Quantcast

As college hockey changes, so do we

The big story as the 2013-14 Division I men’s college hockey season gets under way is the large-scale landscape change that is finally going into effect after three years of planning.

Thirty-five of the 59 teams are either playing in a new conference this season or are part of a league that has changed membership.

card uscho As college hockey changes, so do weHere at U.S. College Hockey Online, we had to do some changing of our own, and I’d like to introduce (or, in some cases, reintroduce) you to our corps of writers who’ll cover the conferences.

Starting with the new leagues, we have Paula C. Weston and Drew Claussen covering the Big Ten and Candace Horgan and Matthew Semisch working in the NCHC.

Shane Frederick and Matt Wellens will keep tabs on the new-look WCHA for us, while Dan Rubin joins Chris Lerch in covering Atlantic Hockey.

Dave Hendrickson and Jim Connelly are back to write about Hockey East, and Brian Sullivan and Nate Owen return to the ECAC Hockey beat.

I hope you’ll agree that this is a great group of people to drive our 18th season of Division I men’s college hockey coverage.

Some other items to keep an eye out for:

• A refresh of our site to make it more accessible on mobile platforms.

• A new live scoreboard.

• An update to our iOS app and the rollout of an Android app.

So here’s to a fun 2013-14 season. We started our season preview coverage this week with a look at 10 players to watch at each position — goaltenders, defensemen and forwards — and our conference and team season previews will start rolling out on Sunday. If you missed it live on Tuesday night, check out our special two-hour edition of USCHO Live!, previewing the season conference by conference with our writers.

If you ever have any comments or suggestions on our coverage or on the site in general, feel free to send them my way via email at editor@uscho.com.

As always, thanks for reading and for continuing the conversation on the game that we all love.

Committee has the final call on classifying neutral-site games

In trying to sort out the issues stemming from the new selection criteria rolled out by the NCAA Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Committee last week, we’ve looked at one of the biggest: the differences between the old and the new as it relates to a real scenario.

card ncaamen Committee has the final call on classifying neutral site gamesHere’s another: Which games count as being played at a neutral site?

The criteria will weight results based on where the game is played, with teams getting an extra reward for winning on the road. Neutral-site games, meanwhile, receive no extra weight. But I’ve always had some uncertainty as to what qualifies for neutral status.

Some of them are obvious. When Clarkson plays New Hampshire at the Ice Breaker tournament at Minnesota’s Mariucci Arena, that’s a neutral site.

Some are a little less clear. How about when Rochester Institute of Technology takes a home game against Michigan to Blue Cross Arena in Rochester? How about RIT’s outdoor game against Niagara?

Does Minnesota have home games at the Xcel Energy Center in the North Star College Cup?

We asked the NCAA for some clarification, and we got these set of guidelines:

Home/Away/Neutral Site Games

The following guidelines and examples are for regular-season and postseason contests.

Team A is playing Team B. For results and the Rating Percentage Index (RPI), the game is considered a “home” game for Team A and an “away” game for Team B if the site of the contest:

• is the regular home site for Team A. Example: The Tennessee baseball team is hosting a tournament and is listed as the visitor for its game with Ball State. It is considered a home game for Tennessee since it is still the Vols’ home field.

• is in the same city or a reasonable distance within the metropolitan area of Team A, and its opponent, Team B, is from outside the metro area. Example: The Butler women’s basketball team has scheduled a home game with Tennessee and wants to move to a larger arena to accommodate an expected larger crowd. The game is moved to Conseco Fieldhouse, which is still in the same metro area as Butler and just a few miles away. It still is considered Butler’s home game.

• is in the same city or a reasonable distance within the metropolitan area of both teams and one team, Team A, is designated as the home team and includes the game in its season-ticket package. Example: The College of Charleston men’s basketball team is playing host to Charleston Southern. The game is moved to a larger arena to accommodate an expected larger crowd. The game is played in the North Charleston Coliseum, which is still in the same metro area of both teams. It is considered the College of Charleston’s home game since it is designated as such and is included in the season-ticket package. This game is not included in the Charleston Southern season-ticket package. In fact, the College of Charleston and Charleston Southern meet every year and rotate which team is the designated home team and includes the game in its season-ticket package. If both or neither team includes this game in its season-ticket package, then the game would be a neutral site game for both teams.

