How well do people think a regional at Mullett would sell?
I don't think it would. I don't think people would get on a plane on short notice for a regional. It's a great spring break destination if you know in advance you would be there. With 4-5 days notice, I think it would be as empty as other regionals not in the Boston area.
How well do people think a regional at Mullett would sell?
I don't think it would. I don't think people would get on a plane on short notice for a regional. It's a great spring break destination if you know in advance you would be there. With 4-5 days notice, I think it would be as empty as other regionals not in the Boston area.
Regionals are always during spring break (for some). Minnesota schools are always in the tournament. I think it would do pretty well.
I wonder if the number of snowbirds would help attendance at Mullett? Assuming the NCAA would even place a regional on campus.
Another warm weather western option could be the Palm Springs area, perfect for USC or UCLA to host! ? ? There is a
Coachella Valley AHL team (Seattle) with a new arena this year and I believe they've had a good response selling tickets, including season tickets to the various golf communities who then resell to their members.
Of we could have an LA Kings poor attendance situation from their early years when when owner Jack Kent Cooke opined maybe the reason so many Northeasterners and Canadians moved to Southern California was that "they hated hockey."? ?
“When your best friend is the son of God, you get tired of losing every argument.”
― Christopher Moore, Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think it would work because it is a home arena for an NCAA team, not allowed.How well do people think a regional at Mullett would sell?
I don't think it would. I don't think people would get on a plane on short notice for a regional. It's a great spring break destination if you know in advance you would be there. With 4-5 days notice, I think it would be as empty as other regionals not in the Boston area.
Regionals are always during spring break (for some). Minnesota schools are always in the tournament. I think it would do pretty well.
I think it's just ridiculous that they instituted a rule, however many years ago, that it can't be held at an on-campus, or home facility. it pretty much takes most of the western arena's out of the deal since most of the appropriate sized facilities are on campus. Certainly Mankato or Duluth could host in their facilities if it weren't for that stupid rule.
Hell, even the arena the Iowa Wild plays at holds 17K, and a building that large will never put in a bid. Look what happened when the X hosted a regional without any local teams - there were about 500 people in attendance.
The Eastern coaches always get ultra-salty when they have to fly out west and play in someone's home arena.
B1G refs... corrupt, or just incompetent?
The Eastern coaches always get ultra-salty when they have to fly out west and play in someone's home arena.
I believe it was Cornell's coach who whined about having to play Minnesota at Mariucci after we beat them in OT back in 2005. If I'd had his home address, I would have sent him a crying towel.
Tact is the ability to step on a man's toes without messing up the shine on his shoes - Harry S Truman
The Eastern coaches always get ultra-salty when they have to fly out west and play in someone's home arena.
I believe it was Cornell's coach who whined about having to play Minnesota at Mariucci after we beat them in OT back in 2005. If I'd had his home address, I would have sent him a crying towel.
He's a whiny putz who would complain if his team had to play across the street from their home rink.
“When your best friend is the son of God, you get tired of losing every argument.”
― Christopher Moore, Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Need to have West Regional somewhere other than North Dakota. I can't believe how many times it's been there. I thought the NCAA hates the hostile and abusive? Why keep rewarding them as a host?
Where in Minnesota can this be held? Ridder?
Guessing Ridder wouldn’t meet the seating requirements (ie number of seats). Thought there was a rule about that but maybe misremembering.
Must seat a minimum of 5,000. Ridder is 3,400
That's the problem. With no home sites there really aren't any rinks in MN that would work. I still think you could host one in Des Moines but there must be some reason why nobody tries.
Until then, North Dakota will gladly keep hosting in Fargo.
What other NCAA sports only play the postseason on neutral sites? Men’s basketball?
Must seat a minimum of 5,000. Ridder is 3,400
And it is also on campus.
Seriously, finding an arena to host an NCAA regional is like Goldilocks. Not too big, not too small, not on campus, but close enough to sell tickets.
There have to be more hockey rinks in the state of Minnesota than the next two or three states combined and we don't have a rink that can host a regional? That's ridiculous!
The few Jr hockey arenas in IA seat around 3500. And Wisconsin doesn't care to host one even though they have Dane County Coliseum 2 miles from campus. So it bounces between Sioux Falls to Fargo.
