fans. Yale would lose by hosting at their stupid whale rink. I think it would be a good idea for the hosting teams to have an option to host either at their own arena or at an arena of their choosing within X number of miles, so they could "host" elsewhere to attract/accomodate more fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 I think it would be a good idea for the hosting teams to have an option to host either at their own arena or at an arena of their choosing ... Just stop there. So what if BC wants to host in Scottrade Center again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runninwiththedogs Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Just stop there. So what if BC wants to host in Scottrade Center again. Hey, why not? UMD's next regional will be hosted in Russia! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 Here's the problem I see: schools with smaller arenas could end up hosting. Let's say UMD is, like, the 9th seed. And Yale is the 8th seed. So we have to play Yale. A team whose arena has a capacity of 3500. They packed in 7800 fans at the stupid Bridgeport arena, and those were almost all Yale fans. Yale would lose by hosting at their stupid whale rink. I think it would be a good idea for the hosting teams to have an option to host either at their own arena or at an arena of their choosing within X number of miles, so they could "host" elsewhere to attract/accomodate more fans. Unless they gave the higher seed the choice of venue...not forcing them to play in their normal home arena, but allowing them to choose where they'd like to play. Then, Yale can still go to Bridgeport and pack in way more fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runninwiththedogs Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Unless they gave the higher seed the choice of venue...not forcing them to play in their normal home arena, but allowing them to choose where they'd like to play. Then, Yale can still go to Bridgeport and pack in way more fans. Right, that's exactly where I was going. The team would be able to choose if they wanted to move their playoff games, and then it would be up to them to secure that venue. Which, actually, could be really difficult. Hmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyPenn613 Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I agree with much of what has been mentioned above, but the biggest part of the article I think has been overlooked (mainly because it's something I have preached for years). My opinion falls in the minority in terms of most college sports fans, so feel free to take aim at me here. I'm no proponent of the BCS, but the college playoff systems are equally if not more so ridiculous than the system that college football uses. Is the BCS fair? Maybe not 100%, but is it more accurate when compared with March Madness or the Frozen Four? I'd argue yes. The biggest part of the article I see not mentioned here is the fact that it should be a best of three series. Obviously that's hard to do with 16 teams (Frozen Four) and impossible for 68 teams (March Madness). However, it's the only way to get a more accurate result. For those who follow college basketball, how often do the top two teams face off for a National Title? Cinderella stories are nice for the fans to follow, but in reality it's simply an undeserving team playing an overrated game. The Frozen Four is the same story, albeit it not nearly as bad as March Madness. If any of you had to name who you considered the 5 best college hockey teams in the nation two months ago, how many would have included Michigan or Duluth? Moreover, how many would have included both of team? This article points out that hockey is the longest major college sports season, and you could argue that any of the conference winners had the best season overall. Yet one bad game in the postseason negates everything that these teams did during the season. Why? The Sioux played a pathetic game against Michigan to get knocked out, but was that anything remotely close to the team that dominated the WCHA this year? Michigan picked up one goal early where Dell was screened and saw the puck late, and for that the season is over? UND plays in tougher conference and won almost 78% of their games this year. Michigan plays in a weaker of the two, and won only about 64% of their games, but one play dictated the results because the Frozen Four uses a simple one game knockout. The 'Any Given Day' monkier can continue to be overused, but in the end it's not accurate. The results will be biased here, and I apologize to the Duluth fan above in advance, but if UND and Duluth were to play 10 games against each other, who would any of you put your money on? Props to Duluth on the National Title, but does it really deserve to overshadow a UND team who won the WCHA season outright, won the Final Five (a very trivial tournament in my opinion), and beat Duluth two out of three times this year with the lone loss being in overtime? How is the team who finished 3rd in the WCHA season, and knocked out in the first round of the Final Five by a bottom feeder team this year suddenly deserve more recognition? I don't want to dive too much into numbers, but I don't think many would have argued at the end of the season that the Sioux weren't the best team in the nation. Nevertheless, they only won 78% of their games. Take that average, and the odds of winning 4 games in a row is about 37%. Those odds are higher than most teams, that doesn't change the fact that those odds are very low for a team that was considered to be outplaying everyone only a few weeks earlier. I'll shut up now, but the point is that a best of three would likely cure a lot of the problems by eliminating a lot of the one game upsets like Colorado College over Boston College or Michigan over North Dakota. Unfortunately, the more these tournaments expand, the far less likely anything like this will take place. Say what you will about the BCS (and I do believe there should be a playoff), but I don't recall a BCS season ending where no one thought either team deserved to be playing for a National Title. Fair? Maybe not. Better than the massive playoffs setup in other sports? That's up for debate. I apologize for the great length here. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runninwiththedogs Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 So you want a change in the playoffs because you don't like the end result? Ok. I want a pony. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxkid12 Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I agree with much of what has been mentioned above, but the biggest part of the article I think has been overlooked (mainly because it's something I have preached for years). My opinion falls in the minority in terms of most college sports fans, so feel free to take aim at me here. I'm no proponent of the BCS, but the college playoff systems are equally if not more so ridiculous than the system that college football uses. Is the BCS fair? Maybe not 100%, but is it more accurate when compared with March Madness or the Frozen Four? I'd argue yes. The biggest part of the article I see not mentioned here is the fact that it should be a best of three series. Obviously that's hard to do with 16 teams (Frozen Four) and impossible for 68 teams (March Madness). However, it's the only way to get a more accurate result. For those who follow college basketball, how often do the top two teams face off for a National Title? Cinderella stories are nice for the fans to follow, but in reality it's simply an undeserving team playing an overrated game. The Frozen Four is the same story, albeit it not nearly as bad as March Madness. If any of you had to name who you considered the 5 