ECAC Finals Weekend not on TV

I feel sorry for the kids who are playing this weekend, I really do, even if Cornell was not there I would be disappointed in the league. Someone dropped the "puck" from the ECAC. How this could not be planned a year in advance is inexcusable. I believe Schafer’s comments were diluted as he probable really tore some ass. Someone should be fired over this. How the ECAC Hockey PR department does not have all of this in the bag a year ahead of time is unbelievable. Many NHL scouts will tell you the ECAC prepares a talented player for the NHL grind as well as any NCAA league. This certainly can be attested to by the success of ECAC alums in the NHL. I think the league takes a hit for this screw up Nationally as the league will be perceived as insignificant and this will hurt all ECAC hockey teams in the recruiting arena.






[www.uscho.com]



By Brian Sullivan • ECAC Hockey Columnist • March 12, 2012


Don’t change that channel, ECAC Hockey fans!

In fact, don’t even bother turning on the TV, for the league’s championship weekend will not be televised this year. The league confirmed today that it could not find a suitable carrier for its flagship event, to be held for the second time at Boardwalk Hall in Atlantic City, N.J.

“We were on CBS Sports last year, and they opted for another route, for lack of a better word,” said ECAC Hockey commissioner Steve Hagwell in a telephone interview Monday morning. “NBC is doing the Hockey East games, and we explored some regional outlets and looked at producing games on our own… and there were just some obstacles that presented themselves.”

Hagwell explained that the league was effectively left without a dance partner when all was said and done, as national and regional outlets all seemed to have pre-existing commitments for next weekend’s airtime.

“We’ve produced games in the past on our own, but (when you’re doing that) you’re looking for an outlet nationally. NBC and CBS opted for other issues, then you’re still looking at regional outlets: NESN has Hockey East; Comcast Sports New England has a commitment to the Celtics; MSG has the Rangers, Knicks, etcetera, so you’ve got to find a viable outlet to put it on.

“[Carriers] have their decisions to make from their own business standpoint, and we have ours. Even locally, Time Warner Albany as an example – just as an example – is doing the New York state high school basketball tournament. Networks have their own commitments. We wanna be on, and we’d love to have somebody want us on.”

Hagwell confessed true disappointment that the final weekend of the league’s season would go un-broadcast, leaving ECAC Hockey as the only Division I league without a TV partnership for its title game.

The games will be streamed live via the internet. Union plays Colgate at 4:30 on Friday, followed by Cornell versus Harvard. The losers play a consolation contest on Saturday afternoon, followed by the championship game that night.

Nate Update: Click here for more information about the online broadcast, which is being handled by RPI TV. The league reached out to the student-run organization, according to Reilly Hamilton, the station’s executive producer.

Nate: Update: Here’s the reaction of the coaches from this afternoon’s teleconference held in preparation of the tournament.


Mike Schafer, Cornell: “One of the reasons we went [to Atlantic City] was that is gave us a great guarantee to be on T.V. It’s really disappointing for our fans and alumni base that depends on those T.V. games. It’s a big failure of our league not to have those games on T.V. [The league] needs to look at why this happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

Don Vaughan, Colgate: “It’s extremely disappointing [that there were issues with the network]. I didn’t find out about it until a couple weeks ago. I find it hard to believe that a network would not want to pick up the championships, especially with the quality of the opponents in the games.”

Ted Donato, Harvard: “It’s always nice to be on T.V; I think it’s a great exposure for the student-athletes involved. They’re certainly deserving of [it].”

Donato added that with the top four seeds advancing to the weekend and an NCAA tournament berth on the line, those games are ones you’d certainly like televised. Union’s Rick Bennett declined to elaborate on the issue, saying that was a question for the league office.


Read more: [www.uscho.com]

Thanks for the confirmation. Last I heard, it wouldn't be available online either. I'm glad this isn't the case.

Here's the link to the internet broadcast info: [www.rpitv.org]

Is it not ironic that the STUDENTS from RPI will be doing the broadcast. I bet the STUDENTS do a better job than RedCast.

........ for more information about the online broadcast, which is being handled by RPI TV. The league reached out to the student-run organization, according to Reilly Hamilton, the station’s executive producer.

Read more: [www.uscho.com]

So much for my annual tradition of begging bars around Colorado to interrupt March Madness for a hockey game between two teams no one here knows of.

flyersgolf
Is it not ironic that the STUDENTS from RPI will be doing the broadcast. I bet the STUDENTS do a better job than RedCast.

........ for more information about the online broadcast, which is being handled by RPI TV. The league reached out to the student-run organization, according to Reilly Hamilton, the station’s executive producer.

Read more: [www.uscho.com]

CBS Sports’ Adam Wodon will team with former RPI head coach Dan Fridgen to call the games.

Interesting that it's going to cost more.

RPI TV
Viewers around the world will be able to watch each game live on any internet enabled computer through America One at a cost of $9.95 per game

As if the league wasn't embarrassing enough.

"No TV and no beer makes Homer something something..."

(Unless the arena actually sells beer.)

flyersgolf
Is it not ironic that the STUDENTS from RPI will be doing the broadcast. I bet the STUDENTS do a better job than RedCast.

........ for more information about the online broadcast, which is being handled by RPI TV. The league reached out to the student-run organization, according to Reilly Hamilton, the station’s executive producer.

Read more: [www.uscho.com]

Why not? It's the students who play the games. And, let's see, Adam Wodon announcing vs. Bob Norton? RPIcast looks better and better. Wodon is an IC grad? During the RS, what would be wrong with Cornell turning Redcast over to the college in Ithaca that knows how to pan a video camera?

“We were on CBS Sports last year, and they opted for another route, for lack of a better word,” said ECAC Hockey commissioner Steve Hagwell in a telephone interview Monday morning. “NBC is doing the Hockey East games, and we explored some regional outlets and looked at producing games on our own… and there were just some obstacles that presented themselves.”

“We’ve produced games in the past on our own, but (when you’re doing that) you’re looking for an outlet nationally. NBC and CBS opted for other issues, then you’re still looking at regional outlets: NESN has Hockey East; Comcast Sports New England has a commitment to the Celtics; MSG has the Rangers, Knicks, etcetera, so you’ve got to find a viable outlet to put it on.

Am I reading this right? Hockey East is going to be on BOTH NBC Sports Network AND NESN??? They can get 2 channels to carry the tourny and we can't get 1?

billhoward

flyersgolf
Is it not ironic that the STUDENTS from RPI will be doing the broadcast. I bet the STUDENTS do a better job than RedCast.

........ for more information about the online broadcast, which is being handled by RPI TV. The league reached out to the student-run organization, according to Reilly Hamilton, the station’s executive producer.

Read more: [www.uscho.com]

Why not? It's the students who play the games. And, let's see, Adam Wodon announcing vs. Bob Norton? RPIcast looks better and better. Wodon is an IC grad? During the RS, what would be wrong with Cornell turning Redcast over to the college in Ithaca that knows how to pan a video camera?

I can't believe we are still fighting this. It's obvious that Redcast could be a lot better. It's also obvious that CU wants to show more than just Men's Hockey. Therefore no discussion of what we want for hockey can be done in a vacuum. Does RPI TV do all the other RPI sports?

If some of you really want to know what could be one to improve Redcast, why don't you try and have a nice conversation with whomever in administraton controls it. You might learn how it works and you might learn how someone could help. That might do a lot more good than reciting the same complaints here every other week or so. But it would also take a lot more effort.

I'm not responding just to you Bill, you just happened to have the post that put me over the top. Maybe Age could come up with an app that would automatically delete Redcast posts for me and then you wouldn't have to read my rants.

billhoward

flyersgolf
Is it not ironic that the STUDENTS from RPI will be doing the broadcast. I bet the STUDENTS do a better job than RedCast.

........ for more information about the online broadcast, which is being handled by RPI TV. The league reached out to the student-run organization, according to Reilly Hamilton, the station’s executive producer.

Read more: [www.uscho.com]

Why not? It's the students who play the games. And, let's see, Adam Wodon announcing vs. Bob Norton? RPIcast looks better and better. Wodon is an IC grad? During the RS, what would be wrong with Cornell turning Redcast over to the college in Ithaca that knows how to pan a video camera?

I think it would actually make sense to let students announce the games and work the cameras. That way Cornell doesn't have to pay for labor and students get great real world experience. There are already students who are in charge of filming lectures for online classes. Why not get them to do it?

jtn27
I think it would actually make sense to let students announce the games and work the cameras. That way Cornell doesn't have to pay for labor and students get great real world experience. There are already students who are in charge of filming lectures for online classes. Why not get them to do it?

*cough*you and I would do it*cough*

Ben

jtn27
I think it would actually make sense to let students announce the games and work the cameras. That way Cornell doesn't have to pay for labor and students get great real world experience. There are already students who are in charge of filming lectures for online classes. Why not get them to do it?

*cough*you and I would do it*cough*

*cough* no I wouldn't, good luck recruiting someone else *cough*

FYI - I haven't worked for CBS College Sports in 5 years. Where was that info from?

And I had nothing to do with the inability to get the games on a cable/satellite channel somewhere, so don't blame me ... But I'd suggest blaming the league office isn't really fair either. I know the efforts they made, and no one wanted it. Would've cost more than the whole budget they have.

For Hockey East, NESN has always been the home, locally. It just so happens to be available on DirecTV too - but that's neither here nor there to NBC - which wants to hone in on that territory - especially (mostly) because Notre Dame will be in Hockey East in a year and a half - and NBC/Notre Dame are joined at the hip.

adamw
FYI - I haven't worked for CBS College Sports in 5 years. Where was that info from?

And I had nothing to do with the inability to get the games on a cable/satellite channel somewhere, so don't blame me ... But I'd suggest blaming the league office isn't really fair either. I know the efforts they made, and no one wanted it. Would've cost more than the whole budget they have.

For Hockey East, NESN has always been the home, locally. It just so happens to be available on DirecTV too - but that's neither here nor there to NBC - which wants to hone in on that territory - especially (mostly) because Notre Dame will be in Hockey East in a year and a half - and NBC/Notre Dame are joined at the hip.

Its totally fair to blame the league office, because they've created an unmarketable tournament that no one wants to watch an hour south of the league's southernmost team, and multiple hours south of the league's furthest south team that actually has fans. What's a total embarrassment is that the AHA is being televised and not the ECAC. When did our league become less marketable than the worst league in the country? Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

css228

adamw
FYI - I haven't worked for CBS College Sports in 5 years. Where was that info from?

And I had nothing to do with the inability to get the games on a cable/satellite channel somewhere, so don't blame me ... But I'd suggest blaming the league office isn't really fair either. I know the efforts they made, and no one wanted it. Would've cost more than the whole budget they have.

For Hockey East, NESN has always been the home, locally. It just so happens to be available on DirecTV too - but that's neither here nor there to NBC - which wants to hone in on that territory - especially (mostly) because Notre Dame will be in Hockey East in a year and a half - and NBC/Notre Dame are joined at the hip.

Its totally fair to blame the league office, because they've created an unmarketable tournament that no one wants to watch an hour south of the league's southernmost team, and multiple hours south of the league's furthest south team that actually has fans. What's a total embarrassment is that the AHA is being televised and not the ECAC. When did our league become less marketable than the worst league in the country? Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Please explain to me how the location of the tournament has anything to do with televising it. Do the viewers really care where it's being played? You mean if it was played in Albany there would be more advertisers for a TV broadcast? I hate the move to AC, but it has nothing to do with no TV. The fact that it's in AC is terrible, the fact that there is no TV is terrible. This is a true, true, but unrelated situation.

Jim Hyla

css228

adamw
FYI - I haven't worked for CBS College Sports in 5 years. Where was that info from?

And I had nothing to do with the inability to get the games on a cable/satellite channel somewhere, so don't blame me ... But I'd suggest blaming the league office isn't really fair either. I know the efforts they made, and no one wanted it. Would've cost more than the whole budget they have.

For Hockey East, NESN has always been the home, locally. It just so happens to be available on DirecTV too - but that's neither here nor there to NBC - which wants to hone in on that territory - especially (mostly) because Notre Dame will be in Hockey East in a year and a half - and NBC/Notre Dame are joined at the hip.

Its totally fair to blame the league office, because they've created an unmarketable tournament that no one wants to watch an hour south of the league's southernmost team, and multiple hours south of the league's furthest south team that actually has fans. What's a total embarrassment is that the AHA is being televised and not the ECAC. When did our league become less marketable than the worst league in the country? Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Please explain to me how the location of the tournament has anything to do with televising it. Do the viewers really care where it's being played? You mean if it was played in Albany there would be more advertisers for a TV broadcast? I hate the move to AC, but it has nothing to do with no TV. The fact that it's in AC is terrible, the fact that there is no TV is terrible. This is a true, true, but unrelated situation.

Raises the expenses for a regional network such as Time Warner Cable Sports to come and do the broadcast, which makes it less appealing to broadcast, and you're not going too get a local regional network from outside the league footprint to broadcast either (like a CSN or The Comcast Network). Its also just another example of the league office being generally incompetent.

