College Hockey:
Sites for 2013 NCAA D-I men’s regionals announced

USCHO Staff Report • Oct. 5, 2011

The NCAA Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Committee announced Wednesday the four regional sites for the 2013 NCAA Tournament.

The four sites and regionals, being held March 29-31, include the East Regional in Providence, R.I.; Northeast Regional in Manchester, N.H.; Midwest Regional in Toledo, Ohio; and the West Regional in Grand Rapids, Mich.

Brown will serve as hosts for the East Regional and New Hampshire will host the Northeast Regional. Bowling Green will host the Midwest Regional and Michigan will host the West Regional.

“The committee has placed an emphasis in the regional rounds on neutral-site buildings with NHL-size ice surfaces,” said committee chair and Wisconsin associate AD Sean Frazier. “All of these facilities meet those standards and we feel the arenas and hosts will be able to provide a tremendous championship opportunity for the student-athletes.”

The 2013 Frozen Four will be held April 11 and 13 at the Consol Energy Center in Pittsburgh.

The following is a self-policing forum for discussing views on this story. Comments that are derogatory, make personal attacks, are abusive, or contain profanity or racism will be removed at our discretion. USCHO.com is not responsible for comments posted by users. Please report any inappropriate or offensive comments by clicking the “Flag” link next to that comment in order to alert the moderator.

Please also keep “woofing,” taunting, and otherwise unsportsmanlike behavior to a minimum. Your posts will more than likely be deleted, and worse yet, you reflect badly on yourself, your favorite team and your conference.

Joe C
Nice to see the Dunkin Donuts Center back in play. I hope it is still called that. What a great sponsor for hockey.
Lenn
Anyone notice that the four regionals and the frozen four will all be held in the eastern time zone? Means a lot of traveling for teams west of Lake Michigan.
- Joe C
  I find it odd that the West Regional is not that far west, too. Honestly, even as an east coast hockey fan, Denver and Minneapolis are exceptional venues. I would also think Grand Forks would be a logical choice now that North Dakota has stopped arguing with the NCAA. (I am not taking sides, I am just ponting out the reason the NCAA did not consider Grand Forks recently, not the merits of why the NCAA did so.)
  What about Omaha or Des Moines? I think the empty seats in St. Louis did not help at all. Geography does not help the western programs, but one has to respect the way they travel. Toledo to Grand Rapids is not a long trip. Maybe the NCAA is trying to make it easier to double-up on regionals, like one can do with Manchester/Providence. One can see 6 games if the games are timed correctly.
  - Lenn
    Look at the attendance vs. seating capacity for each regional final last year. I couldn’t find the attendance for SL, so I used the semis’ attendance.
    *Manchester = 5,906 (9,852) (60%)
    *Green Bay = 3,956 (8,709) (45%)
    *Bridgeport = 7,816 (8,412) (93%)
    *SL = 5,024 (19,150) (26%)
    So, although SL was close to Manchester’s attendance, playing in an arena twice the size of the other three didn’t help. Plus, you had New Hampshire and Merrimack playing in Manchester, NH, and Yale at Bridgeport, CT. Those games should have been sold out. Green Bay had powerhouses such as Western Michigan and RPI!
    Unless there are local teams (and I mean local) at the 2013 venues, I don’t think attendance will be impressive at all.
    - Joe C
      The host requirement caused issues in Manchester. As a BU alum, I know that BC would have gone en masse to Manchester instead of being no-shows at St Louis. Merrimack is a very small school, but we loved the fact that they got a spirit band loaned to them (I think it was Clarkson but I am probably wrong).
      I am not sure how many number one seeds Hockey East and ECAC will produce. Maybe Notre Dame will be a number one seed from Hockey East and play in Grand Rapids/Toledo. Green Bay was LOUD on the television even if it was 45%.
      If the NCAA insists upon hosts being at the host site when they qualify, then they should remove the first round conference matchup exclusion when it involves a host. BC should have been in Manchester, playing UNH in the first round. That gate would have been tremendous. Notre Dame could then have been in St Louis or Green Bay, which is a better gate there, too.
      In my opinion, we should seed 1-16 based on objective criteria, place 1-4 based on attendance, keep hosts at the host site and make minor changes (swapping like-seeds) for attendance but not for conference. If Hockey East has a 1,8,9 and 16 seed, they should all play in the first round (1-16, 8-9) and the winners play in the second round.
      The true problem with attendance in the regionals is this:
      Everyone knows where the conference semis and finals will be. People have a good idea if there team SHOULD get there. Even if your team flames out early, you know all the teams playing and probably have a team you want to cheer against.
      Everyone knows where the Frozen Four will be. For many, this is a vacation destination. If your team makes it, you consider having a road trip or making an impulse purchase. You even get to know about the underdog programs in the two weeks between the regional final and the Frozen Four.
      The regionals have less than a week between announcing and playing the games. Only the hosts know where they are going in advance, everyone else is part of PW shifts and multiple possibilities. You might see a school you know, you might see a first-time entry or matchups that rarely happen.
BD
Who thought Grand Rapids was in the west? Probably somebody from east of the Hudson River…..
FalconFan
Toledo is a great choice. It’s a beautiful new arena. Can’t wait!

Possibly related: