Jump to content


Photo

Buffalo to host Frozen Four in 2019, NCAA hoops in 2022


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#21 bbb

bbb

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 01:09 PM

 

NCAA wants larger venues than NBA/NHL 15-20,000 seat arenas for the later rounds.

 

A total ripoff for fans unless they are paying top $$$ in the risers for later rounds, you can't see much in the domes.

 

Buffalo and Auburn Hills (Detroit next year) have been great to watch for most every other year for quite awhile for the first weekend.


Syracuse hosted the 16/8 a few years ago.

 

You were right at one time, but that's changed in recent years.  Sweet Sixteen/Elite Eight has been going to less domes every year.  And, now this year it was 4 arenas, no domes - Memphis, MSG, KC and San Jose. 
 


 

2003.

 

I haven't gone to one of these since 2010, but what you described fit a bunch of them, especially when it's played in a non-college hockey hotbed.  Those might actually be the best ones though for the people who really want to see the games.  You've got fans practically giving the tickets away outside, those who got 4 seats in the lottery but only needed two.  Even with all the improvements in Buffalo, it could very well happen again at this one.  If you don't get the traveling fanbase in the game (North Dakota), attendance will be lacking.

 

I was wondering what teams travel for hockey.  So many of the schools seem so small that I don't think they would have a big traveling fan base - UMass-Lowell, Denver, UM-Duluth, etc. 



#22 row_33

row_33

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 953 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 01:53 PM

thanks bbb, the NCAA has used cities where there was no recourse to a dome, and MSG will always get more than the others in capacity.

 

With Syracuse so close as a useful option I just don't see Buffalo getting anything more than it does.

 

that's good news for fans, Domes are horrible unless you are a VIP...



#23 bbb

bbb

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:02 PM

thanks bbb, the NCAA has used cities where there was no recourse to a dome, and MSG will always get more than the others in capacity.

 

With Syracuse so close as a useful option I just don't see Buffalo getting anything more than it does.

 

that's good news for fans, Domes are horrible unless you are a VIP...

 

I think you're right about Syracuse getting the 16/8 over Buffalo.  The Carrier Dome has been in the regional rotation since the 80s, before they started using domes for every Final Four and a lot of the regionals, so I think they'll still be in that rotation.  LIke you said, they at least cut the dome in half............There was discussion a few years ago about Buffalo going after the regional, but some people think it's better to have the sub-regional - you have 8 fan bases that way.



#24 row_33

row_33

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 953 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:03 PM

 

I think you're right about Syracuse getting the 16/8 over Buffalo.  The Carrier Dome has been in the regional rotation since the 80s, before they started using domes for every Final Four and a lot of the regionals, so I think they'll still be in that rotation.  LIke you said, they at least cut the dome in half............There was discussion a few years ago about Buffalo going after the regional, but some people think it's better to have the sub-regional - you have 8 fan bases that way.

 

Missed out on Buffalo this year due to workload, missed it horribly....

 

Will go to Little Caesar's or whatever it is next year in Detroit for these games.



#25 bbb

bbb

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:07 PM

Yeah, that should be good - in the new arena.



#26 row_33

row_33

    RFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 953 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:19 PM

Yeah, that should be good - in the new arena.

 

 

Saves a half hour's drive north of Detroit to Auburn Hills, and driving through the rurals of Michigan always seems a bit strange to me, looking for tumbleweeds....



#27 shrader

shrader

    Pleased but sticky

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,650 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 08:22 AM

 

I was wondering what teams travel for hockey.  So many of the schools seem so small that I don't think they would have a big traveling fan base - UMass-Lowell, Denver, UM-Duluth, etc. 

 

No one travels quite like the west does.  North Dakota blows everyone out of the water though.  The Big Ten schools generally do too, I've seen very good showings from Michigan State, Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin (granted that one was in Milwaukee).  Maine, of all places, used to travel really well.  Unfortunately their program has fallen off the face of the earth over the past 10 years.

 

If you want to see a big time program that travels ridiculously poorly, it's BC.



#28 bbb

bbb

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 04:32 PM

 

No one travels quite like the west does.  North Dakota blows everyone out of the water though.  The Big Ten schools generally do too, I've seen very good showings from Michigan State, Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin (granted that one was in Milwaukee).  Maine, of all places, used to travel really well.  Unfortunately their program has fallen off the face of the earth over the past 10 years.

 

If you want to see a big time program that travels ridiculously poorly, it's BC.

 

Wow, I would have figured that BC would have been one of the best!.............So, Denver travels well, I take it?  Were there more Denver or Notre Dame fans in their meeting in the FF in Chicago?.................How do you think Penn State will be now?



