[log in to unmask] wrote:
 
> IAh...yes...but they put 3 teams in each of the 4 venues playing ...correct?
> That still means an extra game for each venue if 4 go to each of the 4 venues
> and play 2 games. (now I'm getting dizzy)
 
No, they put six teams in each of two venues.  The sub-regional idea involved
going to four venues.
 
> Websites never have the full scope of a paper.
 
As I'm not in Denver (rather, i'm around the fourth closest Div 1 school to
Denver), the website is all I have to go by.  It probably isn't all of the paper,
but it usually includes all of the feature articles you were describing.
 
Still, I may have made my original point poorly.  I'm not really trying to say
that Denver does a poor job of covering college hockey relative to any other
city.  I'm saying that Denver provides a lot less coverage to college hockey than
it does to NCAA basketball.  Hoops is the model that the sub-regional idea seeks
to emulate, and I don't think we're close to being ready for that kind of step.
 
> Aha. OK. So according to your findings only campus rinks draw #'s? That makes
> arenas a pretty slim pickings (not too many campus rinks hold more than 9K)
> and you couldn't guarantee that a ...I believe we will have to just live with
> that until hockey becomes the next messiah for everyone. I won't hold my
> breath I guess.
 
Essentially, yes.  And I think those campus rinks will only draw those numbers if
the host team is there.  This may not be true in the east, though a couple more
years like the last one, and it might.  With the right set of circumstances, you
could probably fill a couple of large arenas (Target Center if the Gophers are
there, for instance) but no one is going to take that gamble; the downside (i.e.,
Target Center hosts and the Gophers finish about where they will this year) is too
big.
 
J. Michael Neal
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.