• is in the same area of Team A and Team A plays some or several “home” games there each season. Oftentimes these games are included in the season ticket package offered by the school. Example: The Connecticut men’s basketball team plays some of its home games in its hometown of Storrs; however, the Huskies play most of their games in nearby Hartford. Both sites are considered home sites.

• is in a city close by Team A and Team A designates the game as a “home” game that will count in its home attendance. The game is also included in the season ticket package offered by the school. Example: Ole Miss men’s basketball team plays a game every two to three years in Tupelo, Mississippi, which is 48 miles away from Oxford. Ole Miss always counts it as a home game and includes the game in its season home attendance.

• is a temporary “home” site while the regular home site for Team A is being renovated. Example: McGaw Hall on the Northwestern campus is being renovated, which forces the Northwestern basketball teams to move all their home games from Evanston to nearby Chicago and play in DePaul’s home arena. These games are considered home games for Northwestern since that is where the Wildcats are playing their scheduled home games during the renovation.

• is a nearby temporary emergency site while the regular home site for Team A is being repaired. Example: Owensboro Sportscenter at Kentucky Wesleyan was damaged in a tornado. This forces Kentucky Wesleyan to move its basketball home game with Southern Indiana to a nearby high school gymnasium while the Sportscenter is being repaired. Since this game was played in a nearby temporary set-up, it is still considered a home game for Kentucky Wesleyan. However, if no area arenas or gymnasiums are available and the game is moved the 40 miles away to Southern Indiana’s home court, then the game is now considered a home game for Southern Indiana.

Team A is playing Team B. For results and RPIs, the game is considered a “neutral site” game for both teams if the site of the contest:

• is at another school that is hosting a tournament. Example: The Kansas State women’s volleyball team is hosting a tournament. Arizona and Texas A&M play each other in a match in Manhattan. It’s a neutral site match for both teams.

• is at another school that is hosting a tournament, even though Team A is from the same metro area as the host school and Team B is not. Example: The Temple women’s lacrosse team is hosting a tournament and Villanova plays a game against Auburn. Although Temple and Villanova are both in Philadelphia, since Temple is hosting the tournament on its campus site, only games involving Temple would have a home site. All other games would be counted as neutral sites.

• is in the same city or metropolitan area of both teams and is not the home site for either team. Example: The Temple women’s basketball team is playing Villanova and the game is being played in the Spectrum. The Wells Fargo Center is in Philadelphia and is not the regular home site for either team even though both teams are from Philadelphia. It’s a neutral site game for both teams. The only exception is if Temple was scheduled to host the game and decided to move it to the Wells Fargo Center (a larger arena) to accommodate an expected larger crowd. Then it is Temple’s home game and Villanova’s away game.

• is not in the metropolitan area for either team. Example: The city of Denver is the site for a softball game between Southern Colorado of Pueblo and Air Force of Colorado Springs. It’s a neutral site game for both teams.

Since the determination of home/away and neutral site games can sometimes be a complicated issue, a school can appeal to the NCAA for exceptions to the rule.

• Example: Butler is playing Indiana in men’s basketball at Conseco Fieldhouse. By all indications this should be a home game for Butler since the arena is located in the same city (Indianapolis) as Butler and just a few miles from the campus. IU is in Bloomington, which is 47 miles away from Indianapolis. However, it was IU which contracted the game with Butler and rented the arena, and IU’s conference, the Big Ten, which assigned the game officials. The game was not a part of either team’s season ticket package, but was included as an option with the season tickets for priority purchasing for that game by both teams. In this case, the game will be designated as a neutral site game.

• Sometimes a team’s large fan base could come into play. If a school moves its game to a larger arena or stadium still within its home city to accommodate for an anticipated larger crowd because of the opponent school’s large fan base within that city, the game could be counted as a neutral site game.