I believe that's the rest of the list, yes.What other NCAA sports only play the postseason on neutral sites? Men’s basketball?
B1G refs... corrupt, or just incompetent?
So Xcel or DECC, that's it? The Little Ralph is an awesome arena but it's practically in North Dakota. Oh well, on to Fargo.
They need to put some ice back in the St. Paul coliseum ?
LaCrosse has an arena that holds about 6K for hockey. Just need someone to put in a bid to host there. And a regional can't be at the DECC/Amsoil arena since it is UMD's home barn.
And Xcel and a Target Center are too big.
Because Eastern coaches prefer to have empty arenas than having someone get to play at home, yes.I believe that's the rest of the list, yes.What other NCAA sports only play the postseason on neutral sites? Men’s basketball?
Did they put that rule into place because they felt it was too much of a home advantage? Classic case of trying to solve one problem but creating 3 new ones.
B1G refs... corrupt, or just incompetent?
Paul Caponigri nails it on the head and he has referred to it on the podcast. Too many coaches want what's best for their team and not the league. And I think it goes not just for the BIG, but the NCAA's as well. Coaches need to start think about what's best for college hockey and not for their team. It sucks, but it's like the cycle of life and everything will cycle back to your turn and your advantage.
Keep your stick on the ice...
Must seat a minimum of 5,000. Ridder is 3,400
And it is also on campus.
Seriously, finding an arena to host an NCAA regional is like Goldilocks. Not too big, not too small, not on campus, but close enough to sell tickets.
There have to be more hockey rinks in the state of Minnesota than the next two or three states combined and we don't have a rink that can host a regional? That's ridiculous!
The few Jr hockey arenas in IA seat around 3500. And Wisconsin doesn't care to host one even though they have Dane County Coliseum 2 miles from campus. So it bounces between Sioux Falls to Fargo.
Sheels Arena in Fargo holds 6,000. It is the largest of the mid-level USHL arenas (3,000-6,000 range), most hold 2,400-4,500.
Then there is a big jump in capacity to the next few, but all would be good options I imagine.
Resch Center in Green Bay holds around 10,000
Tyson Event Center in Sioux City holds around 10,000 6,400
Denny Sanford Center in Sioux Falls holds around 10,000 (Brand new, state of the art facility)
Wells Fargo Center (AHL) in Des Moines holds 16,000... Too big.
There was a push awhile back to upgrade the Mayo Civic Center in Rochester to hold 6,200 or so and have ice for hockey. But I think that is probably dead without a fulltime tenant (like a USHL team or something).
EDIT: Sorry the 10k for Tyson Event Center is "full capacity", it holds about 6,400 for Hockey.
FWIW...just successfully "transferred" hard tix by calling Scheels Arena box office. Can have somebody else pick them up. Doesn't really help with selling them, but can at least have a local pick them up before Thursday. See ya Thursday
FWIW...just successfully "transferred" hard tix by calling Scheels Arena box office. Can have somebody else pick them up. Doesn't really help with selling them, but can at least have a local pick them up before Thursday. See ya Thursday
Sounds like a complete cluster...
Do not like how this board is run?
Get your own board!
♃
The Eastern coaches always get ultra-salty when they have to fly out west and play in someone's home arena.
I believe it was Cornell's coach who whined about having to play Minnesota at Mariucci after we beat them in OT back in 2005. If I'd had his home address, I would have sent him a crying towel.
You really want to pretend half our fanbase wouldn't whine if we had to play UND at the Reichsmark in the NCAAs? Or if we had to play at BUs arena if we were playing them? If so I have a bridge to sell you...