Jim Hyla

css228

adamw
FYI - I haven't worked for CBS College Sports in 5 years. Where was that info from?

And I had nothing to do with the inability to get the games on a cable/satellite channel somewhere, so don't blame me ... But I'd suggest blaming the league office isn't really fair either. I know the efforts they made, and no one wanted it. Would've cost more than the whole budget they have.

For Hockey East, NESN has always been the home, locally. It just so happens to be available on DirecTV too - but that's neither here nor there to NBC - which wants to hone in on that territory - especially (mostly) because Notre Dame will be in Hockey East in a year and a half - and NBC/Notre Dame are joined at the hip.

Its totally fair to blame the league office, because they've created an unmarketable tournament that no one wants to watch an hour south of the league's southernmost team, and multiple hours south of the league's furthest south team that actually has fans. What's a total embarrassment is that the AHA is being televised and not the ECAC. When did our league become less marketable than the worst league in the country? Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Please explain to me how the location of the tournament has anything to do with televising it. Do the viewers really care where it's being played? You mean if it was played in Albany there would be more advertisers for a TV broadcast? I hate the move to AC, but it has nothing to do with no TV. The fact that it's in AC is terrible, the fact that there is no TV is terrible. This is a true, true, but unrelated situation.

They are related in that they both illustrate incompetence at the league level.

css228
Its totally fair to blame the league office, because they've created an unmarketable tournament that no one wants to watch an hour south of the league's southernmost team, and multiple hours south of the league's furthest south team that actually has fans. What's a total embarrassment is that the AHA is being televised and not the ECAC. When did our league become less marketable than the worst league in the country? Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Nothwithstanding as someone else said - what does the location of the tournament have to do with TV (if anything, it improves the odds) .... Do you understand the decision to go to Atlantic City was not Steve Hagwell's? It was a 9-3 vote of athletic directors - the people that decide on any major decision, including Cornell's and everyone else's. Hagwell had nothing to do with it.

Jim Hyla

css228

adamw
FYI - I haven't worked for CBS College Sports in 5 years. Where was that info from?

And I had nothing to do with the inability to get the games on a cable/satellite channel somewhere, so don't blame me ... But I'd suggest blaming the league office isn't really fair either. I know the efforts they made, and no one wanted it. Would've cost more than the whole budget they have.

For Hockey East, NESN has always been the home, locally. It just so happens to be available on DirecTV too - but that's neither here nor there to NBC - which wants to hone in on that territory - especially (mostly) because Notre Dame will be in Hockey East in a year and a half - and NBC/Notre Dame are joined at the hip.

Its totally fair to blame the league office, because they've created an unmarketable tournament that no one wants to watch an hour south of the league's southernmost team, and multiple hours south of the league's furthest south team that actually has fans. What's a total embarrassment is that the AHA is being televised and not the ECAC. When did our league become less marketable than the worst league in the country? Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Please explain to me how the location of the tournament has anything to do with televising it. Do the viewers really care where it's being played? You mean if it was played in Albany there would be more advertisers for a TV broadcast? I hate the move to AC, but it has nothing to do with no TV. The fact that it's in AC is terrible, the fact that there is no TV is terrible. This is a true, true, but unrelated situation.

It is possible that Time Warner would have picked it up from RPI TV the way that they did the Freakout this year. Possible but not a cinch. I will watch to see if both Channel 1 and 3 are busy during the tournament on Friday and Saturday. If the announced conflict is only playing on Channel 3 then it is likely that Albany plus RPI-TV would have worked for TW.

adamw
Nothwithstanding as someone else said - what does the location of the tournament have to do with TV (if anything, it improves the odds) .... Do you understand the decision to go to Atlantic City was not Steve Hagwell's? It was a 9-3 vote of athletic directors - the people that decide on any major decision, including Cornell's and everyone else's. Hagwell had nothing to do with it.

Who had the meetings with the Atlantic City Chamber of Commerce? The twelve athletic directors?

Beeeej

adamw
Nothwithstanding as someone else said - what does the location of the tournament have to do with TV (if anything, it improves the odds) .... Do you understand the decision to go to Atlantic City was not Steve Hagwell's? It was a 9-3 vote of athletic directors - the people that decide on any major decision, including Cornell's and everyone else's. Hagwell had nothing to do with it.

Who had the meetings with the Atlantic City Chamber of Commerce? The twelve athletic directors?

So it must be that Hagwell met with AC, brought back a lousy proposal that the ADs voted to accept, right? This is like the coaches complaining that they don't like the full mask. Then convince your schools not to vote for it. No one comes down and tells the schools this is it, the schools vote on a specific proposal. If the proposal is not what they think, then they have lousy lawyers.

It's certainly disappointing to have to be watching on the small, sometimes fuzzy, screen. Back in 2000 I switched to Directv and got it installed hours before the ECACs, mainly for that purpose. It's been great for college hockey, and it's sad that the ECAC couldn't find one of those stations (like MSG++) to cover the games.
A few of us old-timers even remember back in the circa '72-'73 to '74-'75 era when PBS stations in the Northeast carried a Saturday afternoon ECAC game of the week. Now we can't even get on TV with hundreds of stations out there. Maybe the ECAC should've tried some longshot possibilities like ION or Spike (perhaps they did for all I know). It's a way for those networks to make more people aware that they exist. Heck, even TRU TV is showing NCAA BB games tonight.

css228
Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Seems to me that blaming Hagwell for the league's lack of money and marketability is a little like blaming Sandy Alderson for the Mets' lack of money and marketability. At the end of the day, it's ownership, not management. The ECAC member schools are not willing to front the money for things like TV contracts and marketing and the championship venue, and not willing to erode academic qualifications that hold back the league from competing with the other majors.

Put that way, it is not an unmitigated bad thing. It might be fun to be Minnesota from time to time, but do you really want to be Minnesota all the time?

Jim Hyla

Beeeej

adamw
Nothwithstanding as someone else said - what does the location of the tournament have to do with TV (if anything, it improves the odds) .... Do you understand the decision to go to Atlantic City was not Steve Hagwell's? It was a 9-3 vote of athletic directors - the people that decide on any major decision, including Cornell's and everyone else's. Hagwell had nothing to do with it.

Who had the meetings with the Atlantic City Chamber of Commerce? The twelve athletic directors?

So it must be that Hagwell met with AC, brought back a lousy proposal that the ADs voted to accept, right? This is like the coaches complaining that they don't like the full mask. Then convince your schools not to vote for it. No one comes down and tells the schools this is it, the schools vote on a specific proposal. If the proposal is not what they think, then they have lousy lawyers.

Now I am seeing

beeeej@ecachockey.com

Don't click on the above or shagwell might get wind of the coup in progress.

Beeeej

adamw
Nothwithstanding as someone else said - what does the location of the tournament have to do with TV (if anything, it improves the odds) .... Do you understand the decision to go to Atlantic City was not Steve Hagwell's? It was a 9-3 vote of athletic directors - the people that decide on any major decision, including Cornell's and everyone else's. Hagwell had nothing to do with it.

Who had the meetings with the Atlantic City Chamber of Commerce? The twelve athletic directors?

The league solicits bids. The league office takes the bids, and brings them to the ADs to vote. The ADs went with Atlantic City because it promised a large guarantee that no other place would do. And there's too many coaches that don't want to be in Lake Placid because of the large ice surface. And no one wanted to be back Albany except maybe Union and RPI. So options were limited.

jkahn
It's certainly disappointing to have to be watching on the small, sometimes fuzzy, screen. Back in 2000 I switched to Directv and got it installed hours before the ECACs, mainly for that purpose. It's been great for college hockey, and it's sad that the ECAC couldn't find one of those stations (like MSG++) to cover the games.
A few of us old-timers even remember back in the circa '72-'73 to '74-'75 era when PBS stations in the Northeast carried a Saturday afternoon ECAC game of the week. Now we can't even get on TV with hundreds of stations out there. Maybe the ECAC should've tried some longshot possibilities like ION or Spike (perhaps they did for all I know). It's a way for those networks to make more people aware that they exist. Heck, even TRU TV is showing NCAA BB games tonight.

Jeff - that is not the issue. A TV network needs to have the infrastructure in place to produce a remote broadcast. If it doesn, the ECAC would have to produce the broadcast itself, hiring indepdendent production companies. To do so costs about $50,000 once you include labor costs - and all of the buildings, including Albany, have union employees that need to get paid. The league was not willing to pay that cost.

Trotsky

css228
Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Seems to me that blaming Hagwell for the league's lack of money and marketability is a little like blaming Sandy Alderson for the Mets' lack of money and marketability. At the end of the day, it's ownership, not management. The ECAC member schools are not willing to front the money for things like TV contracts and marketing and the championship venue, and not willing to erode academic qualifications that hold back the league from competing with the other majors.

Put that way, it is not an unmitigated bad thing. It might be fun to be Minnesota from time to time, but do you really want to be Minnesota all the time?

This is exactly right Greg. The ECAC schools have to be willing to do certain things, and they are not - and somehow the league office becomes a scapegoat ... Perhaps there are perfectly good reasons all around for why things are the way they are. The ECAC is what it is. Embrace it. That said, it would be nice to figure out a way to get on TV.

adamw

Beeeej

adamw
Nothwithstanding as someone else said - what does the location of the tournament have to do with TV (if anything, it improves the odds) .... Do you understand the decision to go to Atlantic City was not Steve Hagwell's? It was a 9-3 vote of athletic directors - the people that decide on any major decision, including Cornell's and everyone else's. Hagwell had nothing to do with it.

Who had the meetings with the Atlantic City Chamber of Commerce? The twelve athletic directors?

The league solicits bids. The league office takes the bids, and brings them to the ADs to vote. The ADs went with Atlantic City because it promised a large guarantee that no other place would do. And there's too many coaches that don't want to be in Lake Placid because of the large ice surface. And no one wanted to be back Albany except maybe Union and RPI. So options were limited.

Yet, RPI is producing this year's tourney for the internets. I would think that the only thing missing is the network willing to take the feed.

Just hold it in Lynah, dammit.

releck97

adamw

Beeeej

adamw
Nothwithstanding as someone else said - what does the location of the tournament have to do with TV (if anything, it improves the odds) .... Do you understand the decision to go to Atlantic City was not Steve Hagwell's? It was a 9-3 vote of athletic directors - the people that decide on any major decision, including Cornell's and everyone else's. Hagwell had nothing to do with it.

Who had the meetings with the Atlantic City Chamber of Commerce? The twelve athletic directors?

The league solicits bids. The league office takes the bids, and brings them to the ADs to vote. The ADs went with Atlantic City because it promised a large guarantee that no other place would do. And there's too many coaches that don't want to be in Lake Placid because of the large ice surface. And no one wanted to be back Albany except maybe Union and RPI. So options were limited.

Yet, RPI is producing this year's tourney for the internets. I would think that the only thing missing is the network willing to take the feed.

The production quality needed for an internet stream is not what's going to be needed for a television broadcast. Plus add in renting satellite time and it's apples and oranges.

BMac
Just hold it in Lynah, dammit.

Agreed. But at the very least, if they want to be fair, they can hold it in the rink of the highest remaining seed every year.

BMac
Just hold it in Lynah, dammit.

This is actually probably the best possible solution out there. Too bad the rest of the league would cry bloody murder.

adamw

Trotsky

css228
Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Seems to me that blaming Hagwell for the league's lack of money and marketability is a little like blaming Sandy Alderson for the Mets' lack of money and marketability. At the end of the day, it's ownership, not management. The ECAC member schools are not willing to front the money for things like TV contracts and marketing and the championship venue, and not willing to erode academic qualifications that hold back the league from competing with the other majors.

Put that way, it is not an unmitigated bad thing. It might be fun to be Minnesota from time to time, but do you really want to be Minnesota all the time?

This is exactly right Greg. The ECAC schools have to be willing to do certain things, and they are not - and somehow the league office becomes a scapegoat ... Perhaps there are perfectly good reasons all around for why things are the way they are. The ECAC is what it is. Embrace it. That said, it would be nice to figure out a way to get on TV.

A commissioner's responsibility is to work in the best interests of the league. Hagwell is stuck in place, not doing a damn thing about the incompetent officiating (I've never seen a league where there are as many offsides calls where the puck never crosses into the offensive zone as the ECAC), the league's marketability, or even finding a reasonable tourney site where we don't look like idiots for not even being able to fill a quarter of the building. When the NHL was struggling, Bettman led an initiative to revolutionize the game. Hagwell reminds me more of Bud Selig, a commissioner who has no clue what hes doing and ruins the integrity and marketability of the league in the process. I understand the ECAC will never be a big deal, but the fact that they can't even be broadcast on Time Warner Cable Sports is just embarrassing. Once again the AHA has a contract. The league dropped the ball on this. Because there is no way a league with 6 highly recognizable names in it is less marketable than the AHA, which the only schools I had heard of before coming to Cornell were RIT, Robert Morris, Army, and Air Force. CHN hardly ever covers the league (Mostly because no one outside of it cares), Its not a matter of sacrificing standards to be marketable. I mean Cornell has a great product that sells out, without compromising its academic standards. It's a matter of a pretty good product, which no one has thought of a creative way to sell. Yes we're never going to be a huge league. I get that, but that doesn't mean the league offices don't have every responsibility to make the best out of what they can do. If that means Albany, so be it. But AC is just an example of how incompetent our league heads really are. It didn't have to come to this point. The fact that we are here says everything I need to know about league leadership.

jtn27

BMac
Just hold it in Lynah, dammit.