• For Division I men’s basketball starting with the 2007-08 season, consideration is given to who controlled the game tickets, who hired the referees and other game officials, the game’s inclusion on a season ticket package, and so on.

For purposes of attendance, some games considered home and away in the RPI may be switched to neutral site games, and vice versa.

It should be noted that these are guidelines, and the final say is with the committee. So we’ll really have to wait on their rulings on those games mentioned above and others.

My initial impression from reading the guidelines is that both of those RIT games in question are home games for the Tigers. As for the new Minnesota tournament, the Gophers have been cited as the tournament’s permanent host but when they played the Icebreaker in the same building in 2007 the games were listed as neutral.

When we get more definitive word from the committee, we’ll pass it along and make sure our schedules are correct.

Here’s how last season’s PairWise Rankings would have looked with this season’s criteria

card ncaa Heres how last seasons PairWise Rankings would have looked with this seasons criteriaOne of the most prominent questions from college hockey coaches and fans alike in the wake of the NCAA’s announcement of changes to the selection criteria for the national tournament has been about the real-world implications.

Would the 2013 tournament field look different if it had been selected using the new set of criteria?

In terms of which teams earned at-large bids? No.

Committee chair Jim Knowlton of Rensselaer said the Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Committee used a number of analyses to determine how to adjust the selection criteria, which we represent here as the PairWise Rankings.

We asked to see how last season would have looked in the 2013-14 formula, and the NCAA agreed to release that information, which we’re including below.

The field would include the same 16 teams, although six of them would have different seeds:

• Minnesota State and North Dakota would have flipped seeds, with the Mavericks a No. 2 seed and UND in the No. 3 band.

• Wisconsin and Yale would have moved into No. 3 seeds, bumping Niagara and Denver to No. 4 seeds.

The top five spots in the PairWise are identical in each algorithm.

Here’s the NCAA’s representation of the 2012-13 season in the 2013-14 criteria (sorry in advance about the formatting; I’m working on that):