(hell people were whining about maybe playing UND in Fargo)
We like to pretend we are above all that...but we aren't. We complain as loud and as often as everyone else. (you ever notice every year we end up in the "tough" bracket while a team we hate gets the "easy path") And btw we are right and so are they. It sucks that attendance for these events is so hit or miss that we need to do it this way. No option is good, home ice regionals are inherently unfair and even home state regionals can be rather unfair. (the Gophers have benefited from Xcel Regionals more than once and lets not forget Wisconsin's last title where they never left Wisconsin) Unfortunately this is the way it has to be done and to keep costs down for the schools it makes sense to keep as many teams as close to home as possible. This also helps the venues make a little extra money as well. Plus, it makes the matchups compelling. Minnesota vs. Harvard means nothing. Minnesota vs. either Mankato Retirement Home or SCCC has a lot of local intrigue. (Michigan and Penn State in Allentown is likely to get more interest as well because those fanbases have familiarity)
It is what it is. There is no conspiracy, no one is holding the Gophers or the Minnesota Teams or the Big Ten down. The way this is set up just makes the most sense especially since there is not much a break in "bracket integrity". And the same people saying Michigan has it easy and will cake walk through (cause you know, Michigan is known for dominating every game they play which is why they havent won a title this century) would be talking about how unfair the Gophers have it if they had the same regional in Allentown because "X team is a tough out" and "Penn State gives us fits" and so on and so on. (and of course Michigan would have the easy path because Mankato and SCCC dont have the talent level to play with them) It is all about personal perception which is why everyone thinks the refs are screwing them and the announcers hate them.
Need to have West Regional somewhere other than North Dakota. I can't believe how many times it's been there. I thought the NCAA hates the hostile and abusive? Why keep rewarding them as a host?
Where in Minnesota can this be held? Ridder?
UND changed the name so the NCAA stopped hating them. And if you want someone else to host tell someone to bid. Plenty of schools in the West and no one even really tries. No one is stopping other schools from hosting.
And if you want someone else to host tell someone to bid. Plenty of schools in the West and no one even really tries. No one is stopping other schools from hosting.
Do not like how this board is run?
Get your own board!
♃
I think that's mostly due to lack of non-home rinks in reasonable proximity for them to even try to bid at. What rink in Minnesota could the Gophers bid with?
B1G refs... corrupt, or just incompetent?
I think that's mostly due to lack of non-home rinks in reasonable proximity for them to even try to bid at. What rink in Minnesota could the Gophers bid with?
Why does it have to be in Minnesota? Aren't there USHL rinks in surrounding states? Iowa? SoDak? Wisconsin?
There are plenty of rinks in Michigan...what about rinks in Colorado? How about Illinois?
This is ridiculous. There are plenty of options out there...the fact is the money is crap which is why no one does it.
There are plenty of options out there...the fact is the money is crap which is why no one does it.
This is the biggest reason. Schools bidding have a minimum guarantee they have to meet. Most schools refuse to put up the money for that guarantee.
Do not like how this board is run?
Get your own board!
♃
I am tired of the neutral site regionals altogether. I would rather return to the best-of-three with home sites they used to do. We have the weekends to do it for the first two rounds, then let the Frozen Four stay the Frozen Four.
I know neutral sites are the coaches' choice, but on-campus have to be the fans choice.
(Let's just stay away from the 2-game, total goal scenarios)
The Eastern coaches always get ultra-salty when they have to fly out west and play in someone's home arena.
I believe it was Cornell's coach who whined about having to play Minnesota at Mariucci after we beat them in OT back in 2005. If I'd had his home address, I would have sent him a crying towel.
You really want to pretend half our fanbase wouldn't whine if we had to play UND at the Reichsmark in the NCAAs? Or if we had to play at BUs arena if we were playing them? If so I have a bridge to sell you...
(hell people were whining about maybe playing UND in Fargo)
We like to pretend we are above all that...but we aren't. We complain as loud and as often as everyone else. (you ever notice every year we end up in the "tough" bracket while a team we hate gets the "easy path") And btw we are right and so are they. It sucks that attendance for these events is so hit or miss that we need to do it this way. No option is good, home ice regionals are inherently unfair and even home state regionals can be rather unfair. (the Gophers have benefited from Xcel Regionals more than once and lets not forget Wisconsin's last title where they never left Wisconsin) Unfortunately this is the way it has to be done and to keep costs down for the schools it makes sense to keep as many teams as close to home as possible. This also helps the venues make a little extra money as well. Plus, it makes the matchups compelling. Minnesota vs. Harvard means nothing. Minnesota vs. either Mankato Retirement Home or SCCC has a lot of local intrigue. (Michigan and Penn State in Allentown is likely to get more interest as well because those fanbases have familiarity)
It is what it is. There is no conspiracy, no one is holding the Gophers or the Minnesota Teams or the Big Ten down. The way this is set up just makes the most sense especially since there is not much a break in "bracket integrity". And the same people saying Michigan has it easy and will cake walk through (cause you know, Michigan is known for dominating every game they play which is why they havent won a title this century) would be talking about how unfair the Gophers have it if they had the same regional in Allentown because "X team is a tough out" and "Penn State gives us fits" and so on and so on. (and of course Michigan would have the easy path because Mankato and SCCC dont have the talent level to play with them) It is all about personal perception which is why everyone thinks the refs are screwing them and the announcers hate them.