Agreed. But at the very least, if they want to be fair, they can hold it in the rink of the highest remaining seed every year.

So this year at Union in Schenectady in a rink that seats 2225?

css228

adamw

Trotsky

css228
Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Seems to me that blaming Hagwell for the league's lack of money and marketability is a little like blaming Sandy Alderson for the Mets' lack of money and marketability. At the end of the day, it's ownership, not management. The ECAC member schools are not willing to front the money for things like TV contracts and marketing and the championship venue, and not willing to erode academic qualifications that hold back the league from competing with the other majors.

Put that way, it is not an unmitigated bad thing. It might be fun to be Minnesota from time to time, but do you really want to be Minnesota all the time?

This is exactly right Greg. The ECAC schools have to be willing to do certain things, and they are not - and somehow the league office becomes a scapegoat ... Perhaps there are perfectly good reasons all around for why things are the way they are. The ECAC is what it is. Embrace it. That said, it would be nice to figure out a way to get on TV.

A commissioner's responsibility is to work in the best interests of the league. Hagwell is stuck in place, not doing a damn thing about the incompetent officiating (I've never seen a league where there are as many offsides calls where the puck never crosses into the offensive zone as the ECAC), the league's marketability, or even finding a reasonable tourney site where we don't look like idiots for not even being able to fill a quarter of the building. When the NHL was struggling, Bettman led an initiative to revolutionize the game. Hagwell reminds me more of Bud Selig, a commissioner who has no clue what hes doing and ruins the integrity and marketability of the league in the process. I understand the ECAC will never be a big deal, but the fact that they can't even be broadcast on Time Warner Cable Sports is just embarrassing. Once again the AHA has a contract. The league dropped the ball on this. Because there is no way a league with 6 highly recognizable names in it is less marketable than the AHA, which the only schools I had heard of before coming to Cornell were RIT, Robert Morris, Army, and Air Force. CHN hardly ever covers the league (Mostly because no one outside of it cares), Its not a matter of sacrificing standards to be marketable. I mean Cornell has a great product that sells out, without compromising its academic standards. It's a matter of a pretty good product, which no one has thought of a creative way to sell. Yes we're never going to be a huge league. I get that, but that doesn't mean the league offices don't have every responsibility to make the best out of what they can do. If that means Albany, so be it. But AC is just an example of how incompetent our league heads really are. It didn't have to come to this point. The fact that we are here says everything I need to know about league leadership.

What is it about Adam's post that you do not understand?

The league solicits bids. The league office takes the bids, and brings them to the ADs to vote. The ADs went with Atlantic City because it promised a large guarantee that no other place would do. And there's too many coaches that don't want to be in Lake Placid because of the large ice surface. And no one wanted to be back Albany except maybe Union and RPI. So options were limited.

The member schools are not being dragged around by their noses. I guess that's hard to understand, but it's true. They picked AC, unfortunately, and now we have to live with it. As I've said many times, it seems like a lousy decision, but it was made by "our" schools. Hopefully they can change it, but complaining about the people who administer decisions made by the schools is rather ridiculous, in my opinion. If you want to complain to someone who can change things, complain to your school, and offer to try and help. Sure there's nothing you or I can do, but offering may get you further in discussion. It's sure better than posting complaints here.

Jim Hyla

css228

adamw

Trotsky

css228
Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Seems to me that blaming Hagwell for the league's lack of money and marketability is a little like blaming Sandy Alderson for the Mets' lack of money and marketability. At the end of the day, it's ownership, not management. The ECAC member schools are not willing to front the money for things like TV contracts and marketing and the championship venue, and not willing to erode academic qualifications that hold back the league from competing with the other majors.

Put that way, it is not an unmitigated bad thing. It might be fun to be Minnesota from time to time, but do you really want to be Minnesota all the time?

This is exactly right Greg. The ECAC schools have to be willing to do certain things, and they are not - and somehow the league office becomes a scapegoat ... Perhaps there are perfectly good reasons all around for why things are the way they are. The ECAC is what it is. Embrace it. That said, it would be nice to figure out a way to get on TV.

A commissioner's responsibility is to work in the best interests of the league. Hagwell is stuck in place, not doing a damn thing about the incompetent officiating (I've never seen a league where there are as many offsides calls where the puck never crosses into the offensive zone as the ECAC), the league's marketability, or even finding a reasonable tourney site where we don't look like idiots for not even being able to fill a quarter of the building. When the NHL was struggling, Bettman led an initiative to revolutionize the game. Hagwell reminds me more of Bud Selig, a commissioner who has no clue what hes doing and ruins the integrity and marketability of the league in the process. I understand the ECAC will never be a big deal, but the fact that they can't even be broadcast on Time Warner Cable Sports is just embarrassing. Once again the AHA has a contract. The league dropped the ball on this. Because there is no way a league with 6 highly recognizable names in it is less marketable than the AHA, which the only schools I had heard of before coming to Cornell were RIT, Robert Morris, Army, and Air Force. CHN hardly ever covers the league (Mostly because no one outside of it cares), Its not a matter of sacrificing standards to be marketable. I mean Cornell has a great product that sells out, without compromising its academic standards. It's a matter of a pretty good product, which no one has thought of a creative way to sell. Yes we're never going to be a huge league. I get that, but that doesn't mean the league offices don't have every responsibility to make the best out of what they can do. If that means Albany, so be it. But AC is just an example of how incompetent our league heads really are. It didn't have to come to this point. The fact that we are here says everything I need to know about league leadership.

What is it about Adam's post that you do not understand?

The league solicits bids. The league office takes the bids, and brings them to the ADs to vote. The ADs went with Atlantic City because it promised a large guarantee that no other place would do. And there's too many coaches that don't want to be in Lake Placid because of the large ice surface. And no one wanted to be back Albany except maybe Union and RPI. So options were limited.

The member schools are not being dragged around by their noses. I guess that's hard to understand, but it's true. They picked AC, unfortunately, and now we have to live with it. As I've said many times, it seems like a lousy decision, but it was made by "our" schools. Hopefully they can change it, but complaining about the people who administer decisions made by the schools is rather ridiculous, in my opinion. If you want to complain to someone who can change things, complain to your school, and offer to try and help. Sure there's nothing you or I can do, but offering may get you further in discussion. It's sure better than posting complaints here.

It's not that I don't understand that. All I'm saying is that the league could have gotten creative and come back with better bids. If AC is the most appealing bid they can get to bring back to the schools, then the league office has failed. Besides, if I were a betting man, my money would be on Cornell as one of the three that voted against AC. Furthermore, my use of here was probably not specific enough, as it referred to not only the location of the tournament, but the lack of the TV contract, the horrid officiating, and the all around state of the league generally not doing anything to improve its situation.

*Example of the kind of creative thinking that would have been appreciated. Perhaps the league could have tried the NHL network. They show Canadian Junior Hockey in America on a regular basis, and almost all of their nightly coverage is just NHL tonight hours and hours on end. Did anyone ever consider that perhaps they might televise the ECAC tournament?

If they couldnt get a live feed why not at least get a time delayed broadcast someplace? And why the talk about Sat time? They can feed it right to the internet for TV feed, TW already does it that way for many broadcasts. if they wanted to keep costs low that could have and still had a better than internet feed to work with.

Jim Hyla
If you want to complain to someone who can change things, complain to your school, and offer to try and help. Sure there's nothing you or I can do, but offering may get you further in discussion. It's sure better than posting complaints here.

To be fair, that's a little too simplistic. For the ECAC schools for which hockey is not a revenue sport, they will go wherever the $$ is the best no matter what. Do you think the administration at Brown cares whether the tournament is in Placid, Boston, or Boise? If Boise came with a guaranteed take, they'd probably vote for it over Boston. My guess is Cornell wouldn't* and I'd be preaching to the choir telling them (my school) to not ship the tournament to Idaho.

And of course, whining here gets nowhere productive. I'm not sure whining to CU gets me anywhere. Short of promising a big check for moving the tournament elsewhere, what can someone actually "offer to try and help"? And I don't mean that rhetorically. I'm curious what you had in mind.

*-though that assessment includes some measure of optimism

css228

Jim Hyla

css228

adamw

Trotsky

css228
Hagwell has to go, because he's going to run the league into the ground.

Seems to me that blaming Hagwell for the league's lack of money and marketability is a little like blaming Sandy Alderson for the Mets' lack of money and marketability. At the end of the day, it's ownership, not management. The ECAC member schools are not willing to front the money for things like TV contracts and marketing and the championship venue, and not willing to erode academic qualifications that hold back the league from competing with the other majors.

Put that way, it is not an unmitigated bad thing. It might be fun to be Minnesota from time to time, but do you really want to be Minnesota all the time?

This is exactly right Greg. The ECAC schools have to be willing to do certain things, and they are not - and somehow the league office becomes a scapegoat ... Perhaps there are perfectly good reasons all around for why things are the way they are. The ECAC is what it is. Embrace it. That said, it would be nice to figure out a way to get on TV.

A commissioner's responsibility is to work in the best interests of the league. Hagwell is stuck in place, not doing a damn thing about the incompetent officiating (I've never seen a league where there are as many offsides calls where the puck never crosses into the offensive zone as the ECAC), the league's marketability, or even finding a reasonable tourney site where we don't look like idiots for not even being able to fill a quarter of the building. When the NHL was struggling, Bettman led an initiative to revolutionize the game. Hagwell reminds me more of Bud Selig, a commissioner who has no clue what hes doing and ruins the integrity and marketability of the league in the process. I understand the ECAC will never be a big deal, but the fact that they can't even be broadcast on Time Warner Cable Sports is just embarrassing. Once again the AHA has a contract. The league dropped the ball on this. Because there is no way a league with 6 highly recognizable names in it is less marketable than the AHA, which the only schools I had heard of before coming to Cornell were RIT, Robert Morris, Army, and Air Force. CHN hardly ever covers the league (Mostly because no one outside of it cares), Its not a matter of sacrificing standards to be marketable. I mean Cornell has a great product that sells out, without compromising its academic standards. It's a matter of a pretty good product, which no one has thought of a creative way to sell. Yes we're never going to be a huge league. I get that, but that doesn't mean the league offices don't have every responsibility to make the best out of what they can do. If that means Albany, so be it. But AC is just an example of how incompetent our league heads really are. It didn't have to come to this point. The fact that we are here says everything I need to know about league leadership.

What is it about Adam's post that you do not understand?

The league solicits bids. The league office takes the bids, and brings them to the ADs to vote. The ADs went with Atlantic City because it promised a large guarantee that no other place would do. And there's too many coaches that don't want to be in Lake Placid because of the large ice surface. And no one wanted to be back Albany except maybe Union and RPI. So options were limited.

The member schools are not being dragged around by their noses. I guess that's hard to understand, but it's true. They picked AC, unfortunately, and now we have to live with it. As I've said many times, it seems like a lousy decision, but it was made by "our" schools. Hopefully they can change it, but complaining about the people who administer decisions made by the schools is rather ridiculous, in my opinion. If you want to complain to someone who can change things, complain to your school, and offer to try and help. Sure there's nothing you or I can do, but offering may get you further in discussion. It's sure better than posting complaints here.

It's not that I don't understand that. All I'm saying is that the league could have gotten creative and come back with better bids. If AC is the most appealing bid they can get to bring back to the schools, then the league office has failed. Besides, if I were a betting man, my money would be on Cornell as one of the three that voted against AC. Furthermore, my use of here was probably not specific enough, as it referred to not only the location of the tournament, but the lack of the TV contract, the horrid officiating, and the all around state of the league generally not doing anything to improve its situation.

*Example of the kind of creative thinking that would have been appreciated. Perhaps the league could have tried the NHL network. They show Canadian Junior Hockey in America on a regular basis, and almost all of their nightly coverage is just NHL tonight hours and hours on end. Did anyone ever consider that perhaps they might televise the ECAC tournament?

In fact, as has been mentioned before, NHL did carry games. As I remember it was just a pick up from another feed, not that they wanted to produce it. Anyway, no one has come up with a suggeston that hasn't been tried. That seems to suggest that there weren't many options for TV. I'm sure nonbelievers will never be convinced by facts, that's the nature of belief, but until someone gives an argument based upon some facts, I'm willing to say, we've got to live with what we've got. And, we have to try and make it better.

Jim Hyla

css228
*Example of the kind of creative thinking that would have been appreciated. Perhaps the league could have tried the NHL network. They show Canadian Junior Hockey in America on a regular basis, and almost all of their nightly coverage is just NHL tonight hours and hours on end. Did anyone ever consider that perhaps they might televise the ECAC tournament?

