College Hockey News Adam Wodon changing tune on NCAA Regionals Format?
As our own stephenrjking pointed out (took umbrage to) in a diary recently (https://mgoblog.com/diaries/against-college-hockey-news-move-hockey-regionals-home-sites), long time writer for CHN Adam Wodon continued to advocate for keeping the existing NCAA hockey Regionals playoff format... the one which keeps having major playoff games at far flung "neutral sites" with virtually no attendance (helping the small, mostly east coast schools disproportionately).
The issue has been generating increasing blowback and Adam has now felt the need to revise his stance... somewhat.
Maybe we'll finally see some movement on this. But probably not considering who's running it.
Link: https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2024/02/09_Between-the-Lines-NCAA-Regional.php
February 9th, 2024 at 1:02 PM ^
Translation: More than a few people chewed his ass into bubble gum and now he’s backtracking.
February 9th, 2024 at 1:12 PM ^
However, since then, I've come to learn that the groundswell this time around is real. I venture to say that we might be past 50 percent of coaches now believing the Regionals should go back to campus sites. I've talked to a bunch of coaches in the last two weeks who previously were adamently in favor of neutral sites, who are now in the other column or on the fence.
If that's true then we might actually see this happen sometime soon.
Adam seems like he's holding onto this just to be the contrarian. Seems like his two arguments at this point are:
- What if your home rink is too small in NCAA rules that do not exist
- Seeding based off Pairwise alone is bad.
Argument #1 seems like it exists solely so he had another paragraph to write as that's a nothing worry. #2 is fine. Have a committee if you want. Do it like every other D1 sport. I don't care
February 9th, 2024 at 1:18 PM ^
2) Seeding based off Pairwise alone is bad.
Is that "eastern teams should always be seeded in the east"? Hockey gods forbid they should have to travel more than a couple hours.
February 9th, 2024 at 1:21 PM ^
He takes a very defensive posture in his writing. And his logic is quite weak. Who is this guy and why does his opinion matter?
February 9th, 2024 at 1:24 PM ^
Must be related to Freddie P. Soft. Managing editor of the College Hockey News site.
February 9th, 2024 at 1:29 PM ^
Well, Adam has written for CHN for a long time and has been a good reporter from what I recall. I don't know why he's dying on this hill. Maybe the cities of Bridgeport, Manchester, and Worchester are holding him at gunpoint...
February 9th, 2024 at 2:39 PM ^
I honestly wouldn't mind that. If one of the big issues people have with home sites for the early rounds has been the advantage it gives the higher seed, then the tournament can be structured to ensure distances between opponents in the early rounds is minimized, giving opposing fans more of an opportunity to travel. Just seed geographic regions rather than the country as a whole. This simplest way to do this is the east/west divide. Select the top 8 teams from the B1G, NCHC, and CCHA; and the top 8 teams from HEA, AHC, and ECAC. You can throw independents in there as well if you assign them a geographic region ahead of time. Then have two separate 8-team brackets to get down to four total teams, and still do the frozen four at a neutral site.
February 9th, 2024 at 3:38 PM ^
Just for comparison, if you were to do that this year, taking how things stand now as the final standings, you'd end up with:
St. Thomas @ North Dakota (319 miles)
Minnesota @ Denver (920 miles)
Michigan @ Wisconsin (391 miles)
Western Michigan @ Michigan State (79 miles)
RIT @ BC (386 miles)
Providence @ Quinnipiac (113 miles)
Cornell @ BU (327 miles)
Maine @ UMass (309 miles)
Median distance: 323 miles
IQR: 260 - 388 miles
Versus, if you used raw pairwise, the distances are:
St. Thomas @ BC (1390 miles)
Minnesota @ Denver (920 miles)
RIT @ BU (389 miles)
Providence @ MSU (764 miles)
Cornell @ North Dakota (1391 miles)
Western Michigan @ Quinnipiac (788 miles)
UMass @ Maine (309 miles)
Michigan @ Wisconsin (391 miles)
Median distance: 776 miles
IQR: 391 - 1038 miles
So not only would this mechanism make the typical travel distance much shorter, it would also vastly reduce the differences in travel between away teams, reducing inequalities in home ice advantage across the home teams.
February 9th, 2024 at 4:06 PM ^
Okay, but the NCAA isn't going to regionalize the tournament. They have rules that transcend all sports, and one of them is that at-large teams are selected nationally, not regionally.
So let's do something that the lacrosse tournament does. (1) pick the field. (2) seed the top 8 in order. (3) First round has a rule--minimize the number of flights ("flight" = 400 or more miles between schools). (4) No intra-conference matchups in the first round. (5) If no other rules are violated, seed by ranking.
So what do we get?
RIT at #1 Boston College (386 miles)
Providence at #8 Denver (1970 miles)
St. Thomas at #5 Wisconsin (265 miles)
Michigan at #4 Maine (901 miles)
Minnesota at #3 North Dakota (313 miles)
Massachusetts at #6 Quinnipiac (80 miles)
Western Michigan at #7 Michigan State (79 miles)
Cornell at #2 Boston University (327 miles)
Only 2 flights, median 320 miles and IQR (!!!) of 173 - 644 miles. All without breaking any NCAA rules. You can't avoid the 2 flights, there are no non-conference opponents available within 400 miles of Maine or Denver.