In my opinion, there is a very big difference between having to play in an opposing team’s rink as a lower seed and having to play in front of a largely hostile crowd as a higher seed at a neutral venue. Especially as the #1 overall.
If we had to play at the Ralph in the first round because we drew them as a lower seed, I wouldn’t even think of complaining. They would have earned that advantage.
Hard to compare that to being seeded in a pre sold out Fargo regional for the Gophers or Allentown for Michigan. Both Minnesota and Michigan earned their #1 seeds, yet will have most of the crowd against them both games.
IMO - It’s just silly not to do on campus for the first round at higher seed. Have two regional sites for the second round and take out the week off before the Frozen Four.
If only the Coliseum still had ice…
Edit: someone already said this oops
So is it just eastern schools willing to take a loss on hosting? Because most eastern regionals of late have struggled to have solid attendance.
If only the Coliseum still had ice…
Edit: someone already said this oops
The Coliseum wasn't the best place for hockey. Though it would be good for hosting crowds. Had to seat well over 4,000.
Keep your stick on the ice...
What rink in Minnesota could the Gophers bid with?
Aren't there USHL rinks in surrounding states? Iowa? SoDak? Wisconsin?
There are plenty of rinks in Michigan...what about rinks in Colorado? How about Illinois?
This is ridiculous. There are plenty of options out there...the fact is the money is crap which is why no one does it.
And you answered Steve's question. None.
Is there a nice arena in Alaska we could host at?
how about International Falls MN?
Aloha!
The figure I’ve seen is 5700 though idk what modifications they did after taking out the ice.If only the Coliseum still had ice…
Edit: someone already said this oops
The Coliseum wasn't the best place for hockey. Though it would be good for hosting crowds. Had to seat well over 4,000.
And yeah I get why having home team host regionals might be difficult because of travel arrangements and everything else but they already to it for the big ten tourney so surely it’s not impossible.
And to Steve’s point it is pretty ridic that MN has as many rinks as it does but somehow none qualify for every reason under the sun. Sure other states could technically do it but that’s not really the point, if regionals struggle to draw attendance then it’s kinda pointless to require 5000 seats especially when the venues like the X (I assume this would be the same in other states) won’t bid because they’d rather host a concert or what have you. Yes college hockey is niche we all know that and yet the NCAA insists on setting a floor on number of seats required.
When Mariucci hosted regionals previously it was a predetermined site prior to the season, correct? I don’t think it was a higher seed type of thing.
So those years we played in the Mariucci regional we earned the right to play there. It wasn’t handed to us for making the NCAAs.
(Please correct me if I’m wrong).
I believe you are correct.When Mariucci hosted regionals previously it was a predetermined site prior to the season, correct? I don’t think it was a higher seed type of thing.
So those years we played in the Mariucci regional we earned the right to play there. It wasn’t handed to us for making the NCAAs.(Please correct me if I’m wrong).
The Eastern coaches always get ultra-salty when they have to fly out west and play in someone's home arena.
I believe it was Cornell's coach who whined about having to play Minnesota at Mariucci after we beat them in OT back in 2005. If I'd had his home address, I would have sent him a crying towel.
You really want to pretend half our fanbase wouldn't whine if we had to play UND at the Reichsmark in the NCAAs? Or if we had to play at BUs arena if we were playing them? If so I have a bridge to sell you...
