My Ideal NCAA Tournament System
by Hunt (2019-03-26 11:19:30)
Edited on 2019-03-26 11:23:19

Since nobody asked, I thought I'd share my thoughts.

I had SO much fun Saturday night. The two most fun NCAA hockey games I've ever been to were last year's B10 semifinal and this year's B10 championship (I wasn't at last year's final or this year's semi because St.Patrick's Day weekend is a family/neighborhood holiday for me). Now, we are going to move on to even bigger games. But it won't feel the same, because most of them are going to be played in bland, sterile rinks with about 25% occupancy.

College hockey is good hockey, but it isn't elite hockey. It shares the developmental role with Canadian Juniors, and most truly top players don't come to college...or especially stay long in college. And that's OK. I think college sports should be for people who want to be in college, and there SHOULD be a developmental route open to those prospects who don't want college. But that's a different argument for another day. Part of what makes college hockey great is that it is COLLEGE hockey. The rinks, the students, the bands, the campuses...COLLEGE. That's what made Saturday great. That is what is missing in the tournament.

I've heard the idea of the #1 seeds hosting the regionals floated. That's fine...a definite improvement. But I still think you can do better. I was at women's basketball yesterday, and the way the NCAA takes over the building and experience for a "NCAA Event," it still has a different feel to it. Plus, the regional system isn't perfect in it's bracket purity (beyond the first round, or even in the first round if you avoid conference matchups), and, let's be honest, deciding a hockey championship round by one game is kinda silly and stupid.

So...my plan...

Same 16 teams get in. Conference championship autobids, decide the at-large bids and rank the teams according to Pairwise.

FIRST ROUND: Best of three, campus sites, higher ranked team hosts: 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15, 3 vs 14...8 vs.9. No alterations for anything. Two conference rivals facing each other? AWESOME, hockey is all about rivalries. These are TRUE home games. Home teams control the buildings like they do every other game...STH get their seats, full student sections, bands, warm-ups, control of the music/scoreboard/PA announcer. Everything. A real home game.

SECOND ROUND: The next weekend, best of three, campus sites:
Re-seed the eight teams left: 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, 4 vs. 5. Same thing, full home game experience.

Honestly, I'd love to continue this through the Frozen Four, but I know that is a sacred cow that isn't going away. The TV argument could be made...but all the games aren't on TV anyway (2 aren't), and with ESPN+, all the games would be relatively easily available for anyone who wants them. The only real issue would be the first weekend with 8 series, but that could be mitigated by having some of them be THR/FRI/SAT.

Do what you do best. Show off the unique experiences so many college hockey teams have. It's a fringe sport...doing the basketball model just doesn't work.

I also think it makes the regular season matter more, which is a nice side benefit.

Flame away.


watch Coach Jackson's post-game presser (PSU)
by DavidAddison  (2019-03-28 10:54:39)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

it wasn't apples-to-apples because I believe he was talking about the Conference tournament, but he said in the last year or so he has changed his mind and that single elimination (vs. best of three) is the way to go. It was not a specific comment, so I don't know whether he feels that way even for the first round of the conference tourney.

But his points were 1) single elimination, 2) on campuses. Why? Because they generated nights like Saturday night. (No longer Jackson talking now...) If that had been best of three there is no way it would've been 6000 people three straight nights and no way the intensity would've been as high, even in game 3 (likely due to fan fatigue).

I like on-campus up until frozen four. I'd keep it single elimination though. This isn't the pros.

By the way, if you think single elimination is unfair in hockey...for hoops March madness there are plenty of upsets that would never happen in a series. No how, no way. And yet people love it.


Interesting Idea
by Pat85  (2019-03-26 17:49:04)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I would think at least the first round 2 out of 3 on higher seeds home ice would add to the tournament, but the TV issues raised might limit the number of games/locations covered. Perhaps streaming, even low quality by each of the home teams could be supplemented.

Maybe a Frozen 8 if they went to this, but I suppose another weekend of 2 out of 3 could be manageable and remain viable for profits and TV.

IF they leave the format the same, give the #1 seeds home ice. They can still create the atmosphere of an NCAA Tourney and have contingency plans pre-arranged (if a school lacks a suitable home rink, they need to make arrangements with an alternate site and block dates; block hotels a month out in the likely #1 seed locations; move the opening round a week late and eliminate the off-week between the opening round and the Frozen Four), allowing for even more of the contingencies to be worked out, including tickets and travel for the visiting teams.

IF the Atlantic Conference remains a borderline league, I would also advocate some remedy for a PW26 or higher ranked team stealing a spot (play-in game vs. the highest ranked team left-out , in the same manner the hoops tourney does play-in games).