February 9th, 2024 at 4:44 PM ^
Tell me ESPN wouldn't love this:
RIT at #1 Boston College, Fri 7:00 ET
Providence at #8 Denver, Fri 7:30 MT
Massachusetts at #6 Quinnipiac, Sat 3:30 ET
Michigan at #4 Maine, Sat 6:00 ET
Minnesota at #3 North Dakota, Sat 7:30 CT
Western Michigan at #7 Michigan State, Sun 2:30 ET
St. Thomas at #5 Wisconsin, Sun 4:00 CT
Cornell at #2 Boston University, Sun 7:30 ET
Not a single game when most people are working. Start the tournament with the #1 seed, and Saturday and Sunday prime time games with the 2 biggest non-conference rivalries in college hockey.
February 9th, 2024 at 4:46 PM ^
Lacrosse isn't a bad model ---- one thing lacrosse does is that for the Quarterfinals, those ARE at a neutral site. 2 doubleheaders at 2 different sites, winners go to the Final Four.
The teams that feed into each doubleheader site isn't pre-determined. Instead, the highest remaining seed goes to the regional site which is most geographically favorable to them. Then the second highest remaining seed gets slotted, et cetera.
Using your hypothetical hockey bracket, assuming the 2 QF sites are Sioux Falls and Providence (these are 2 of the actual sites from this year), and assuming all higher seeds win in the 1st round, you'd get this:
- #8 Denver vs #1 Boston College --- Providence, RI
- #7 Michigan State vs #2 Boston University --- Providence, RI
- #6 Quinnipiac vs #3 North Dakota --- Sioux Falls, SD
- #5 Wisconsin vs #4 Maine --- Sioux Falls, SD
Those would probably get pretty good attendance. Narrowing things down from 4 neutral sites for the QF to 2 seem like it would really help attendance. In real life, BC and BU would be in separate spots for the QF. This would have BC and BU fans both together, rooting against their rival, would add to the atmosphere.
February 9th, 2024 at 4:49 PM ^
Yeah my preferred system uses this idea too (I always go with "Milwaukee and Manchester" as the QF sites, but I assume that we might get to the point where the regionalized quarterfinals could move from 10,000 seat arenas to 15,000 seat arenas).
February 9th, 2024 at 1:26 PM ^
I appreciate his public acknowledgement of other sides of the debate. I do find it hilarious that he never gave the issue much thought because he didn’t think there was any significant interest in it.
I mean, he could well be telling the truth, but if so that reflects on his insular connections rather than the state of opinions outside the northeastern bubble.
February 9th, 2024 at 2:11 PM ^
Chris Farley=Comic Genius 🤣😂
February 9th, 2024 at 1:48 PM ^
I'm just baffled that they (NCAA, schools) are OK burning money in pit like this. You're literally throwing away 100s of thousands of dollars every year by putting games on at neutral sites. And it's not just the gate, obviously, it's all the concessions and gear they could be selling.
Another issue, and this is more from a recruiting standpoint, is that you are not putting your best foot forward as a sport with these lame 1/4 full venues. College hockey's home crowds are notoriously loud and knowledgeable. It's part of what makes the game so special. Yet, by the time fans are tuning in on TV, they are seeing these weird playoff games with almost zero buzz in the building.
February 9th, 2024 at 2:00 PM ^
As with anything, follow the money.
February 9th, 2024 at 2:19 PM ^
Username checks out. :-)
February 9th, 2024 at 2:31 PM ^
In this case, I don't think it's the money, but chances of winning. Most schools think they have a snowball's chance in hell of actually getting a home site playoff game, but they think they can fall backward into an autobid once in a while. Playing those games at a neutral site, in theory, increases their odds of winning, rather than playing on the home ice of a higher seed. That's been the public reasoning, at least.
February 9th, 2024 at 2:38 PM ^
Agree. The tournament absolutely would make more money if it were at home venues.
It’s not a huge dollar amount either way, though, and so not a controlling factor.
The tournament format is not set by bean-counting NCAA corporate bigwigs. It is set by the hockey competition committee. Finances are a factor overall, but only one factor. The Frozen Four is the big revenue driver in the sport.
February 9th, 2024 at 4:27 PM ^
Agree with your last point. I'm not much of a hockey fan at all, but I do tune into the NHL playoffs occasionally and UM when they're good. The atmosphere is dreadful in some of those college games.
February 9th, 2024 at 6:12 PM ^
yeah and there are those in college hockey that still seem baffled by the fact that the top 17-18yr old kids are more willing to go the minor league rout than college when they hardly see the real fans or environment
February 9th, 2024 at 1:48 PM ^
It's just fucking bizarre that the NCAA sees no problem with televising playoff games with thousands of empty seats at "neutral" sites. It's almost as though their intent is to tamp down general fan enthusiasm for college hockey.
It's amazing that an organization can employ such a wide range of goddamned idiots across multiple sports.
February 9th, 2024 at 6:10 PM ^
Adam has his head in the sand and cannot see the forest for the trees.
Harvard is 3 miles from BU and their arena (4K)
Princeston is 23 miles from Rutgers and their arena (8K)
Ferris State is less than an hour from Van Andel Arena
Colgate is less than 40 miles from Syracuse
And Merrimack is in Andover Md there are at least 3 arenas they could use
He just does not like change and will do anything to not talk about or promote something that has a reasonable solution.
February 9th, 2024 at 6:14 PM ^
And even if all of those teams played at home, so what?
I would rather see FSU play in front of 1500 fans at Ewigleben than in front of 1000 or even 2000 fans in Allentown PA. If you are concerned about visiting team fans, then make a minimum number of tickets available for purchase by the visiting team ticket office.
February 9th, 2024 at 7:05 PM ^
Agreed. Is anyone worried for softball regionals when only a few hundred people attend? No. A home playoff game in Big Rapids would be electric
February 9th, 2024 at 7:26 PM ^
Ewigleben can be a lot of fun. It would be an absolute madhouse if they played a tournament game there.