(hell people were whining about maybe playing UND in Fargo)
We like to pretend we are above all that...but we aren't. We complain as loud and as often as everyone else. (you ever notice every year we end up in the "tough" bracket while a team we hate gets the "easy path") And btw we are right and so are they. It sucks that attendance for these events is so hit or miss that we need to do it this way. No option is good, home ice regionals are inherently unfair and even home state regionals can be rather unfair. (the Gophers have benefited from Xcel Regionals more than once and lets not forget Wisconsin's last title where they never left Wisconsin) Unfortunately this is the way it has to be done and to keep costs down for the schools it makes sense to keep as many teams as close to home as possible. This also helps the venues make a little extra money as well. Plus, it makes the matchups compelling. Minnesota vs. Harvard means nothing. Minnesota vs. either Mankato Retirement Home or SCCC has a lot of local intrigue. (Michigan and Penn State in Allentown is likely to get more interest as well because those fanbases have familiarity)
It is what it is. There is no conspiracy, no one is holding the Gophers or the Minnesota Teams or the Big Ten down. The way this is set up just makes the most sense especially since there is not much a break in "bracket integrity". And the same people saying Michigan has it easy and will cake walk through (cause you know, Michigan is known for dominating every game they play which is why they havent won a title this century) would be talking about how unfair the Gophers have it if they had the same regional in Allentown because "X team is a tough out" and "Penn State gives us fits" and so on and so on. (and of course Michigan would have the easy path because Mankato and SCCC dont have the talent level to play with them) It is all about personal perception which is why everyone thinks the refs are screwing them and the announcers hate them.
In my opinion, there is a very big difference between having to play in an opposing team’s rink as a lower seed and having to play in front of a largely hostile crowd as a higher seed at a neutral venue. Especially as the #1 overall.
If we had to play at the Ralph in the first round because we drew them as a lower seed, I wouldn’t even think of complaining. They would have earned that advantage.
Hard to compare that to being seeded in a pre sold out Fargo regional for the Gophers or Allentown for Michigan. Both Minnesota and Michigan earned their #1 seeds, yet will have most of the crowd against them both games.
IMO - It’s just silly not to do on campus for the first round at higher seed. Have two regional sites for the second round and take out the week off before the Frozen Four.
I don't necessarily disagree, it is probably the best of all the bad options. I just get why coaches wouldn't want that and why the NCAA wouldn't either. They are different reasons mind you but both are valid. Coaches want as much fairness as possible and the NCAA would never want to see say Minnesota playing in an arena that holds 12 people.
I think going back to home regionals is the way to go and even though it could be a logistical mess I would say have the #1 seeds host. I know all the arguments why that could be a pain...but it makes the most sense and takes away the only real argument against home ice regionals. (lower seeds being rewarded for hosting) Neutral sites only work if you have enough fans to fill them and college hockey just doesn't.
In the here and now though this is the system and we are stuck with it. Everyone is dealing with the same challenges so we can either deal with it or bid ourselves.
When Mariucci hosted regionals previously it was a predetermined site prior to the season, correct? I don’t think it was a higher seed type of thing.
So those years we played in the Mariucci regional we earned the right to play there. It wasn’t handed to us for making the NCAAs.(Please correct me if I’m wrong).
When Mariucci hosted that was pre-determined. The Gophers bid before the season (cant remember how many years in advance) and as long as they made the NCAAs they would be there.
In my time as a fan the sites were always pre-determined and the host always was placed there. Same as now only it didn't have to be a neutral site.
The figure I’ve seen is 5700 though idk what modifications they did after taking out the ice.If only the Coliseum still had ice…
Edit: someone already said this oops
The Coliseum wasn't the best place for hockey. Though it would be good for hosting crowds. Had to seat well over 4,000.
And yeah I get why having home team host regionals might be difficult because of travel arrangements and everything else but they already to it for the big ten tourney so surely it’s not impossible.