In fact, as has been mentioned before, NHL did carry games. As I remember it was just a pick up from another feed, not that they wanted to produce it. Anyway, no one has come up with a suggeston that hasn't been tried. That seems to suggest that there weren't many options for TV. I'm sure nonbelievers will never be convinced by facts, that's the nature of belief, but until someone gives an argument based upon some facts, I'm willing to say, we've got to live with what we've got. And, we have to try and make it better.

As I remember they televised the RPI game last year at RPI. Meaning its likely they took the RPI TV feed. Which is why I'm wondering why that can't be done again?

css228

Jim Hyla

css228
*Example of the kind of creative thinking that would have been appreciated. Perhaps the league could have tried the NHL network. They show Canadian Junior Hockey in America on a regular basis, and almost all of their nightly coverage is just NHL tonight hours and hours on end. Did anyone ever consider that perhaps they might televise the ECAC tournament?

In fact, as has been mentioned before, NHL did carry games. As I remember it was just a pick up from another feed, not that they wanted to produce it. Anyway, no one has come up with a suggeston that hasn't been tried. That seems to suggest that there weren't many options for TV. I'm sure nonbelievers will never be convinced by facts, that's the nature of belief, but until someone gives an argument based upon some facts, I'm willing to say, we've got to live with what we've got. And, we have to try and make it better.

As I remember they televised the RPI game last year at RPI. Meaning its likely they took the RPI TV feed. Which is why I'm wondering why that can't be done again?

My guess is that the sponsorship dollar for five hours of NHL tonight rank higher than whatever ads you could sell for ECAC hockey and the league wasn't interested in paying the difference. I fondly remember the days of "This week in ECAC hockey. Brought to you by ECAC hockey."

Chris '03

css228

Jim Hyla

css228
*Example of the kind of creative thinking that would have been appreciated. Perhaps the league could have tried the NHL network. They show Canadian Junior Hockey in America on a regular basis, and almost all of their nightly coverage is just NHL tonight hours and hours on end. Did anyone ever consider that perhaps they might televise the ECAC tournament?

In fact, as has been mentioned before, NHL did carry games. As I remember it was just a pick up from another feed, not that they wanted to produce it. Anyway, no one has come up with a suggeston that hasn't been tried. That seems to suggest that there weren't many options for TV. I'm sure nonbelievers will never be convinced by facts, that's the nature of belief, but until someone gives an argument based upon some facts, I'm willing to say, we've got to live with what we've got. And, we have to try and make it better.

As I remember they televised the RPI game last year at RPI. Meaning its likely they took the RPI TV feed. Which is why I'm wondering why that can't be done again?

My guess is that the sponsorship dollar for five hours of NHL tonight rank higher than whatever ads you could sell for ECAC hockey and the league wasn't interested in paying the difference. I fondly remember the days of "This week in ECAC hockey. Brought to you by ECAC hockey."

But even on tape delay. You can't tell me that the American sponsorship rights for the QMJHL are higher than the sponsorship rights ECAC Hockey.

css228

Jim Hyla

css228
*Example of the kind of creative thinking that would have been appreciated. Perhaps the league could have tried the NHL network. They show Canadian Junior Hockey in America on a regular basis, and almost all of their nightly coverage is just NHL tonight hours and hours on end. Did anyone ever consider that perhaps they might televise the ECAC tournament?

In fact, as has been mentioned before, NHL did carry games. As I remember it was just a pick up from another feed, not that they wanted to produce it. Anyway, no one has come up with a suggeston that hasn't been tried. That seems to suggest that there weren't many options for TV. I'm sure nonbelievers will never be convinced by facts, that's the nature of belief, but until someone gives an argument based upon some facts, I'm willing to say, we've got to live with what we've got. And, we have to try and make it better.

As I remember they televised the RPI game last year at RPI. Meaning its likely they took the RPI TV feed. Which is why I'm wondering why that can't be done again?

The one and only use of RPI-TV for a Time Warner live broadcast was this year's Freakout. However, I am now wondering if we can't talk TW into a delayed broadcast of this year's event. Although at this point, it may be contractually impossible.

There are a lot of good ideas and people who care giving feedback. As we have already seen, college hockey as we know it; is going to have great changes occur come the 2013-14 season. As of right now the ECAC is falling further behind the new conferences and realignments coming. Had the ECAC had a professional fulltime PR person with the credentials and connections in charge of the ECAC hockey championship this situation would not have occurred regardless of where the tournament was being held. It takes at least a year or more to plan these things out and be successful. As many of you have pointed out money seems to be the issue and to hire such a qualified person requires money. To line up sponsors and TV takes time and a lot of hand squeezing. I get the feeling that this TV issue was not addressed early enough, I could be wrong. But Comcast and Fios are right in the neighborhood of Atlantic City.

Cornell needs to have the guts to let the ECAC know they are willing to walk if things do not improve. Play in Hockey East; you think Hockey East would not want Cornell?-fantasy-. Kids today want to be seen and I believe an issue like this will be used as a recruiting detriment for all ECAC hockey schools. Schafer does an incredible job getting kids to come to Cornell instead of higher profile programs or major junior A. I think you could tell from his quote: “One of the reasons we went [to Atlantic City] was that is gave us a great guarantee to be on T.V. It’s really disappointing for our fans and alumni base that depends on those T.V. games. It’s a big failure of our league not to have those games on T.V. [The league] needs to look at why this happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again.”; Schafer feels someone did not do their due diligence, I agree. Cornell Ice Hockey is far and above the best supported and followed program in the Ivies and ECAC. I would like to see if we can swim with the other big boys.

css228
It's not that I don't understand that. All I'm saying is that the league could have gotten creative and come back with better bids. If AC is the most appealing bid they can get to bring back to the schools, then the league office has failed. Besides, if I were a betting man, my money would be on Cornell as one of the three that voted against AC. Furthermore, my use of here was probably not specific enough, as it referred to not only the location of the tournament, but the lack of the TV contract, the horrid officiating, and the all around state of the league generally not doing anything to improve its situation.

*Example of the kind of creative thinking that would have been appreciated. Perhaps the league could have tried the NHL network. They show Canadian Junior Hockey in America on a regular basis, and almost all of their nightly coverage is just NHL tonight hours and hours on end. Did anyone ever consider that perhaps they might televise the ECAC tournament?

Sorry to be blunt, but you're being clueless ... For one, in response to something you said up thread - what are you referring to when you say Atlantic Hockey has a TV contract?

Next ... How do you know the league didn't try NHL Network? Again, NHL Network was not sending its own crew down to do it. ECAC would have to buy time to do just the championship game, on Saturday afternoon, and payh $50,000 to do it -- something the schools are not willing to do.

Next ... The league cannot "get creative and come back with better bids" ... What do you suggest they do? Go to the arena managers and hold them hostage until they bid? Which place would you have liked this to be? Any reasonable place in the Northeast bid ... Atlantic City put up the most money ... the ADs voted for it over any other option. End of story.

Honestly - all of these criticisms betray a large ignorance of the issue. It's easy, simplistic and wrong to sit here criticizing the league office without knowing the ins and outs of the how it works, and what the league office has done to try. Ultimately, these schools - collectively - are just not popular enough to warrant any network being that motivated to make it work. I love the ECAC - have covered it for over 20 years - and I run CHN by the way ... and fact is, we go where the coverage and eyeballs demand. Just like television does. Did anyone check to see the attendance at Harvard this past weekend? Who beyond Cornell fans care in enough numbers to give any TV network an incentive to carry games. NBC Network only got something like 48,000 viewers for Harvard/Yale. Which is basically a 0.0 rating.

I've written more articles in my life defending the hockey in the ECAC than I care to count anymore. No one would love the league to be more wildly popular than me. But reality is reality - and I know the people involved and the efforts that are made.

There's so much more that could be said ... but I suppose if you're hell bent on blaming the league office for the lack of interest, then it doesn't much matter what I say.

flyersgolf
Schafer does an incredible job getting kids to come to Cornell instead of higher profile programs or major junior A. I think you could tell from his quote: “One of the reasons we went [to Atlantic City] was that is gave us a great guarantee to be on T.V. It’s really disappointing for our fans and alumni base that depends on those T.V. games. It’s a big failure of our league not to have those games on T.V. [The league] needs to look at why this happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again.”; Schafer feels someone did not do their due diligence, I agree. Cornell Ice Hockey is far and above the best supported and followed program in the Ivies and ECAC. I would like to see if we can swim with the other big boys.

This is a complete misquote ... IF you are quoting this from an article somewhere, then that article is misquoting Schafer. He never said they picked Atlantic City to get a "great guarantee to be on TV" .... You, or someone, added "to be on TV" to that quote They went to Atlantic City to get a "great guarantee" ... meaning - GURANTEED $$. Up front. It had nothing to do with TV.

css228
Besides, if I were a betting man, my money would be on Cornell as one of the three that voted against AC.

I will take that bet. I take PayPal.

flyersgolf
Cornell needs to have the guts to let the ECAC know they are willing to walk if things do not improve. Play in Hockey East; you think Hockey East would not want Cornell?-fantasy-. Kids today want to be seen and I believe an issue like this will be used as a recruiting detriment for all ECAC hockey schools. Schafer does an incredible job getting kids to come to Cornell instead of higher profile programs or major junior A. I think you could tell from his quote: “One of the reasons we went [to Atlantic City] was that is gave us a great guarantee to be on T.V. It’s really disappointing for our fans and alumni base that depends on those T.V. games. It’s a big failure of our league not to have those games on T.V. [The league] needs to look at why this happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again.”; Schafer feels someone did not do their due diligence, I agree. Cornell Ice Hockey is far and above the best supported and followed program in the Ivies and ECAC. I would like to see if we can swim with the other big boys.

That will never happen, except in some sort of scenario where the level of play in the ECAC becomes so diluted that it loses its auto-bid to the NCAA Tournament. While Hockey East would probably love to have Cornell and the large fan base that comes with it, I highly doubt they would want Harvard, Yale, or any of the other Ivies, and I can't see Cornell leaving the other Ivy League teams behind. The 6 Ivies with DI college hockey come as a package.

adamw
Did anyone check to see the attendance at Harvard this past weekend?

Yes. And I cringed.

Chris '03

adamw
Did anyone check to see the attendance at Harvard this past weekend?

Yes. And I cringed.

This says that Harvard has averaged 95% attendance this season (it also says RIT has averaged 111%). That can't be right. Where did you find the attendance info?

jtn27

Chris '03

adamw
Did anyone check to see the attendance at Harvard this past weekend?

Yes. And I cringed.

This says that Harvard has averaged 95% attendance this season (it also says RIT has averaged 111%). That can't be right. Where did you find the attendance info?

[www.collegehockeystats.net]

No game in the series cracked 2k. CU women did better than that.

ETA: Harvard's numbers you cite may include the game at Fenway. (attendance 9k)

adamw

flyersgolf
I think you could tell from his quote: “One of the reasons we went [to Atlantic City] was that is gave us a great guarantee to be on T.V...”

This is a complete misquote ... IF you are quoting this from an article somewhere, then that article is misquoting Schafer. He never said they picked Atlantic City to get a "great guarantee to be on TV" .... You, or someone, added "to be on TV" to that quote They went to Atlantic City to get a "great guarantee" ... meaning - GURANTEED $$. Up front. It had nothing to do with TV.

[www.uscho.com]

"One of the reasons we went [to Atlantic City] was that is gave us a great guarantee to be on TV. It’s really disappointing for our fans and alumni base that depends on those TV games. It’s a big failure of our league not to have those games on TV."

Maybe it he was misquoted, but flyersgolf isn't playing a game of telephone here. The quote's right out of the USCHO article that appears to have specifically called coaches to get quotes about this.

AdamW I really appreciate your feedback, it is great to have you on here, I copied and pasted directly from the article.

Chris '03

jtn27

Chris '03

adamw
Did anyone check to see the attendance at Harvard this past weekend?

Yes. And I cringed.

This says that Harvard has averaged 95% attendance this season (it also says RIT has averaged 111%). That can't be right. Where did you find the attendance info?

[www.collegehockeystats.net]

No game in the series cracked 2k. CU women did better than that.

ETA: Harvard's numbers you cite may include the game at Fenway. (attendance 9k)

I think you may be right about Fenway. The page I linked to says that it includes "home games" played at other sites. So that explains Harvard's abnormally high attendance.

pfibiger
Maybe it he was misquoted, but flyersgolf isn't playing a game of telephone here. The quote's right out of the USCHO article that appears to have specifically called coaches to get quotes about this.

OK. Well, that article is inaccurate. I was on the same conference call - I have the same quote from Schafer. It came from the conference call with coaches on Monday morning. Nate Owen misunderstood what Schafer was saying and added the "to be on TV" on his own because maybe that's what he thought Schafer meant. Schafer never said that.

jtn27

Chris '03

adamw
Did anyone check to see the attendance at Harvard this past weekend?

