To piggy-back on Erik's premise:

Let's take a REAL regional - yesterday's in Amherst.

Noon: Denver vs. Bemidji State
3:30: UNH vs. Harvard

I doubt that many of those folks in Amherst came early to watch the
Denver game.  But I bet there were more folks in Minneapolis who stayed
to watch at least most of the Cornell game, than those who came early
to see Denver out east.

Just my two cents worth

On Sunday, March 27, 2005, at 10:28  AM, Erik J Biever wrote:

> William grumbles:
>
>> 3.  We need to address the NCAA neutral ice problem if we ever hope
>> to grow
>> college hockey's appeal.  We are like womens basketball was 10 years
>> ago when
>> the top seeds played at home, and always won, making an expanded
>> tournament a
>> farce for the lower seeds.  Yesterday afternoon showed that the
>> Gophers have
>> great Minnesota fans, but not necessarily great college hockey fans.
>> Filling
>> the barn for the first semi, then leaving before the second is poor
>> form.  This
>> underscored why the NCAA must give the western schools an unfair
>> advantage
>> each year by having games at a home rink, rather than neutral ice as
>> it is in the
>> east.  As long as this situation exists, the final four will have a
>> better
>> chance of western teams being there.  Everyone must admit that
>> playing on home
>> ice gives a team an edge toward advancing.  Of course this sets up a
>> circular
>> argument about how to run a national tournament when few places have
>> the
>> apparent fan interest to sell out a random NCAA game.  Until the
>> western areas can
>> figure out how to get people to come and enjoy good hockey (even if
>> the home
>> team is not playing) we seem to be stuck with this problem.
>
> Poor form my eye.  Suppose you juggled games around and put this
> regional in
> Worcester:
>
> BC vs North Dakota
> Denver vs Bemidji State
>
> Would the arena be full for the second game?  I think not.
>
> I don't think this is a western phenomenon.
>
> -- Erik
>