And to Steve’s point it is pretty ridic that MN has as many rinks as it does but somehow none qualify for every reason under the sun. Sure other states could technically do it but that’s not really the point, if regionals struggle to draw attendance then it’s kinda pointless to require 5000 seats especially when the venues like the X (I assume this would be the same in other states) won’t bid because they’d rather host a concert or what have you. Yes college hockey is niche we all know that and yet the NCAA insists on setting a floor on number of seats required.
i'd be all for smaller rinks that are packed to the gills. and personally I think the hosting at the 1 seed (for each regional) makes the most sense. They earned the right. If you don't like it, win your games. Yeah it will suck the years you finish as a 2, but you deserve to have an advantage when you are one of the best teams. From a logistical standpoint, I can't see how extending the season one week in the hosting rinks ends up being much of an issue. Teams travel to wherever they end up at the drop of a hat anyway, so the argument of travel doesn't make sense to me either.
Unless the NCAA (or whoever) mandated it, right now, it's bids (much like F4), correct? That's half the problem.
When you tell somebody somethin', it depends on what part of the United States you're standin' in... as to just how dumb you are.
The figure I’ve seen is 5700 though idk what modifications they did after taking out the ice.If only the Coliseum still had ice…
Edit: someone already said this oops
The Coliseum wasn't the best place for hockey. Though it would be good for hosting crowds. Had to seat well over 4,000.
And yeah I get why having home team host regionals might be difficult because of travel arrangements and everything else but they already to it for the big ten tourney so surely it’s not impossible.
And to Steve’s point it is pretty ridic that MN has as many rinks as it does but somehow none qualify for every reason under the sun. Sure other states could technically do it but that’s not really the point, if regionals struggle to draw attendance then it’s kinda pointless to require 5000 seats especially when the venues like the X (I assume this would be the same in other states) won’t bid because they’d rather host a concert or what have you. Yes college hockey is niche we all know that and yet the NCAA insists on setting a floor on number of seats required.
i'd be all for smaller rinks that are packed to the gills. and personally I think the hosting at the 1 seed (for each regional) makes the most sense. They earned the right. If you don't like it, win your games. Yeah it will suck the years you finish as a 2, but you deserve to have an advantage when you are one of the best teams. From a logistical standpoint, I can't see how extending the season one week in the hosting rinks ends up being much of an issue. Teams travel to wherever they end up at the drop of a hat anyway, so the argument of travel doesn't make sense to me either.
I doubt you would of it was your money on the line...
The figure I’ve seen is 5700 though idk what modifications they did after taking out the ice.If only the Coliseum still had ice…
Edit: someone already said this oops
The Coliseum wasn't the best place for hockey. Though it would be good for hosting crowds. Had to seat well over 4,000.
And yeah I get why having home team host regionals might be difficult because of travel arrangements and everything else but they already to it for the big ten tourney so surely it’s not impossible.
And to Steve’s point it is pretty ridic that MN has as many rinks as it does but somehow none qualify for every reason under the sun. Sure other states could technically do it but that’s not really the point, if regionals struggle to draw attendance then it’s kinda pointless to require 5000 seats especially when the venues like the X (I assume this would be the same in other states) won’t bid because they’d rather host a concert or what have you. Yes college hockey is niche we all know that and yet the NCAA insists on setting a floor on number of seats required.
i'd be all for smaller rinks that are packed to the gills. and personally I think the hosting at the 1 seed (for each regional) makes the most sense. They earned the right. If you don't like it, win your games. Yeah it will suck the years you finish as a 2, but you deserve to have an advantage when you are one of the best teams. From a logistical standpoint, I can't see how extending the season one week in the hosting rinks ends up being much of an issue. Teams travel to wherever they end up at the drop of a hat anyway, so the argument of travel doesn't make sense to me either.
I doubt you would of it was your money on the line...
the obligatory cost is 100K. If you could host it on campus (the essence of my point and advocating for smaller arenas, much like is the case for most colleges), you would easily make that. I also think your odds of selling out/increasing demand go up with the smaller venue. Why the NCAA picked this size, I don't really know but would be interested to hear if you happen to.
Way back in the day ('81-'88) when the tourney was 8 teams, the first round was at the higher seeds home rink and it was a 2 game total goal situation. Made for some crazy qualifying games... Then it went to 12 teams, hosted at the highest seed for the first two rounds. For 1992, the NCAA thought they could make money out of the deal and had 6 team East/West regionals. That lasted until 2003 when they moved to the current format.
I don't remember the timing when they NCAA made the rule about home barns or on campus sights, but it was within the last 10 years.