Yes. And I cringed.

This says that Harvard has averaged 95% attendance this season (it also says RIT has averaged 111%). That can't be right. Where did you find the attendance info?

Our page that you linked (thank you) is unfortunately inaccurate on the percentages when teams plays games that are considered home games, but are not in their home arena. RIT, for example, played a game at Blue Cross Arena that got a big crowd, skewing the percentage. As someone else rightly pointed out, the Fenway game against Union also skewed Harvard's percentage.

adamw

css228
It's not that I don't understand that. All I'm saying is that the league could have gotten creative and come back with better bids. If AC is the most appealing bid they can get to bring back to the schools, then the league office has failed. Besides, if I were a betting man, my money would be on Cornell as one of the three that voted against AC. Furthermore, my use of here was probably not specific enough, as it referred to not only the location of the tournament, but the lack of the TV contract, the horrid officiating, and the all around state of the league generally not doing anything to improve its situation.

*Example of the kind of creative thinking that would have been appreciated. Perhaps the league could have tried the NHL network. They show Canadian Junior Hockey in America on a regular basis, and almost all of their nightly coverage is just NHL tonight hours and hours on end. Did anyone ever consider that perhaps they might televise the ECAC tournament?

Sorry to be blunt, but you're being clueless ... For one, in response to something you said up thread - what are you referring to when you say Atlantic Hockey has a TV contract?

Next ... How do you know the league didn't try NHL Network? Again, NHL Network was not sending its own crew down to do it. ECAC would have to buy time to do just the championship game, on Saturday afternoon, and payh $50,000 to do it -- something the schools are not willing to do.

Next ... The league cannot "get creative and come back with better bids" ... What do you suggest they do? Go to the arena managers and hold them hostage until they bid? Which place would you have liked this to be? Any reasonable place in the Northeast bid ... Atlantic City put up the most money ... the ADs voted for it over any other option. End of story.

Honestly - all of these criticisms betray a large ignorance of the issue. It's easy, simplistic and wrong to sit here criticizing the league office without knowing the ins and outs of the how it works, and what the league office has done to try. Ultimately, these schools - collectively - are just not popular enough to warrant any network being that motivated to make it work. I love the ECAC - have covered it for over 20 years - and I run CHN by the way ... and fact is, we go where the coverage and eyeballs demand. Just like television does. Did anyone check to see the attendance at Harvard this past weekend? Who beyond Cornell fans care in enough numbers to give any TV network an incentive to carry games. NBC Network only got something like 48,000 viewers for Harvard/Yale. Which is basically a 0.0 rating.

I've written more articles in my life defending the hockey in the ECAC than I care to count anymore. No one would love the league to be more wildly popular than me. But reality is reality - and I know the people involved and the efforts that are made.

There's so much more that could be said ... but I suppose if you're hell bent on blaming the league office for the lack of interest, then it doesn't much matter what I say.

1) I'm referring to the fact that their final will be televised, per Brian Sullivan's USCHO article.
2) Creative would be along the lines of what RPI did for Big Red Freakout. Let RPI TV do the production, like they're planning to anyway, and then just give the feed away, or pay whatever small fee a regional cable network wants to force on it. It is worth the investment.d
3) Creative in terms of rinks could be anything. If you're going out of the league footprint, why not Hershey, PA and its hockey specific arena? What about doing something totally different and holding the tourney in Canada? Or if the radical idea of staying inside the league footprint is in play, then how come I've never heard Scranton-Wilkes Barre brought up once? And as another poster suggested, why not just hold the tourney at Lynah, or Lynah and Houston? It may not be as glamourous, but it'd certainly be functional to have a rotation of the 3 largest buildings in the league (Correct me if I'm wrong, Lynah, Houston, and Thompson, or if you'd prefer to not be in NH, Ingalls). Even Matthews is a better option than what we have.

There are two ways to handle problems in life, you can just sit back and give up, or you can do something about it. All I'm saying is how is the league ever going to gain any traction, or any popularity, if it just accepts that it will never do so. There is no shame in trying and failing, Its the apparent lack of an attempt to even try that bothers me. And I know its totally unrealistic, because we'd never jeopardize the cash machine that is Ivy League status, but maybe the ECAC isn't the way to go if they aren't willing to put in the effort to raise the league profile. Yes the issue is that the leagues profile and popularity is not high enough, but you refuse to ask if it really has to be that way. Maybe it does, but maybe it doesn't. And that's why the league should get creative. Perhaps a league wide streaming package would keep alumni more connected, because its a real hassle to pay each school a fee for each game you watch out of league. Perhaps the solution is nothing I've mentioned above, or even perhaps there is no solution. But when I look and see that the AHA final will be televised, and that "ECAC hockey will be the only Division I league without a TV partnership for its title game", I see one conference that found a way to get things done, even if it cost them money, and another league, which is home to superior hockey and far more recognizable institutions, that basically gave up, or got outmaneuvered by the AHA. Either of which is quite frankly embarrassing.

A few quotes from Brian Sullivan's article - I have seen that perhaps these are misquotes, but the general sense backs up the feeling that the league should have been able to find a TV deal for at least the Final, if not the Semi-Final.

Mike Schafer, Cornell: “One of the reasons we went [to Atlantic City] was that is gave us a great guarantee to be on TV. It’s really disappointing for our fans and alumni base that depends on those TV games. It’s a big failure of our league not to have those games on TV. [The league] needs to look at why this happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

Don Vaughan, Colgate: “It’s extremely disappointing [that there were issues with the network]. I didn’t find out about it until a couple weeks ago. I find it hard to believe that a network would not want to pick up the championships, especially with the quality of the opponents in the games.”

Ted Donato, Harvard: “It’s always nice to be on TV; I think it’s a great exposure for the student-athletes involved. They’re certainly deserving of [it].”

Union’s Rick Bennett declined to elaborate on the issue, saying that was a question for the league office.

So clearly, people far more informed than me feel as though the league could have done something with regards to a TV partnership for the Final,

I'm not trying to be disrespectful, and will openly admit you probably know far more about this situation than I ever will, but I do believe that there is legitimate reason to be frustrated at the league office. I shudder to think of a world where asking for creativity in problem solving is "clueless" and "simplistic". If you're telling me that there is absolutely nothing more they can do to market the league, fine then, but is it wrong to suggest they may actually be able to do something? And if they may actually be able to do something about it, why is it wrong to expect them to do whatever they can. I think where we disagree is on our expectations of the league office. I want them to be more Gary Bettman, and less Bud Selig.

there are so many good arenas in the northeast, from Hartford to Bridgeport to Syracuse to Atlantic city, and they are all good, and more or less centrally located. Only Atlantic City truly offers a destination and attractions, even if its not so family friendly. which is a problem, i think.

Well, I guess we will know a little better at the end of this tournament, when they announce that (a) as planned, we will be returning in 2013 (rabble rabble rabble), (b) keep your eyes open for developing information on future venues (golf clap) or (c) the ECAC is proud to announce a ten year extension with Boardwalk Hall (city burned to ground; end of dilemma).

The Rancor
there are so many good arenas in the northeast, from Hartford to Bridgeport to Syracuse to Atlantic city, and they are all good, and more or less centrally located. Only Atlantic City truly offers a destination and attractions, even if its not so family friendly. which is a problem, i think.

If your two criteria for how to select an arena for the tournament are:
1) It's centrally located - I would amend this to include that it's near a large alumni base.
2) The city it's located in has family friendly destinations and attractions
Then I think there's only one arena that fits the bill: Madison Square Garden. However, I think we can all agree that's unrealistic (and debatably even a bad thing because it won't even be close to selling out). Since that's the case, the league is stuck in the unenviable position of needing to pick the rink which is the least reprehensible.

I know this is probably an unpopular opinion here (and I was unable to attend AC last year, so maybe I'll change my opinion in a week), but I think Atlantic City is probably the best option. The league chose to eschew the game being centrally located (meaning in upstate NY or New England) in favor of being within driving distance of the large alumni bases in New York and Philadelphia (I know Cornell has a lot of alums in these 2 cities, and, while I don't know for sure, I think it's safe to assume that the other Ivies do too. I don't know about the other smaller schools in the ECAC though). And being unable to find any feasible rink in a city with family friendly attractions, it settled for just having attractions, instead of nothing at all.

jtn27

The Rancor
there are so many good arenas in the northeast, from Hartford to Bridgeport to Syracuse to Atlantic city, and they are all good, and more or less centrally located. Only Atlantic City truly offers a destination and attractions, even if its not so family friendly. which is a problem, i think.

If your two criteria for how to select an arena for the tournament are 1) It's centrally located - I would amend this to include that it's near a large alumni base - and 2) The city it's located in has family friendly destinations and attractions, I think there's only one arena that fits the bill: Madison Square Garden. However, I think we can all agree that's unrealistic and debatably even a bad thing because it won't even be close to selling out. Since that's the case, the league is stuck in the unenviable position of needing to pick the rink which is the least reprehensible. I know this is probably an unpopular opinion here (and I was unable to attend AC last year, so maybe I'll change my opinion in a week), but I think Atlantic City is probably the best option. The league chose to eschew the game being centrally located (meaning in upstate NY or New England) in favor of being within driving distance of the large alumni bases in New York and Philadelphia. And being unable to find any feasible rink in a city with family friendly attractions, it settled for just having attractions, instead of nothing at all.

Eh, our alumni base in Philly isn't as big as you'd think. Also Boardwalk Hall isn't really a rink, at least not a hockey specific one. They did host this year's AHL all star game, but its more often used for concerts, and sporting events like boxing and basketball, not to forget, the Miss America Pageant. There have been hockey tenants (I think an ECHL team was there for four years) but its definitely not a hockey oriented facility, as evidenced by the terrible ice conditions last year. Let's put it this way though, Its really too bad the Spectrum was torn down, I mean they were using it for nothing in particular (other than the Phantoms), but it really would have been the perfect scenario for this, City people actually want to go to, Real rink. Thinking about Philly and throwing out crazy ideas, I wonder if an ice rink could be put in the Palestra or the Liacorous Center if you aren't going to use a hockey oriented building anyway. If Penn's Class of 23 Arena were twice the size, I'd advocate that for sure.

css228
It's totally fair to blame the league office, because they've created an unmarketable tournament ...

Maybe the ECAC office dropped the ball but look what it has to sell: ECAC hockey. The caliber of the league might be the culprit. We have not been a strong league at the national championship level for almost a generation. RPI and Harvard (shame) won the NCAAs in 1985 and 1989, Colgate made the title game in 1990. Since then, four trips to the Frozen Four, the most recent in 2003 (Cornell). For Hockey East, 2003-2011, 10 trips. TV sees the ECAC tournament crowning another one-and-done NCAA qualifier, so why bother. Swamp drag racing may be a better draw.

Fan interest in the ECAC playoffs doesn't suggest a lot of support for ECAC hockey either. What will the ECAC title game draw (actual attendees sitting in seats during the title game): 5,000? 3,000? By the way, the box score attendence figures for the three Yale-at-Harvard quarterfinal games: 1551, 1853, 801.

If anybody's going to fix the ECAC's lack of successful NCAA hockey, it feels as if half of the responsibility falls to Cornell and the other half falls to the other 11 teams. Yale or Union could have done something the previous two years and ... nada. Up to us. Too bad no Brian Ferlin.

The ECAC may be damaged goods. Albany is where the ECAC belongs after 2013. For a lot of fans, Albany can be a day trip Friday for Boston and NYC region fans and if your team wins, you day trip back Saturday also. Or finally show up on Saturday as Yale fans do.

Lake Placid works if you can convince fans it's a fun vacation weekend. Bridgeport could be possible, much as I dislike the thought. Is Prudential Center in Newark a possibility sometime in the future, lower bowl only with curtains over the top half?

If the league is looking for a revenue guarantee from the arena, maybe the league has to (with what money?) rent the auditorium and hope attendance covers costs. I'm curious to see if Atlantic City offers the ECAC an inducement to leave a year early. If nothing else is knocking on AC's door for mid-March 2013 and even the small turnout covers costs, then there's little reason for AC to end it a year early.

css228

jtn27

The Rancor
there are so many good arenas in the northeast, from Hartford to Bridgeport to Syracuse to Atlantic city, and they are all good, and more or less centrally located. Only Atlantic City truly offers a destination and attractions, even if its not so family friendly. which is a problem, i think.

If your two criteria for how to select an arena for the tournament are 1) It's centrally located - I would amend this to include that it's near a large alumni base - and 2) The city it's located in has family friendly destinations and attractions, I think there's only one arena that fits the bill: Madison Square Garden. However, I think we can all agree that's unrealistic and debatably even a bad thing because it won't even be close to selling out. Since that's the case, the league is stuck in the unenviable position of needing to pick the rink which is the least reprehensible. I know this is probably an unpopular opinion here (and I was unable to attend AC last year, so maybe I'll change my opinion in a week), but I think Atlantic City is probably the best option. The league chose to eschew the game being centrally located (meaning in upstate NY or New England) in favor of being within driving distance of the large alumni bases in New York and Philadelphia. And being unable to find any feasible rink in a city with family friendly attractions, it settled for just having attractions, instead of nothing at all.