One if the conditions on going to 16
by Wearendhockey  (2019-03-26 18:41:03)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

teams for the tournament was the hockey schools agreeing that conference winners would get an auto bid, regardless of their strength, percieved or actual. And Atlantic hockey teams have managed recent upsets, including 16 overall seeds beating overall 1 seeds. I doubt there is any support right now for either adding teams are creating "play in" situations.


I like the autobids
by Hunt  (2019-03-27 07:20:01)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Penn State went 22-15-2. They went under. 500 in a mediocre Big Ten, finishing 4th. They did not win their conference tournament. They would be in if AIC was out.

I'm glad they aren't 4 wins from being national champs. Small conference champs add something to the tourney IMO. For any level you say they don't belong, it's a reward for finishing #1 and drawing them.


Understood, but
by Pat85  (2019-03-26 20:31:25)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

is there any pushback for the fact that league has consistently failed to deliver a top 20 PW team to the tourney? If they even had an occasional top 10 or 20 team, they would have a greater claim to legitimacy, but upsets in the one-and-done hockey tourney do not validate their worthiness for an auto-bid, IMO. Play-in game is not a great idea, and soothing the pain of a legit #16 team is not something to be overly concerned about - it just seems Atlantic is playing a different level of hockey during the year, and perhaps not worthy of auto-bid status.


I think there has been occasional pushback
by Wearendhockey  (2019-03-27 00:01:49)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

from fans but I'm sure coaches around the NCAA love to have teams that will give you a weekend series in your rink and not ask for one in return. Atlantic Hockey also was a 14 scholarship league until fairly recently, and there was no way they were going to compete like that.


(long)The in-game experience under such a system would be
by wearendhockey  (2019-03-26 15:03:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

immeasurably better.

During the first decade and a half or so of the original expansion of the tournament from 4 teams to 5, then 6, then 8 and finally 12, 1st round and or quarter-final games were contested on the home ice of the "higher" seed (higher in quotes because originally it was not the same transparent formula used for the last couple of decades).

Some years they played 2 game total goal series -- which hockey purists, of which I am one, usually decry. At some point, 1989 I believe, they went to a best of 3 format for these rounds. During the first couple of years of more than 4 teams in the national tournament, early games were also single elimination, just like the final four have always been.

It was only in 1992 that the tournament was finally moved off campus sites as a general rule to neutral venues. Of course teams were allowed to bid and play games on their home campus, and did with some regularity.

Michigan has played a number of NCAA games at Yost Arena, with it supposedly being a "neutral" regional site. 3 times in fact, and at all three, they were the regional winner, moving on to the Frozen Four. In 1998 in particular, Michigan was aided -- some said unfairly -- by hosting a regional. They were 3rd seed (of 6) in the regional. Home ice in the NCAAs (coupled with a push from a wake up call delivered by Notre Dame in a CCHA playoff series that was much tougher than anyone expected it to be) led to Michigan winning the title that year.

Shortly after the last time Michigan hosted a regional on their home ice the NCAA decided teams would no longer be allowed to so so. Our hosting of a regional in 2015 is widely believed to be because no one else bid on it, so it had to be somewhere. May as well entertain schools hosting again.

I think the one thing often overlooked in discussions about ways to improve the in-person experience and attendance is the ability of ESPN (or anyone else. Please, anyone else???) to broadcast the entire tournament. Right now, with single game elimination and 4 pre-determined sites, it is not a heavy lift. Those of us who love the game but do not plan on attending in person can watch virtually the entire tournament. At the very least we can see all of most games and at least some of all games. Were it to go to campus sites, TV viewership may become a lot more limited. If it went to a format with the top-8 seeds (and the top-4 remaining seeds) hosting, unless it was single elimination, you might see no national coverage of first OR second round games. That's not good or progress.

Lots of things to consider.


TV
by Hunt  (2019-03-27 11:35:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The TV exposure argument is valid. I'll spare you the long post and drawn out details, but if you could get ESPN to commit to two channels for the first round, and one game on a second channel Fri/Sat of the second round, I think you can pretty easily get the tournament in with only two games on ESPN3, which is currently the case. (That does include the first round being 4 series THR/FRI/SAT and 4 series FRI/SAT/SUN and the second round 2 series THR/FRI/SAT and 2 series FRI/SAT/SUN, plus Friday late-afternoon games). Obviously it is much easier if a Denver or CC or ASU hosts a series to have them start at 8 or 8:30 local time and 10ish on the East Coast, but it's still possible without that. Both of those (the different days and the late-afternoon starts) aren't 100% ideal, but are fair and reasonable compromises to get essentially your entire tournament on TV...and you already have the regionals staggered and some late-afternoon weekday hockey.

I would love it. While most of my first post talked about atmosphere and optics, I also think best-of-3 is just a far better way to determine a champion in hockey than single elimination. Plus, the "best-of-3 to get to the final 4" kind of becomes college hockey's signature style, which is unique and would be consistent through both the conference and national tournaments.