#29 Koolaid

Koolaid

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,927 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 09:39 AM

 

No one travels quite like the west does.  North Dakota blows everyone out of the water though.  The Big Ten schools generally do too, I've seen very good showings from Michigan State, Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin (granted that one was in Milwaukee).  Maine, of all places, used to travel really well.  Unfortunately their program has fallen off the face of the earth over the past 10 years.

 

If you want to see a big time program that travels ridiculously poorly, it's BC.

 

Bostonites are known for being poor supporters unless team is guaranteed a win.



#30 Boyst62

Boyst62

    Hall of Farmer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,731 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 11:03 AM

i just love that the dipheads in the ncaa got off their high horse to do whats right about giving back nc what it should have never lost to begin with.

 

gboro is one of the largest venues in the country, only 2 are larger iirc.  and it's very convenient for travel.  right along 40, 85 and just off 77, and not far from 95.  it's centrally located to schools in the area, as well. 



#31 Koolaid

Koolaid

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,927 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 12:28 PM

Maybe they were trying to do the players a favor and get them an all expenses trip out of state and it has been ruined now.

They were probably afraid like Cuba athletes they would bail.



#32 shrader

shrader

    Pleased but sticky

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,650 posts

Posted 24 April 2017 - 09:15 AM

 

Wow, I would have figured that BC would have been one of the best!.............So, Denver travels well, I take it?  Were there more Denver or Notre Dame fans in their meeting in the FF in Chicago?.................How do you think Penn State will be now?

 

I've never been to one where Denver played, so I can't really say.  They were always a bit more of a vocal fanbase online, but that's my only encounter with them.  I'd imagine there were more Notre Dame fans in Chicago thanks to the location, but that's a pure guess.

 

I've had no encounters with Penn State hockey.  They didn't exist when I was going to games.  With their quick build, I bet they'll have a very good following.  I used to play beer league hockey with a guy who went to school there and I know he was very excited when they decided to go D1.

 

 

Bostonites are known for being poor supporters unless team is guaranteed a win.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love taking shots at Boston, but I think this one is more about the school than the city itself.  They've won 4 national championships over the last 17 years and are in the frozen four essentially every year.  If that can't draw the attention of their student base, nothing will.



#33 bbb

bbb

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts

Posted 25 April 2017 - 03:07 AM

I was surprised how fast Penn State was to get good. 



#34 shrader

shrader

    Pleased but sticky

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,650 posts

Posted 25 April 2017 - 08:47 AM

I was surprised how fast Penn State was to get good. 

 

I'm too lazy to look it up, but I'd imagine that they've been an older team than most so far.  Bring in those older guys who are guaranteed to use their full four years of eligibility and may not have gotten a shot somewhere else and you're going to have a physical edge over the teams with younger high draft picks.  I may dig into their roster later when I have some free time to see if that's the case.



#35 teef

teef

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 390 posts

Posted 25 April 2017 - 09:04 AM

 

No one travels quite like the west does.  North Dakota blows everyone out of the water though.  The Big Ten schools generally do too, I've seen very good showings from Michigan State, Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin (granted that one was in Milwaukee).  Maine, of all places, used to travel really well.  Unfortunately their program has fallen off the face of the earth over the past 10 years.

 

If you want to see a big time program that travels ridiculously poorly, it's BC.

 

 

 

Wow, I would have figured that BC would have been one of the best!.............So, Denver travels well, I take it?  Were there more Denver or Notre Dame fans in their meeting in the FF in Chicago?.................How do you think Penn State will be now?

i went to bc, and unfortunately it's true.  they love their hockey program, but they've been so good of so long under jerry york, that i think everyone has become spoiled.  

 

on top of that, the general athletics atmosphere is pretty tame.  people enjoy the games, but it seems to be more background.  even the football games don't tend to fill up until the second quarter.  people just hang outside of the stadium and eat/drink.  add in that the major programs are total garbage right now, and you won't see anyone travel too much outside of mass to see anything.



#36 bbb

bbb

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts

Posted 26 April 2017 - 03:57 AM

 

I'm too lazy to look it up, but I'd imagine that they've been an older team than most so far.  Bring in those older guys who are guaranteed to use their full four years of eligibility and may not have gotten a shot somewhere else and you're going to have a physical edge over the teams with younger high draft picks.  I may dig into their roster later when I have some free time to see if that's the case.

 

Interesting info. 


 

 

i went to bc, and unfortunately it's true.  they love their hockey program, but they've been so good of so long under jerry york, that i think everyone has become spoiled.  

