On Sun, 29 Mar 1998, Eeyore wrote:
 
> So, from an attendence standpoint, campus sites are the only option for the
> West Regionals.  There just is no other choice.
 
How about St. Paul Civic Center?  The new arena in Columbus, Ohio.
Cincinnati,...OK forget that one, Chicago?  an attendan$e risk initially,
maybe it would grow into something, and why not Detroit occaisionally.  I
still cannot understand why a game between Michigan and Michigan State
during the regular season in Detroit draws a big crowd, but one
post-season draws nothing.
>
> Besides, your analysis is flawed in another way.  This was the fourth year that
> the West Regional was held at a campus site with the home team involved.  It is
> the first time that the home team has gone on to the Final Four.  Michigan
> State was a complete flop in its two tries at Munn; the Spartans didn't make it
> out of the first round either time.  And while Michigan did benefit from home
> ice this time, they can claim to have paid their dues.  In 1995, they had to
> beat Wisconsin in front of the very hostile Dane County crowd.  Basically,
 
As I recall Michigan State was the #6 seed both times, so it could be
argued that the competitive difference between the two teams was so great
that it outweighed the home field advantage.  I can't remember Wisconsin's
at the time, but I don't think that they were one of the top five teams
that year.
 
Also, one other slight correction.  The attendance for all the previous
East Regionals was in the 8-10,000 range, with Albany's 1994 doing nearly
12,000.
 
One other alternative: prohibit the home team from playing in the
on-campus venue.  But that would hurt attendan$e, the only reason for
playing the contest there in the first place.
***************************************************************************
Brian Morris                    RPI Engineers--Wait Until Next Year
[log in to unmask]
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.