Eh, our alumni base in Philly isn't as big as you'd think. Also Boardwalk Hall isn't really a rink, at least not a hockey specific one. They did host this year's AHL all star game, but its more often used for concerts, and sporting events like boxing and basketball, not to forget, the Miss America Pageant. There have been hockey tenants (I think an ECHL team was there for four years) but its definitely not a hockey oriented facility, as evidenced by the terrible ice conditions last year. Let's put it this way though, Its really too bad the Spectrum was torn down, I mean they were using it for nothing in particular (other than the Phantoms), but it really would have been the perfect scenario for this, City people actually want to go to, Real rink. Thinking about Philly and throwing out crazy ideas, I wonder if an ice rink could be put in the Palestra or the Liacorous Center if you aren't going to use a hockey oriented building anyway. If Penn's Class of 23 Arena were twice the size, I'd advocate that for sure.

I'll reserve my judgment about Boardwalk Hall as a rink until this weekend, but I agree with a lot of this. While I agree that Philly isn't quite as big on Cornellians as one would think, there are a lot more than meet the eye, especially when you look at Cornellians within graduate programs in Philly (I know 12 from my year alone at Penn, Jefferson, and Drexel for PhD/MPH/MD programs).

The Spectrum would've been wonderful if the Phantoms hadn't moved to the Adirondacks and they lost all financially feasible use for it, but I think there's a lot to be said about Penn's Class of 1923 rink. Not big enough for the tournament alas, but a really nice barn nonetheless. Though one has to wonder why Drexel doesn't just buy it from Penn when they use it for hockey more than Penn does.

But I digress.

Basically, I think AC is way too south for a tournament to be financially (and environmentally) feasible, especially given the fact that keeping the ice cold in March down here is sadly actually a problem. Especially as it's going to be in the high 60/70s most of the week and weekend.

Allentown gets our new rink in a couple years. We're reasonably located close to New York and Philly. The ECAC can hold it here.

Ducks for cover.

bnr24

css228

jtn27

The Rancor
there are so many good arenas in the northeast, from Hartford to Bridgeport to Syracuse to Atlantic city, and they are all good, and more or less centrally located. Only Atlantic City truly offers a destination and attractions, even if its not so family friendly. which is a problem, i think.

If your two criteria for how to select an arena for the tournament are 1) It's centrally located - I would amend this to include that it's near a large alumni base - and 2) The city it's located in has family friendly destinations and attractions, I think there's only one arena that fits the bill: Madison Square Garden. However, I think we can all agree that's unrealistic and debatably even a bad thing because it won't even be close to selling out. Since that's the case, the league is stuck in the unenviable position of needing to pick the rink which is the least reprehensible. I know this is probably an unpopular opinion here (and I was unable to attend AC last year, so maybe I'll change my opinion in a week), but I think Atlantic City is probably the best option. The league chose to eschew the game being centrally located (meaning in upstate NY or New England) in favor of being within driving distance of the large alumni bases in New York and Philadelphia. And being unable to find any feasible rink in a city with family friendly attractions, it settled for just having attractions, instead of nothing at all.

Eh, our alumni base in Philly isn't as big as you'd think. Also Boardwalk Hall isn't really a rink, at least not a hockey specific one. They did host this year's AHL all star game, but its more often used for concerts, and sporting events like boxing and basketball, not to forget, the Miss America Pageant. There have been hockey tenants (I think an ECHL team was there for four years) but its definitely not a hockey oriented facility, as evidenced by the terrible ice conditions last year. Let's put it this way though, Its really too bad the Spectrum was torn down, I mean they were using it for nothing in particular (other than the Phantoms), but it really would have been the perfect scenario for this, City people actually want to go to, Real rink. Thinking about Philly and throwing out crazy ideas, I wonder if an ice rink could be put in the Palestra or the Liacorous Center if you aren't going to use a hockey oriented building anyway. If Penn's Class of 23 Arena were twice the size, I'd advocate that for sure.

I'll reserve my judgment about Boardwalk Hall as a rink until this weekend, but I agree with a lot of this. While I agree that Philly isn't quite as big on Cornellians as one would think, there are a lot more than meet the eye, especially when you look at Cornellians within graduate programs in Philly (I know 12 from my year alone at Penn, Jefferson, and Drexel for PhD/MPH/MD programs).

The issue is not a critical mass of alumni. I am certain that almost any major city in the United States could make the case that it has the essential critical mass of Cornellians, lest we forget that there are eleven other schools in the ECAC which it appears as though many of us have done too readily on here, and alumni from other Ivies. The crucial issue is an effective mass of alumni within the city from the given institutions who will take the time to attend a hockey tournament in the host city. I am not sure if Philadelphia-based Cornellians have such dedication to take the time out of their schedule or classes, if they are currently graduate students, to attend an ECAC Championships. I know that there are at least a couple of Faithful on here from the Philadelphia area, but I know far more Cornellians in the Philadelphia area who would be no more inclined to attend the ECAC Championships were it held in Philadelphia than were it held in Atlantic City.

I would counter that New York City-based Cornellians have proven that they share the interest in the sport and will take the time to attend Cornell hockey events within the City. Additionally, New York City has the benefits of being an attraction that offers family-friendly entertainment and draws in students, fans, and alumni from the surrounding regions readily. It is reasonably accessible from the Capital Region, New Haven, Cambridge, and Princeton. I believe that for the ECAC Championships to be successful the host city needs to be a backdrop that attracts the needed audience. I am not alone in feeling this way. I read a post recently that put forth the argument that the ECAC Championships should be held in New York City.

Russ Bitely
What other city/site could possibly be easily accessible for teams and fans, have many attractions & accommodations outside the arena, actually have a facility that can host a hockey game, and lastly have a love for the game of hockey...'these streets will make you feel brand new, the lights will inspire you, lets here it for New York, New York, New York...' as Alicia Keys poetically sings...So who and what kind of people become the lawyers, doctors, financial gurus and live in NYC? Bingo! The ones that attended the prestigious Ivy League college and universities that make-up the ECAC Hockey Conference. What better event than hockey to get together and root for your alma mater while grabbing a few 8oz. beers at $10.00 a pop. This gives ECAC Hockey its instant big time identity above and beyond those other so-called super conferences.

Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

Silver lining: no TV timeouts.

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

This would also make the ECAC the officially-recognized hipster-poser conference.

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

As I wrote earlier, I think the Garden would be the best location, but it isn't feasible. While the Barclays would probably be better than a lot of the alternatives, I'm not so sure that's the way to go. For one thing, it's still an NBA arena, so there could be scheduling conflicts and/or they might think they can attract higher level events, such as big concert tours, for that weekend. Second, no offense to those of you that live there, but Brooklyn just doesn't have the same draw as Manhattan. It doesn't have the same level of tourist attractions/night life to go to before/after the game, and it's harder to get to. I live in Nassau County on Long Island and despite Brooklyn being geographically closer to where I live than Manhattan, it's harder to get to (2 trains versus 1) and it would definitely be harder to get to for anyone in NJ/NE/Manhattan/Upstate NY. That being said, the league should at the very least talk to the Barclays Center about the possibility.

Are there any other smaller arenas in NYC other than MSG and the Barclays (and if you want to include it Nassau Coliseum)?

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

The core question involved in this decision is draw: is NYC, expensive as it is, enough of a draw by itself to put way more asses in seats than the ECAC currently draws to less expensive venues? Or is Albany, depressing as it is, cheap enough to get people to show up for two nights and put up with Albany during the non-game hours? NYC would be acceptable to me, and it might change fans' responses from, "Ah, what the hell; I'm not doing anything that weekend" to "I'm really looking forward to next weekend!" OTOH, the league could try to demonstrate that they give a shit and organize a bunch of stuff for people to do on Saturday so as to make it a family-friendly weekend destination: there's a lot the league could do to make an Albany tournament more appealing, but it probably involves organization and, you know, some actual legwork to implement.

I don't feel *any* of the love (well, AD-calculator-by-proxy) several of you are expressing for Atlantic City: it's nearly as far from NYC to AC as it is from NYC to Albany and way farther from most of the schools whose fans don't travel well, it's not particularly family friendly (or in fact non-criminal friendly), it's expensive to stay there, and the venue is at least as much of a dump as the Albany name-of-the-week rink.

css228 ... not trying to be disrespectful either, but you're obviously young, still in school, and haven't seen it all like us old people. Note I said you were "being clueless" - not that you "are clueless"

Before I get to individual points, generally, I believe your whole premise is flawed -- that no one tried, no one got creative, etc... How do you know? I can assure you that every possibility was explored. Just because it didn't happen, doesn't mean the things you suggest weren't thought of.

You mentioned that the coaches feel things were wrong with the league, and they would know better than us. Well, first off, there are 2 things here -- venue of the championship, and television. And the coaches were only commenting about the TV part. They can't be complaining about the Atlantic City part, because most of them approved, including Cornell.

As for TV - I love all the coaches involved, and certainly mean no disrespect towards them either - but I think their complaints are unfair. But really, only Mike Schafer's comment was particularly critical. Rick Bennett's comment was not being snarky, it was merely deflecting the question because he didn't want to talk about it. Ted Donato's comment was completely benign. Don Vaughan said it was disappointing and "hard to believe" - but what is he going to say: "Yes, I believe it, our league is not very good, so of course no one would want us." ... Even Schafer's comment didn't call out the league office in particular, but said it was a "big failure of our league." It would be unfair to suggest Steve Hagwell in particular did nothing creative to try. Can the league as a whole do better? Sure. It could pony up all sorts of cash to get something done. I think Coach Scahfer's concern is that, he believed the guarantee money from Atlantic City could help fund a TV production on their own. But the guarantee money went to help solve other shortfalls, with not enough left over.

Like with anything else, these are multi-faceted issues, and far too easy to scapegoat one individual.

Onto your other points:

1) I can't find any information on Atlantic Hockey being televised. I can't find it on their web site. Maybe it's happening, but I can't find it.

2) This is not doable for a variety of reasons. I can assure you it was explored.

3) What makes you think all of your radical ideas weren't either a) thought about/explored or b) any more radical than what was already done. Again, these places have to WANT the ECAC. And of the ones that wanted them, Atlantic City was fairly radical, no? You say, why not give radical ideas a shot. They did. And that's still not good enough. And they took the cash. But again - that arena decision was not the league office's. It was the decision of the athletic directors/schools. The coaches themselves don't want it in Lake Placid anymore, because of the size of the ice surface. The coaches themselves don't want the tournament to be on campuses.

Believe me, I have seen incompetence and been fairly critical of the ECAC administration in the past, when it was the prior administration. I wrote numerous articles picking them apart, while the coaches cheered me on. The ECAC made many improvements since then. Unfortunately, things have become harder and harder to keep up with the joneses in college hockey. It's been a slow, steady decline in overall interest since the split with Hockey East. Even Cornell's crowds, you could argue, are not as rabid as they used to be. But there are many factors.

The ECAC is a great league with great coaches, great players, and I fully support and defend its mission as a home for true (or true-er) student-athletes. But the league is stuck between a rock and a hard place so to speak, and people can find scapegoats if they want, but the fundamental issues will not change, no matter who was the commissioner.

Oh - and as for officials ... every coach and every fan in every town in every league that I've ever seen, bitches and moans about officiating until the cows come home. EVERYWHERE. To some extent, this is just run of the mill complaining. In college hockey, it's also a function of these being part-time refs and not as good as, say, NHL refs. Nothing will ever change that.

Bottom line - nobody gave up or got out-maneuvered. Nobody failed to try, or failed to think creatively. There is nothing wrong with suggesting there is more that can be done, but I am telling you that most have been tried. Certainly there's always a better job anyone can do, including coaches, media, and anyone else.

And - while I'd agree that I prefer Gary Bettman over Bud Selig - Bettman is also soundly booed in every arena he walks into. I think those people are misguided too.

Sorry for the novel.

jtn27

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

As I wrote earlier, I think the Garden would be the best location, but it isn't feasible. While the Barclays would probably be better than a lot of the alternatives, I'm not so sure that's the way to go. For one thing, it's still an NBA arena, so there could be scheduling conflicts and/or they might think they can attract higher level events, such as big concert tours, for that weekend. Second, no offense to those of you that live there, but Brooklyn just doesn't have the same draw as Manhattan. It doesn't have the same level of tourist attractions/night life to go to before/after the game, and it's harder to get to. I live in Nassau County on Long Island and despite Brooklyn being geographically closer to where I live than Manhattan, it's harder to get to (2 trains versus 1) and it would definitely be harder to get to for anyone in NJ/NE/Manhattan/Upstate NY. That being said, the league should at the very least talk to the Barclays Center about the possibility.

Are there any other smaller arenas in NYC other than MSG and the Barclays (and if you want to include it Nassau Coliseum)?