best college hockey teams in the nation two months ago, how many would have included Michigan or Duluth? Moreover, how many would have included both of team? This article points out that hockey is the longest major college sports season, and you could argue that any of the conference winners had the best season overall. Yet one bad game in the postseason negates everything that these teams did during the season. Why? The Sioux played a pathetic game against Michigan to get knocked out, but was that anything remotely close to the team that dominated the WCHA this year? Michigan picked up one goal early where Dell was screened and saw the puck late, and for that the season is over? UND plays in tougher conference and won almost 78% of their games this year. Michigan plays in a weaker of the two, and won only about 64% of their games, but one play dictated the results because the Frozen Four uses a simple one game knockout. The 'Any Given Day' monkier can continue to be overused, but in the end it's not accurate. The results will be biased here, and I apologize to the Duluth fan above in advance, but if UND and Duluth were to play 10 games against each other, who would any of you put your money on? Props to Duluth on the National Title, but does it really deserve to overshadow a UND team who won the WCHA season outright, won the Final Five (a very trivial tournament in my opinion), and beat Duluth two out of three times this year with the lone loss being in overtime? How is the team who finished 3rd in the WCHA season, and knocked out in the first round of the Final Five by a bottom feeder team this year suddenly deserve more recognition? I don't want to dive too much into numbers, but I don't think many would have argued at the end of the season that the Sioux weren't the best team in the nation. Nevertheless, they only won 78% of their games. Take that average, and the odds of winning 4 games in a row is about 37%. Those odds are higher than most teams, that doesn't change the fact that those odds are very low for a team that was considered to be outplaying everyone only a few weeks earlier. I'll shut up now, but the point is that a best of three would likely cure a lot of the problems by eliminating a lot of the one game upsets like Colorado College over Boston College or Michigan over North Dakota. Unfortunately, the more these tournaments expand, the far less likely anything like this will take place. Say what you will about the BCS (and I do believe there should be a playoff), but I don't recall a BCS season ending where no one thought either team deserved to be playing for a National Title. Fair? Maybe not. Better than the massive playoffs setup in other sports? That's up for debate. I apologize for the great length here. i think the point of this argument is that they want to reward teams that have a successful year and not punish them by putting them in a regional where there fan base will never show up. although i do like the way the tournament is set up now, it gives everybody the same chance to win a title. the team to win the national title shouldn't be the one who has won the regular season title and the tourny title its the one who shows up to play and executes at that moment. thats the great thing about tournaments like this, everyone is beatable and anyone can win. if we had it the way you are saying it would've been UND vs. YALE or UND vs. BC and that wouldnt be that interesting to me. also if you remember in 2001 when Miami and Nebraska play for the BCS title, Nebraska shouldn't have been playing for the title because they didn't even win the Big 12 (which was won by Colorado) and they also lost to Colorado but they jumped over Colorado because Nebraska lost one less game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggsy Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 So you want a change in the playoffs because you don't like the end result? Ok. I want a pony. Wow, this is one of the first times I agree with you. And not about the pony I don't think you can make the argument about punishing teams for making them play in certain venues because they are set well before the teams playing are decided. Also they are not being punished. They already got their reward and get to hang a banner. Get done with it and move on to the next fight. If you're already worn out from the previous fight to do well in the next one, that's no one's issue but the team's. I think the best way to do this is to move it back to campus sites. Then there will not be any more cavernous empty huge areans. The other option is to hold 2 super regionals instead of 4. The first round series is an okay idea but I think another round is more exciting thing to see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I wonder if the X would be as excited hosting it when Minnesota and Wisconsin aren't around? Yes, it will. This year was AWESOME!!! Last year without the Goofs was exciting as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runninwiththedogs Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Yes, it will. This year was AWESOME!!! Last year without the Goofs was exciting as well. I read what he said the same way you did at first, but I think the poster is wondering if the Xcel as an entity would still want to host it. I think yes. I'm not sure how it would work with the B6HC and their little tournament, as I assume that one would rotate between venues (Xcel, Joe, Kohl or Bradley Center, somewhere in OH, somewhere in PA), so the FF might have to move every five years or so (to Denver, to Grand Forks), but unless the Final Five was DU, CC, UAA, BSU and MTU (I am assuming they go back to the original format if they have 10 teams), then attendance would still be great. Really, as long as UND makes it it'll be fine! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggsy Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I read what he said the same way you did at first, but I think the poster is wondering if the Xcel as an entity would still want to host it. I think yes. I'm not sure how it would work with the B6HC and their little tournament, as I assume that one would rotate between venues (Xcel, Joe, Kohl or Bradley Center, somewhere in OH, somewhere in PA), so the FF might have to move every five years or so (to Denver, to Grand Forks), but unless the Final Five was DU, CC, UAA, BSU and MTU (I am assuming they go back to the original format if they have 10 teams), then attendance would still be great. Really, as long as UND makes it it'll be fine! I don't see why they wouldn't want to host. It has always been a great event for them and very well attended. Probably better then the class A hockey tournament in many cases. I wonder if going back to the original format would reinstate the 3rd place game? There have always been mixed feelings about that but IIRC there have been cases where winning that game was a clincher for an NCAA bid for teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I read what he said the same way you did at first, but I think the poster is wondering if the Xcel as an entity would still want to host it. I think yes. I'm not sure how it would work with the B6HC and their little tournament, as I assume that one would rotate between venues (Xcel, Joe, Kohl or Bradley Center, somewhere in OH, somewhere in PA), so the FF might have to move every five years or so (to Denver, to Grand Forks), but unless the Final Five was DU, CC, UAA, BSU and MTU (I am assuming they go back to the original format if they have 10 teams), then attendance would still be great. Really, as long as UND makes it it'll be fine! Oops! I agree with you you, it will work out. Their priority is not Gopher hockey; it's PROFIT!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.