A few suggestions:
 
Play at a common site, rather than campus sites.  This makes scheduling
predictable before the season starts.  Also, allows collective t.v. and media
coverage.  You probably have to split the east tournaments between two weeks to
max out attendence (otherwise, Mike can't get to both   :^)
 
Play only one game per team per tourny - teams in the same position in the
standings play each other.  This allows the single site: even in the case of 10
games, you can do 2323 over four days or 433 over three.  It also reduces the
'number of games ceiling' problem (though by the same token it reduces the
payoff of having interleague play).  You probably have to throw out some teams
from larger conferences -- but I wouldn't just automatically toss the lowest in
the standings.  For one thing, this would give the larger conference a
statistical advantage (proof left to the reader).  For another, it's mean.  Let
the large conference figure out who goes each year.
 
Revenue and cost share, perhaps proportional to athletic department budget.
 This would allow the small schools to participate.
 
Have the Fall tournies be a "pre-season" tourny (see how well the ACC-Big East
tourny does in squeakball) based on the previous year's standings.
 
Sample:
 
First week October:  CCHA vs ECAC at Albany
Second week October:  WCHA vs HE at Boston
 
Third week December:  HE vs CCHA at Detroit
Fourth week December:  ECAC vs WCHA at St. Paul
 
 
 
 
 
 
Greg
Malden
Let's Go Red!