The question isn't how Barclays compares to MSG. It's how it compares to Albany, Atlantic City, Providence, Bridgeport, Rochester, etc., etc. I think it does quite favorably in those comparisons. (That said, I'm sure the conversation is moot, as it's likely never going there).

Jordan 04
The question isn't how Barclays compares to MSG. It's how it compares to Albany, Atlantic City, Providence, Bridgeport, Rochester, etc., etc. I think it does quite favorably in those comparisons. (That said, I'm sure the conversation is moot, as it's likely never going there).

The thing is, no team's fans are travelling anywhere, except Cornell's - unless it's in their backyard. And local interest is non-existent pretty much everywhere. Clarkson fans will go as far as Albany. Quinnipiac - if they ever make it - would bring some. RPI and Union fans would go to Albany, but probably not anywhere else. What's left?

Jordan 04

jtn27

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

As I wrote earlier, I think the Garden would be the best location, but it isn't feasible. While the Barclays would probably be better than a lot of the alternatives, I'm not so sure that's the way to go. For one thing, it's still an NBA arena, so there could be scheduling conflicts and/or they might think they can attract higher level events, such as big concert tours, for that weekend. Second, no offense to those of you that live there, but Brooklyn just doesn't have the same draw as Manhattan. It doesn't have the same level of tourist attractions/night life to go to before/after the game, and it's harder to get to. I live in Nassau County on Long Island and despite Brooklyn being geographically closer to where I live than Manhattan, it's harder to get to (2 trains versus 1) and it would definitely be harder to get to for anyone in NJ/NE/Manhattan/Upstate NY. That being said, the league should at the very least talk to the Barclays Center about the possibility.

Are there any other smaller arenas in NYC other than MSG and the Barclays (and if you want to include it Nassau Coliseum)?

The question isn't how Barclays compares to MSG. It's how it compares to Albany, Atlantic City, Providence, Bridgeport, Rochester, etc., etc. I think it does quite favorably in those comparisons. (That said, I'm sure the conversation is moot, as it's likely never going there).

Were I being selfish, I would support the ECAC Championships moving to Rochester, NY or Buffalo, NY, those are within easy driving distance of my law school and within 1-2 hours of my hometown in Upstate New York. However, I was trying to think of something that would allow the ECAC to rebrand itself and seek to re-establish itself as a brand in college hockey. Admittedly, I know that success on the ice on a national stage will need to correspond with any successful rebranding. That is the catch-22. The ECAC cannot get a new venue or media platform until it is successful, and the ECAC will not be successful until it can get more high quality recruits through increased exposure through better venues and media platforms. Also, Atlantic Hockey has the Blue Cross Arena in Rochester, NY reserved for its championships. I know that most on here will assume that the ECAC, as one of the "Big Four," could push easily Atlantic Hockey out of the venue, but I think one needs to re-examine our condescension toward Atlantic Hockey. The Atlantic Hockey Championships will be televised. Atlantic Hockey has had a team make the Frozen Four within the last two years (RIT in 2010), the ECAC has not.

Aaron M. Griffin
I think one needs to re-examine our condescension toward Atlantic Hockey. The Atlantic Hockey Championships will be televised. Atlantic Hockey has had a team make the Frozen Four within the last two years (RIT in 2010), the ECAC has not.

The teams currently in Atlantic Hockey that have NCAA wins since 2000:

Niagara (1)
Holy Cross (1)
RIT (2/1FF)
Air Force (1)

The teams currently in the ECAC that have NCAA wins since 2000:

Cornell (6/1FF)
Yale (2)
Clarkson (1)
St. Lawrence (2/1)

adamw

Aaron M. Griffin
I think one needs to re-examine our condescension toward Atlantic Hockey. The Atlantic Hockey Championships will be televised. Atlantic Hockey has had a team make the Frozen Four within the last two years (RIT in 2010), the ECAC has not.

The teams currently in Atlantic Hockey that have NCAA wins since 2000:

Niagara (1)
Holy Cross (1)
RIT (2/1FF)
Air Force (1)

The teams currently in the ECAC that have NCAA wins since 2000:

Cornell (6/1FF)
Yale (2)
Clarkson (1)
St. Lawrence (2/1)

I can't tell if this is refuting his argument or supporting it.

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

Yeah, I definitely wouldn't complain about being able to roll out of bed and walk to the ECAC tournament.

Jordan 04
I can't tell if this is refuting his argument or supporting it.

supporting it, basically ... I didn't have time to look up the W-L records - but I remembered the wins off the top of my head. But the ECAC gets 2 or 3 teams in every year, so while it has more wins (thanks to Cornell), the W-L record must be close. And without Cornell in the mix, forget it.

css228
There are two ways to handle problems in life, you can just sit back and give up, or you can do something about it. All I'm saying is how is the league ever going to gain any traction, or any popularity, if it just accepts that it will never do so. There is no shame in trying and failing, Its the apparent lack of an attempt to even try that bothers me.

This is ridiculous. "Trying and failing" is exactly what the ECAC was doing with the move to Atlantic City. Attendance in Albany wasn't great and trending downward (~6500 for the Cornell-Union championship game in 2010, with a local team playing, as compared to ~8600 for the Cornell-Harvard championship game in 2005, and even worse when Cornell wasn't involved, like ~4800 for the Harvard-Princeton championship game in 2008), so they took bids and let another city take a crack at it. Now, as it turns out, Atlantic City is not the draw they needed (only ~4100 for the championship game last year), and if AC even bids again afer the expiration of the current deal next year (assuming both sides don't agree to terminate it sooner) then presumably they won't offer such an optimistic guarantee and the tournament will wind up elsewhere. But your original statement is just the complete opposite of what happened.

Beeeej

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

Yeah, I definitely wouldn't complain about being able to roll out of bed and walk to the ECAC tournament.

Look, we can all give the "wouldn't it be great if they put it right near ME!!!" arguments, but the more I think about it, the more sure I am that the ECAC Tournament belongs in Albany.

Here are the major factors:

1) Geographic Location: How easy is it to get to? Accessible airports, highways, and of course distance to participating schools. Costs of sending teams & bands matters here.

2) Facility Quality: Olympic or Standard sheet, number of locker rooms, is there a pro team already there, or is it a multipurpose room where some guy will turn on a garden hose and hope it stays cold? Is it appropriately sized for fans with enough amenities?

3) Marketing & local media exposure:
3a) Will the locals be/get interested? Will the city treat it like a "big deal" and put up signs and events, or will it be an afterthought? Will it make the front page of the local paper's sports section? Does the local population "get" what college hockey is?
3b) How will the rest of college hockey look at it? Will fans of non-ECAC college teams in the region want to come and check it out? Other conferences have Boston, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Rochester. What does it say about us if you say "Glens Falls!" next to those? Lake Placid has an exemption because that is a holy name in American Hockey history, and pretty cool to brag about. Boston & NYC are obviously the big winners in 3(b), but not 3(a).
3c) Will the league make money? That's obviously what they care about, so I'll stick that in here.
3d) Is it a big enough media market that there would be some help in getting a broadcast set up to make it appealing/easy for a Cable TV outlet to pick it up?

4) Fan Friendliness: Accommodations for us. Hotels, bars, restaurants, "things to do." Is it cheap or expensive? City or suburban? How easy is transit? How easy is parking? Will people whine about it being "too dumpy" or "too dangerous" or not "family friendly?"

All that said, I rank the usual suspects thusly:

1) Albany
2) Providence
3) Worcester
4) Rochester
5) Hartford
6) Syracuse
7) Boston
8) Bridgeport
9) Springfield
10) Glens Falls

Also receiving votes: Lake Placid, Manchester, Newark, Binghamton

As someone who grew up in a small Upstate NY town, forget about NYC. Regardless of reality and what you think about it, a huge majority of people outside the Metro NY region are TERRIFIED of NYC, and would be sticker-shocked at what the hotel & parking rates would be. Yes, you have local alumni, but frankly, I'd rather cater more to the students & townies who have been going to the games all along. Ma & Pa from Potsdam aren't going to even consider NYC, or feel comfortable letting Junior go for a weekend tournament. Boston just doesn't have the same stigma.

Albany is the best available of all worlds. Geographically, it's the heart of the league. It can cater to people who feel comfortable in a city, as well as people who feel more used to the stuff around Wolff Road or the surrounding towns. It's big enough that there's plenty of entertainment & historical stuff around, and the Times-Union (both the arena and the paper) has always treated us well. Hell, they used to cover a Pearl St. building with the league Tournament bracket.

Aaron M. Griffin

Jordan 04

jtn27

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

As I wrote earlier, I think the Garden would be the best location, but it isn't feasible. While the Barclays would probably be better than a lot of the alternatives, I'm not so sure that's the way to go. For one thing, it's still an NBA arena, so there could be scheduling conflicts and/or they might think they can attract higher level events, such as big concert tours, for that weekend. Second, no offense to those of you that live there, but Brooklyn just doesn't have the same draw as Manhattan. It doesn't have the same level of tourist attractions/night life to go to before/after the game, and it's harder to get to. I live in Nassau County on Long Island and despite Brooklyn being geographically closer to where I live than Manhattan, it's harder to get to (2 trains versus 1) and it would definitely be harder to get to for anyone in NJ/NE/Manhattan/Upstate NY. That being said, the league should at the very least talk to the Barclays Center about the possibility.

Are there any other smaller arenas in NYC other than MSG and the Barclays (and if you want to include it Nassau Coliseum)?

The question isn't how Barclays compares to MSG. It's how it compares to Albany, Atlantic City, Providence, Bridgeport, Rochester, etc., etc. I think it does quite favorably in those comparisons. (That said, I'm sure the conversation is moot, as it's likely never going there).

Were I being selfish, I would support the ECAC Championships moving to Rochester, NY or Buffalo, NY, those are within easy driving distance of my law school and within 1-2 hours of my hometown in Upstate New York. However, I was trying to think of something that would allow the ECAC to rebrand itself and seek to re-establish itself as a brand in college hockey. Admittedly, I know that success on the ice on a national stage will need to correspond with any successful rebranding. That is the catch-22. The ECAC cannot get a new venue or media platform until it is successful, and the ECAC will not be successful until it can get more high quality recruits through increased exposure through better venues and media platforms. Also, Atlantic Hockey has the Blue Cross Arena in Rochester, NY reserved for its championships. I know that most on here will assume that the ECAC, as one of the "Big Four," could push easily Atlantic Hockey out of the venue, but I think one needs to re-examine our condescension toward Atlantic Hockey. The Atlantic Hockey Championships will be televised. Atlantic Hockey has had a team make the Frozen Four within the last two years (RIT in 2010), the ECAC has not.

I think the only way to get the BCA for the ECACs would be to poach RIT from the AHA. Not that I'd complain about that either...

RichH

Beeeej

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

Yeah, I definitely wouldn't complain about being able to roll out of bed and walk to the ECAC tournament.

Look, we can all give the "wouldn't it be great if they put it right near ME!!!" arguments, but the more I think about it, the more sure I am that the ECAC Tournament belongs in Albany.

Here are the major factors:

1) Geographic Location: How easy is it to get to? Accessible airports, highways, and of course distance to participating schools. Costs of sending teams & bands matters here.

2) Facility Quality: Olympic or Standard sheet, number of locker rooms, is there a pro team already there, or is it a multipurpose room where some guy will turn on a garden hose and hope it stays cold? Is it appropriately sized for fans with enough amenities?

3) Marketing & local media exposure:
3a) Will the locals be/get interested? Will the city treat it like a "big deal" and put up signs and events, or will it be an afterthought? Will it make the front page of the local paper's sports section? Does the local population "get" what college hockey is?
3b) How will the rest of college hockey look at it? Will fans of non-ECAC college teams in the region want to come and check it out? Other conferences have Boston, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Rochester. What does it say about us if you say "Glens Falls!" next to those? Lake Placid has an exemption because that is a holy name in American Hockey history, and pretty cool to brag about. Boston & NYC are obviously the big winners in 3(b), but not 3(a).
3c) Will the league make money? That's obviously what they care about, so I'll stick that in here.

4) Fan Friendliness: Accommodations for us. Hotels, bars, restaurants, "things to do." Is it cheap or expensive? City or suburban? How easy is transit? How easy is parking? Will people whine about it being "too dumpy" or "too dangerous" or not "family friendly?"

All that said, I rank the usual suspects thusly:

1) Albany
2) Providence
3) Worcester
4) Rochester
5) Hartford
6) Syracuse
7) Boston
8) Bridgeport
9) Springfield
10) Glens Falls

Also receiving votes: Lake Placid, Manchester, Newark, Binghamton

As someone who grew up in a small Upstate NY town, forget about NYC. Regardless of reality and what you think about it, a huge majority of people outside the Metro NY region are TERRIFIED of NYC, and would be sticker-shocked at what the hotel & parking rates would be. Yes, you have local alumni, but frankly, I'd rather cater more to the students & townies who have been going to the games all along. Ma & Pa from Potsdam aren't going to even consider NYC, or feel comfortable letting Junior go for a weekend tournament. Boston just doesn't have the same stigma.