 

on top of that, the general athletics atmosphere is pretty tame.  people enjoy the games, but it seems to be more background.  even the football games don't tend to fill up until the second quarter.  people just hang outside of the stadium and eat/drink.  add in that the major programs are total garbage right now, and you won't see anyone travel too much outside of mass to see anything.

 

Somebody told me, and I don't know how true it is, that BC is trying to deemphasize athletics in order to be looked at as even more academic than they are now.............It was in a discussion of our Bonnies hoops coach, a BC grad, always seeming to have that job out there, and it might be the only one he would take..........But, this person said that's no longer the case because of this downgrading of athletics.

 

In terms of hockey, it sounds like they are like Bama football fans.  Too spoiled now - so they're not traveling like they did at the beginning of Saban's tenure.
 



#37 teef

teef

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 390 posts

Posted 26 April 2017 - 07:36 AM

 

Interesting info. 


 

Somebody told me, and I don't know how true it is, that BC is trying to deemphasize athletics in order to be looked at as even more academic than they are now.............It was in a discussion of our Bonnies hoops coach, a BC grad, always seeming to have that job out there, and it might be the only one he would take..........But, this person said that's no longer the case because of this downgrading of athletics.

 

In terms of hockey, it sounds like they are like Bama football fans.  Too spoiled now - so they're not traveling like they did at the beginning of Saban's tenure.
 

i don't think they're deepmhasizing it, but it's never been a large concern.  years ago there was a falling out between the president and the basketball coach over some recruits.  the president didn't want them there because he felt they weren't up to the academic standard of the school.  these were top notch guys, so the coach left and went to OSU.  that's when it all became public. 

 

bc just won't invest much into the programs.  they are trying though, as a few years ago they upped their allowance for a head football coach from $750k to $1.2mill.   with numbers like that it's tough to get high end coaches.  they just hired the deputy athletic director of OSU as the new AD, so we'll see if he can right the ship.

 

ultimately i just have come to terms that bc is the ultimate stepping stone program for coaches.  if you can show results at bc, you tend to get the big boy jobs right after.



#38 bbb

bbb

    UDFA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,166 posts

Posted 27 April 2017 - 12:40 AM

i don't think they're deepmhasizing it, but it's never been a large concern.  years ago there was a falling out between the president and the basketball coach over some recruits.  the president didn't want them there because he felt they weren't up to the academic standard of the school.  these were top notch guys, so the coach left and went to OSU.  that's when it all became public. 

 

bc just won't invest much into the programs.  they are trying though, as a few years ago they upped their allowance for a head football coach from $750k to $1.2mill.   with numbers like that it's tough to get high end coaches.  they just hired the deputy athletic director of OSU as the new AD, so we'll see if he can right the ship.

 

ultimately i just have come to terms that bc is the ultimate stepping stone program for coaches.  if you can show results at bc, you tend to get the big boy jobs right after.

 

Funny that you think of BC as the stepping stone, because that coach that went from BC to OSU is Jim O'Brien, who coached at Bonnies when I was there, and the word was that he was using it as a stepping stone to BC, his alma mater...........Which is where he went.

 

And, now, like I said - we have another BC grad who is a good coach and the worry is him going to his alma mater. 



#39 teef

teef

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 390 posts

Posted 27 April 2017 - 09:28 AM

 

Funny that you think of BC as the stepping stone, because that coach that went from BC to OSU is Jim O'Brien, who coached at Bonnies when I was there, and the word was that he was using it as a stepping stone to BC, his alma mater...........Which is where he went.

 

And, now, like I said - we have another BC grad who is a good coach and the worry is him going to his alma mater. 

it was jim o'brien!  the break up was pretty nasty.  he even took some of his best players with him.  that was seen as the big step in the friction between the athletic and academic dept.  skinner was the next coach who was from URI.  he was great.

 

they've recently hired the coach of Cornell who took his team to the sweet 16...didn't work out.  if i'm not mistaken, the newest coach is from miami of ohio, where he had a fantastic record.  for bc, he's won 2 conference games in 2 years.  

 

the bonnies coach sound exactly like a coach they would take.  i'd give the current coach another year before he's outed.  then it's next man up.

 

edit:  great info about o'brien.  i had no idea he ever coached at bonnies.  (my wife is a bonnies alum as well)


Edited by teef, 27 April 2017 - 09:29 AM.


#40 shrader

shrader

    Pleased but sticky

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,650 posts

Posted 27 April 2017 - 09:44 AM

it was jim o'brien!  the break up was pretty nasty.  he even took some of his best players with him.  that was seen as the big step in the friction between the athletic and academic dept.  skinner was the next coach who was from URI.  he was great.

 

 

Wasn't there some kind of scandal with Skinner?  That's a sport I never pay attention to but I remember hearing talk somewhere around that time.