Rank Team        Record  PWCs  RPI RK
-------------------------------------------------
 1 Quinnipiac     27- 7- 5 58- 0 | 57.06 1
 2 Minnesota     26- 8- 5 57- 1 | 56.70 2
 3 *UMass Lowell    26-10- 2 55- 3 | 56.06 3
 4 *Notre Dame     25-12- 3 55- 3 | 54.98 4
 5 Miami       24-11- 5 53- 5 | 54.89 5
 6 New Hampshire   19-11- 7 53- 5 | 54.48 6
 7 Boston College   22-11- 4 52- 6 | 54.44 7
 8 Minnesota State  24-13- 3 50- 8 | 54.28 8
 9 North Dakota    21-12- 7 49- 9 | 54.15 9
 10 *Union       21-12- 5 49- 9 | 53.89 10
 11 *Wisconsin     22-12- 7 48-10 | 53.83 12
 12 Yale        18-12- 3 46-12 | 53.63 14
 13 Niagara      23- 9- 5 45-13 | 53.86 11
 14 Denver       20-13- 5 45-13 | 53.81 13
 15 St Cloud      23-15- 1 43-15 | 53.62 15
 16 Western Michigan  19-11- 8 43-15 | 53.18 16
 17 Providence     17-14- 7 43-15 | 52.87 17
 18 Rensselaer     18-14- 5 41-17 | 52.49 18
 19 Boston University 21-16- 2 40-18 | 52.36 19
 20 Colorado College  18-19- 5 39-19 | 52.25 20
 21 Brown       16-14- 6 37-21 | 51.78 21
 22 Cornell      15-16- 3 37-21 | 51.46 22
 23 Ferris State    16-16- 5 36-22 | 51.12 23
 24 Robert Morris   20-14- 4 35-23 | 51.11 24
 25 Dartmouth     15-14- 5 35-23 | 51.05 25
 26 St Lawrence    18-16- 4 32-26 | 50.99 26
 27 Ohio State     16-17- 7 32-26 | 50.85 27
 28 Nebraska Omaha   19-18- 2 31-27 | 50.79 28
 29 Alaska       17-16- 4 31-27 | 50.64 29
 30 Michigan      18-19- 3 28-30 | 50.46 30
 31 Holy Cross     20-14- 3 28-30 | 50.06 31
 32 Northern Michigan 15-19- 4 28-30 | 50.01 32
 33 Merrimack     15-17- 6 26-32 | 49.98 33
 34 Air Force     17-13- 7 26-32 | 49.91 34
 35 Connecticut    19-14- 4 24-34 | 49.80 35
 36 Mercyhurst     19-17- 5 23-35 | 49.63 36
 37 Bowling Green   15-21- 5 23-35 | 49.39 37
 38 *Canisius      19-18- 5 21-37 | 49.19 38
 39 Colgate      14-18- 4 21-37 | 49.03 39
 40 Minnesota Duluth  14-19- 5 19-39 | 48.78 40
 41 Penn State     11-12- 0 18-40 | 48.77 41
 42 Maine       11-19- 8 16-42 | 48.43 42
 43 Lake Superior   17-21- 1 16-42 | 48.42 43
 44 Michigan Tech   13-20- 4 16-42 | 48.25 44
 45 Michigan State   14-25- 3 15-43 | 48.08 45
 46 Vermont      11-19- 6 14-44 | 48.04 46
 47 Princeton     10-16- 5 12-46 | 47.96 47
 48 RIT        15-18- 5 11-47 | 47.90 48
 49 Massachusetts   12-19- 3 11-47 | 47.90 49
 50 Clarkson      9-20- 7 9-49 | 47.29 50
 51 Harvard      10-19- 3 8-50 | 47.21 51
 52 American Int'l   12-17- 6 7-51 | 46.56 52
 53 Northeastern    9-21- 4 6-52 | 45.49 53
 54 Bentley      12-20- 3 5-53 | 45.06 54
 55 Bemidji State    6-22- 8 4-54 | 44.58 55
 56 Alaska-Anchorage  4-25- 7 3-55 | 43.56 56
 57 Army        7-22- 5 2-56 | 42.60 57
 58 Alabama-Huntsville 1-20- 1 1-57 | 38.38 58
 59 Sacred Heart    2-30- 4 0-58 | 38.18 59

You can see how last year’s PairWise and NCAA tournament actually shook out in this edition of Bracketology.

The order of teams from last year’s PairWise was:

1 Quinnipiac
2 Minnesota
3 Massachusetts-Lowell
4 Notre Dame
5 Miami
6 Boston College
7 New Hampshire
8 North Dakota
9 Denver
10 Niagara
11 Minnesota State
12 Union
13 St. Cloud State
14 Wisconsin
15 Yale
16 Canisius

Canisius, of course, was the Atlantic Hockey tournament champion and received an automatic bid.

Is the change worth much if it produces the same result in terms of deciding which teams get at-large bids? The committee wanted to be cautious about changes because of the new conference landscape and not yet knowing how that would impact things, but this could be considered overcautious.

But I guess we’ll have to let it play out and see what happens.

Television schedules taking shape; ESPN getting back into regular season coverage

I0000pc jApMcIVo Television schedules taking shape; ESPN getting back into regular season coverage

An ESPN camera operator works at the 2010 Frozen Four in Detroit (photo: Jim Rosvold).

One of the great promises of Big Ten hockey was the additional national exposure the conference could bring in the form of a national television schedule.

We’ve seen the commitment made for the conference’s debut season, and it has some impressive elements.

The Big Ten and its six teams rolled out the core of their 2013-14 TV schedules on Monday and advertised some big numbers:

• At least 70 games overall.

• 34 games on either the Big Ten Network, ESPNU or ESPNews.

• 36 games on Fox Sports regional networks, with more on local channels in the home markets.

The addition of the ESPN family of networks stood out to me in that it has been a few years since we’ve seen college hockey out of Bristol before the start of the NCAA tournament.

An ESPN spokesperson said the seven Big Ten games on either ESPNU or ESPNews came as part of the network’s most recent rights extension with the conference.

We’ve heard complaints over the years that ESPN doesn’t show up on the college hockey scene until the last 15 games of the season, and while seven games isn’t a whole lot out of the 1,000 or so that get played in the regular season, it’s a start.

It has been pointed out by Andy Johnson at Bucky’s 5th Quarter that Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez once claimed BTN would show upwards of 40 games a season. Twenty-seven doesn’t quite reach that number, so I’ll be interested to hear why the actual figure didn’t reach the projected one.

For the Big Ten as a whole, will the TV schedule help in winning over those soured by the teams’ departure from the WCHA and the CCHA? Only time will tell.

With the Big Ten schedules, those for NCHC teams (the league has a deal with CBS Sports Network) and other schools that have publicized TV schedules, we have 162 games in our composite TV schedule for the 2013-14 season. There will be more to come from Hockey East, which announces its TV schedule at its media day on Sept. 24, and when NBC Sports Network reveals its plans.

Click here to see our TV schedule, and send email here to let us know of other TV schedules we can add.

European trips give teams an early start

Hidden among the typical summertime news, we’ve actually had actual college hockey teams playing actual hockey games.

Dartmouth and Quinnipiac have both taken advantage of an NCAA rule that allows teams to make a trip to play foreign competition once every four years.

Quinnipiac went to Italy and Switzerland earlier this month for four games against European pro competition, and Dartmouth is in the middle of a trip to the same two countries for three games.

Read up on Dartmouth’s trip here and see how Quinnipiac’s excursion went here.

NCAA rules allow for such trips once every four years during a vacation period for the school. Incoming freshmen aren’t allowed, and the team is limited to 10 games, none against other American teams.

The team gets 10 days of practice before the trip, and don’t think that isn’t a valuable early start to the season.

UPDATE: Adrian coach Ron Fogarty got in touch to mention that the Bulldogs also toured Italy and Switzerland this summer. Read about that on Adrian’s site here.

A Saturday-Monday schedule for future Frozen Fours?

The specifications for sites interested in bidding on regionals and Frozen Fours from 2015 to 2018 are out, and one item jumped out to me right away.

It appears that the NCAA is considering moving the game dates for the Frozen Four from Thursday and Saturday to Saturday and Monday. That’s listed as a possible option in the bid specs, and it would give the Frozen Four a similar structure to the men’s basketball Final Four.

We’ll check with the NCAA to see how much of a possibility this is, but I wanted to put it out there. How would you feel about the national championship game being played on a Monday? Leave a comment below.

Update: I notice that the minimum capacity to host a Frozen Four is 18,000. Will that eliminate Boston from consideration? Maybe not. Capacity at TD Garden is listed as 17,565 for hockey, although Frozen Four games there in 1998 and 2004 drew crowds of over 18,000.

32 NCAA tournament events up for bid soon around college hockey

If you’re waiting to hear where the 2015 Frozen Four will be, you’re in for quite a wait.

Site selection announcements for NCAA events from 2015 to 2018 are scheduled for December, according to the web site for the coordinated, NCAA-wide bid process.

That means the 2015 regional and Frozen Four hosts will have only 15 to 16 months before players are taking the ice for those events. To me, that suggests a greater likelihood of familiar venues that season, places that have been already seen successful weekends.

More information about what the NCAA is looking for will come out June 17, when bid specifications are released. Bids are accepted from July 15 to Sept. 16.

The NCAA is advertising for four seasons of postseason sites in men’s and women’s hockey, Division I and Division III. That means there are 32 openings to be filled across NCAA hockey.

In Division I men’s hockey, some issues connected to the future of the regionals need to be addressed first.

Earlier this month, the NCAA Division I Men’s Ice Hockey Committee heard ideas from coaches on changes to improve the regional atmosphere, but there was no consensus. The movement to return NCAA games to campus sites has its supporters but there also has been a good amount of pushback.

The 2014 men’s Frozen Four is in Philadelphia, with regionals in Bridgeport, Conn.; Worcester, Mass.; Cincinnati; and St. Paul, Minn.

While we wait to see which venues step forward as bidders, here are some of the details that the NCAA has already posted:

• The minimum venue capacity for Division I regionals is 5,000, while it is 3,500 for the women’s Frozen Four and 3,000 for the Division III men’s championship. The men’s Frozen Four also will have a minimum (it has been 15,000) but that detail isn’t part of the bid brochure.

• The men’s Frozen Four bid requires a minimum of 2,454 hotel room nights, 573 on the peak night. The women’s Frozen Four needs 682 room nights (168 at peak), while the D-III men’s championship needs 296 (85 at peak) and the D-III women’s championship needs 305 (85 at peak).

• The men’s Frozen Four is scheduled for April 9 and 11 in 2015, April 7 and 9 in 2016, April 6 and 8 in 2017 and April 5 and 7 in 2018.

• The women’s Frozen Four and the Division III championships all are scheduled for the same weekend in the four years covered by the bid process: March 20-22, 2015; March 18-20, 2016; March 17-19, 2017; and March 16-18, 2018. Women’s Frozen Four games are Friday and Sunday; D-III games are Friday and Saturday.

Where would you like to see these tournaments go? Share your thoughts in the comments.

Digging through the history books after two days of the 2013 NCAA tournament

A few interesting notes have surfaced so far in the 2013 NCAA tournament. Here are some that stand out:

• For only the second time in 65 tournaments (not counting the first), and for the first time since 1958, the Frozen Four will not include a team that previously won an NCAA Division I championship. (The first tournament doesn’t count, obviously, because there was no defending champion.) Denver, Clarkson, North Dakota and Harvard took part in the four-team tournament in Minneapolis in 1958, with the Pioneers coming out on top.

• There will be two teams from ECAC Hockey in the Frozen Four for the first time in 30 years. Harvard and Providence played in the 1983 tournament in Grand Forks, N.D., before the formation of Hockey East took the Friars to that league. To find the last time two current ECAC members were in the national semifinals, you have to go back to 1980, when Cornell and Dartmouth made it in a five-team tournament.

• Jesse Root’s goal for Yale nine seconds into overtime on Friday was the fastest overtime goal in NCAA tournament history. That broke the record of 15 seconds set by Lake Superior State in a 6-5 victory over Northeastern in the 1994 West Regional first round. The Lakers won two more overtime games that year before blowing out Boston University 9-1 in the national championship game.

• Of 10,648 completed entries in College Hockey Pickem 2013, only two perfect brackets remain. You can see their brackets on the standings page.

Bracket busted yet? Only 1 percent of entries still have chance at perfection

So, how’s your bracket doing?

Sorry. Judging from the statistics we’re seeing in College Hockey Pickem 2013, that might be a sore subject.

The first game of the 2013 NCAA tournament eliminated the team predicted as the national champion on 39 percent of the brackets. Yale’s overtime win over Minnesota also took out 10,339 of 10,648 completed entries from a run at a perfect bracket.

After the wins by Yale, Massachusetts-Lowell, North Dakota and New Hampshire on Friday, there are only 112 brackets (1 percent) that have a chance to go 15-for-15.

Here’s the rundown of which teams were favored to win it all:

Minnesota: 4,117 (38.66%)
North Dakota: 1,375 (12.91%)
Boston College: 1,298 (12.19%)
Notre Dame: 715 (6.71%)
Massachusetts-Lowell: 664 (6.24%)
Quinnipiac: 620 (5.82%)
Wisconsin: 554 (5.20%)
Miami: 483 (4.54%)
Denver: 223 (2.09%)
St. Cloud State: 212 (1.99%)
New Hampshire: 202 (1.90%)
Union: 81 (0.76%)
Minnesota State: 57 (0.54%)
Canisius: 19 (0.18%)
Niagara: 14 (0.13%)
Yale: 14 (0.13%)

We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?

The issue of the so-called tournament atmosphere surfaces in college hockey around this time every season as we head into NCAA regional weekend. The selection committee switches some matchups, in part, to generate more attendance and, therefore, more buzz in the buildings.

But are ticket prices holding some would-be attendees back? If you’re buying through Ticketmaster, where fees are added to the base price, a two-day adult regional ticket package costs $72.70 in Grand Rapids, $86.30 in Toledo and $87.30 in Providence and Manchester. A single-day ticket costs $42.05 in Grand Rapids, $53.85 in Toledo and $54.50 in Providence.

So we asked our Twitter followers a question:

Are ticket prices keeping you from attending regional games this weekend? Let us know, and let us know what price would get you in the door.
uscho2005 normal We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@USCHO
USCHO.com

Here are some of the responses we got with price suggestions:

@ $25 per game seems reasonable. It's about what it costs per game for season tickets at UNH #cawlidgehawkey
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@JuGGerbad
Colin Thorner
@ I think $25-30 would be fair. I would defiantly consider going then
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@RyanHaley24
Ryan Haley
@ $45 for the weekend. You're going to have to open the wallet to attend the Frozen Four. Don't do it twice.
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@joecct77
Joe LaCour
“@: Are ticket prices keeping you" $35-$45 should be reasonable for regionals. Reg season is $12-$18. $77 is ridiculous!!
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@OldTimeHockey23
Jim Pickens
@ $30 is the max for a game that is 50% full, especially with teams I don't care about. $50 is ridiculous even for Gophers-UND.
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@WCCOKyle
Kyle Shiely
@ $25 would have been nice. Paying $45 each for 2 games Saturday and $75 each for Hawks/Wings Sunday. #hockey #GoHawks #twice
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@miamibeef04
Douglas Cutler
@ Over $50 with charges just to attend Sat in Prov. For $25-30, sure. But going to watch on ESPNU.
bri1 normal We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?

And we couldn’t help but notice these responses, too:

@ its a joke! 45$ for single game tickets. This isn't the NHL. Not to mention a "casual" fan won't pay that let alone some real fans
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@mymetrodome83
Stephen Minnesota
@ bad regional choices too. All are in the EASTERN time zone. You wonder why attendance is down. Seriously, take a look around.
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@mymetrodome83
Stephen Minnesota
@ how about a site in a time zone that's not eastern.
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@icyrollingrock3
Justin Lewis
@ Wow. I haven't had to buy tickets in a while. $87 is a LOT. And it's a pain to get to the point where the site tells you the prices.
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@mhaithaca
Mark H. Anbinder
@ Put them in cities that are easy to get to by air. G-Rap, Toledo, Worcester, Manchester? Come ON. Dont make me rent a car AND fly in.
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@adamchappelle
Adam Chappelle
@ Ohio State and their insistence on producing losing teams is keeping me away
533f5e2e6929919f4bf627dd0051ec2d normal We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@ctodt
Casey Todt
@ only want 1 game. Don't want to pay for a game I'm not into. I'll get em out front on gameday for less
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@ Absolutely! $75 for Toledo/3 games. Thats equal to 5 Walleye games and at least 7 #BGSU_Hockey games. Add concessions on top of that?
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@Ian_F_H
Ian Hoadley
@ Nope.. Terrible locations are keeping me away!
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@NoraTeele
N. Teele Schneider
@ No, the 12 hour trip is keeping me from going. But next year at the X I will be buying upper deck and sitting in all the empty lowers
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@WCCOKyle
Kyle Shiely
@ @ & single games in Toledo @ $45 will scare off everyone but the most ardent supporters. hope Cincinnati prices better nxt yr.
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@UTPbrandon
Brandon Gee
@ Midwest 2-day tickets on StubHub ON THE GLASS are below face value.
 We asked: Are ticket prices keeping you away from the regionals?
@HewDrew
Drew Hewett
BNY Mellon Wealth Management