Albany is the best available of all worlds. Geographically, it's the heart of the league. It can cater to people who feel comfortable in a city, as well as people who feel more used to the stuff around Wolff Road or the surrounding towns. It's big enough that there's plenty of entertainment & historical stuff around, and the Times-Union (both the arena and the paper) has always treated us well. Hell, they used to cover a Pearl St. building with the league Tournament bracket.

I agree with you 100% on every single thing you just said, and after last year in Atlantic City, I long for the Albany days. But if the league chose to put it at Barclays Center, I'd be happy as a clam for my personal comfort and convenience. I don't think those are incompatible viewpoints at all.

Beeeej
I agree with you 100% on every single thing you just said, and after last year in Atlantic City, I long for the Albany days. But if the league chose to put it at Barclays Center, I'd be happy as a clam for my personal comfort and convenience. I don't think those are incompatible viewpoints at all.

Of course, I was just looking for a nice jumping off spot for my PowerPoint presentation, and picked your comment as a good segue. I'm two blocks from the Hartford Civic Center, and would probably do cartwheels for 2 weeks straight if that was announced as the new venue.

(I even had to check my own bias to not rank Hartford #3 on the list. Geographically, it's great being an ECAC road-warrior here, and the region does have a decent hockey pedigree, despite the absolute takeover of UConn hoops in the local sports zeitgeist.)

tl;dr

Ben
tl;dr

Am I the only one who interprets this response as "I'm an asshole, and I wanted everyone to know"?

adamw
And no one wanted to be back Albany except maybe Union and RPI.

Could you elaborate? I know (having made) the fans' complaints about Albany, but what were the schools' issues?

Kyle Rose

Ben
tl;dr

Am I the only one who interprets this response as "I'm an asshole, and I wanted everyone to know"?

I know, right? Who puts in the semi-colon?

Trotsky

adamw
And no one wanted to be back Albany except maybe Union and RPI.

Could you elaborate? I know (having made) the fans' complaints about Albany, but what were the schools' issues?

Money

adamw
css228 ... not trying to be disrespectful either, but you're obviously young, still in school, and haven't seen it all like us old people. Note I said you were "being clueless" - not that you "are clueless"

Before I get to individual points, generally, I believe your whole premise is flawed -- that no one tried, no one got creative, etc... How do you know? I can assure you that every possibility was explored. Just because it didn't happen, doesn't mean the things you suggest weren't thought of.

You mentioned that the coaches feel things were wrong with the league, and they would know better than us. Well, first off, there are 2 things here -- venue of the championship, and television. And the coaches were only commenting about the TV part. They can't be complaining about the Atlantic City part, because most of them approved, including Cornell.

As for TV - I love all the coaches involved, and certainly mean no disrespect towards them either - but I think their complaints are unfair. But really, only Mike Schafer's comment was particularly critical. Rick Bennett's comment was not being snarky, it was merely deflecting the question because he didn't want to talk about it. Ted Donato's comment was completely benign. Don Vaughan said it was disappointing and "hard to believe" - but what is he going to say: "Yes, I believe it, our league is not very good, so of course no one would want us." ... Even Schafer's comment didn't call out the league office in particular, but said it was a "big failure of our league." It would be unfair to suggest Steve Hagwell in particular did nothing creative to try. Can the league as a whole do better? Sure. It could pony up all sorts of cash to get something done. I think Coach Scahfer's concern is that, he believed the guarantee money from Atlantic City could help fund a TV production on their own. But the guarantee money went to help solve other shortfalls, with not enough left over.

Like with anything else, these are multi-faceted issues, and far too easy to scapegoat one individual.

Onto your other points:

1) I can't find any information on Atlantic Hockey being televised. I can't find it on their web site. Maybe it's happening, but I can't find it.

2) This is not doable for a variety of reasons. I can assure you it was explored.

3) What makes you think all of your radical ideas weren't either a) thought about/explored or b) any more radical than what was already done. Again, these places have to WANT the ECAC. And of the ones that wanted them, Atlantic City was fairly radical, no? You say, why not give radical ideas a shot. They did. And that's still not good enough. And they took the cash. But again - that arena decision was not the league office's. It was the decision of the athletic directors/schools. The coaches themselves don't want it in Lake Placid anymore, because of the size of the ice surface. The coaches themselves don't want the tournament to be on campuses.

Believe me, I have seen incompetence and been fairly critical of the ECAC administration in the past, when it was the prior administration. I wrote numerous articles picking them apart, while the coaches cheered me on. The ECAC made many improvements since then. Unfortunately, things have become harder and harder to keep up with the joneses in college hockey. It's been a slow, steady decline in overall interest since the split with Hockey East. Even Cornell's crowds, you could argue, are not as rabid as they used to be. But there are many factors.

The ECAC is a great league with great coaches, great players, and I fully support and defend its mission as a home for true (or true-er) student-athletes. But the league is stuck between a rock and a hard place so to speak, and people can find scapegoats if they want, but the fundamental issues will not change, no matter who was the commissioner.

Oh - and as for officials ... every coach and every fan in every town in every league that I've ever seen, bitches and moans about officiating until the cows come home. EVERYWHERE. To some extent, this is just run of the mill complaining. In college hockey, it's also a function of these being part-time refs and not as good as, say, NHL refs. Nothing will ever change that.

Bottom line - nobody gave up or got out-maneuvered. Nobody failed to try, or failed to think creatively. There is nothing wrong with suggesting there is more that can be done, but I am telling you that most have been tried. Certainly there's always a better job anyone can do, including coaches, media, and anyone else.

And - while I'd agree that I prefer Gary Bettman over Bud Selig - Bettman is also soundly booed in every arena he walks into. I think those people are misguided too.

Sorry for the novel.

Fair enough, I guess I am letting my frustration as a fan get the better of my rational judgment. Either way, its probably unproductive to continue to bring the subject up, as either way it doesn't really affect me given that Atlantic City is an easy trip from Philadelphia. By the way, I really enjoyed your article on Cornell. When CHN does cover ECAC hockey, I'd definitely say its coverage is the best.

So I wasn't sure that it fit in either the "America One worse than Red Cast" thread or the "ECACs not on TV" thread but I'll stick it here. In the USCHO thread about the ECACs not being on TV, RHamilton, who appears to be the manager of RPI TV, said this:

RHamilton on USCHO
We're trying to prod America One into streaming at as high of a quality as possible, but they're not exactly being forthcoming. I'm still trying.

In a perfect world, they'd stream at multiple bitrates and resolutions, both HD and SD so customers with slower internet can still enjoy. For $10 a game, customers should expect that. We're feeding them a 1080i60 feed, and they've decided that a 480x270 feed at 800 kbps is "adequate". It's unfortunately a very poor representation of our feed. If you click on one of our VoDs and start playing a video, you can see the resolutions and bitrates we feel are "adequate" in the drop down box above the video. Note that we offer a huge selection, and it even attempts to auto adjust to your internet speed. That's thinking for the customer, something America One is a bit hesitant to do. Oh yeah, and we do it for free.

I should probably be a bit more candid, but it's quite frustrating.

[board.uscho.com]

Given how many times we've discussed what quality streaming _could_ be available from RedCast (paging CowbellGuy and Kyle Rose to the discussion), here's a pretty stark example of what goes down. I guess all these providers are nickel and diming about bandwidth costs? Seems (to go back to the TV discussion) of a place where the ECAC commissioner could step in and say "we want a higher quality product for our fans, you need to offer a low bitrate/res option and a higher def one" and make it happen. Why does the student manager for RPI TV have to be the one negotiating with B2? Where's his leverage?

jtwcornell91

Aaron M. Griffin

Jordan 04

jtn27

Aaron M. Griffin
Now, I think that The Garden might be out of the Conference's price range or unreasonable for other reasons for the ECAC to start with that location in the City. I think that the idea to host the ECAC Championships in New York City is an intriguing idea nonetheless. The Barclays Center in Brooklyn will open in September. It is smaller than The Garden (14,500 vs. 18,200) and it would be likely far cheaper than hosting an event in Manhattan at The Garden. The Barclays Center will be looking for new tenants, why should the ECAC Championships not be on that list? That is the avenue that I would like explored. It would allow the ECAC to tout and market the ECAC Championships as being in New York City without all the costs of hosting the event at The Garden.

As I wrote earlier, I think the Garden would be the best location, but it isn't feasible. While the Barclays would probably be better than a lot of the alternatives, I'm not so sure that's the way to go. For one thing, it's still an NBA arena, so there could be scheduling conflicts and/or they might think they can attract higher level events, such as big concert tours, for that weekend. Second, no offense to those of you that live there, but Brooklyn just doesn't have the same draw as Manhattan. It doesn't have the same level of tourist attractions/night life to go to before/after the game, and it's harder to get to. I live in Nassau County on Long Island and despite Brooklyn being geographically closer to where I live than Manhattan, it's harder to get to (2 trains versus 1) and it would definitely be harder to get to for anyone in NJ/NE/Manhattan/Upstate NY. That being said, the league should at the very least talk to the Barclays Center about the possibility.

Are there any other smaller arenas in NYC other than MSG and the Barclays (and if you want to include it Nassau Coliseum)?

The question isn't how Barclays compares to MSG. It's how it compares to Albany, Atlantic City, Providence, Bridgeport, Rochester, etc., etc. I think it does quite favorably in those comparisons. (That said, I'm sure the conversation is moot, as it's likely never going there).

Were I being selfish, I would support the ECAC Championships moving to Rochester, NY or Buffalo, NY, those are within easy driving distance of my law school and within 1-2 hours of my hometown in Upstate New York. However, I was trying to think of something that would allow the ECAC to rebrand itself and seek to re-establish itself as a brand in college hockey. Admittedly, I know that success on the ice on a national stage will need to correspond with any successful rebranding. That is the catch-22. The ECAC cannot get a new venue or media platform until it is successful, and the ECAC will not be successful until it can get more high quality recruits through increased exposure through better venues and media platforms. Also, Atlantic Hockey has the Blue Cross Arena in Rochester, NY reserved for its championships. I know that most on here will assume that the ECAC, as one of the "Big Four," could push easily Atlantic Hockey out of the venue, but I think one needs to re-examine our condescension toward Atlantic Hockey. The Atlantic Hockey Championships will be televised. Atlantic Hockey has had a team make the Frozen Four within the last two years (RIT in 2010), the ECAC has not.

I think the only way to get the BCA for the ECACs would be to poach RIT from the AHA. Not that I'd complain about that either...

Qpac for RIT? I'm down.

pfibiger
Given how many times we've discussed what quality streaming _could_ be available from RedCast (paging CowbellGuy and Kyle Rose to the discussion), here's a pretty stark example of what goes down. I guess all these providers are nickel and diming about bandwidth costs?

Let's say B2 is retarded and were to stream 1080i at something like 10Mbit/sec. Bandwidth cost today for a provider their size is going to be something like $1/Mbit/sec for monthly 95/5, which means their cost for your viewing would be $10 if you were to stream at 10Mbit/sec for more than 5% of a month, or 36 hours. Chances are their costs are at least an order of magnitude less than this because of all the pessimistic assumptions I've made.

Bottom line: bandwidth costs have nothing to do with their pricing model.

css228
Fair enough, I guess I am letting my frustration as a fan get the better of my rational judgment. Either way, its probably unproductive to continue to bring the subject up, as either way it doesn't really affect me given that Atlantic City is an easy trip from Philadelphia. By the way, I really enjoyed your article on Cornell. When CHN does cover ECAC hockey, I'd definitely say its coverage is the best.

Hey, stop kissing up now ... No worries. There are no perfect answers. Plenty of room for discussion.

My understanding is that the HD/SD streaming issue has been resolved.

RichH

Beeeej

Aaron M. Griffin
Look, we can all give the "wouldn't it be great if they put it right near ME!!!" arguments, but the more I think about it, the more sure I am that the ECAC Tournament belongs in Albany.

Here are the major factors:

1) Geographic Location: How easy is it to get to? Accessible airports, highways, and of course distance to participating schools. Costs of sending teams & bands matters here.

2) Facility Quality: Olympic or Standard sheet, number of locker rooms, is there a pro team already there, or is it a multipurpose room where some guy will turn on a garden hose and hope it stays cold? Is it appropriately sized for fans with enough amenities?

3) Marketing & local media exposure:
3a) Will the locals be/get interested? Will the city treat it like a "big deal" and put up signs and events, or will it be an afterthought? Will it make the front page of the local paper's sports section? Does the local population "get" what college hockey is?
3b) How will the rest of college hockey look at it? Will fans of non-ECAC college teams in the region want to come and check it out? Other conferences have Boston, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Rochester. What does it say about us if you say "Glens Falls!" next to those? Lake Placid has an exemption because that is a holy name in American Hockey history, and pretty cool to brag about. Boston & NYC are obviously the big winners in 3(b), but not 3(a).
3c) Will the league make money? That's obviously what they care about, so I'll stick that in here.
3d) Is it a big enough media market that there would be some help in getting a broadcast set up to make it appealing/easy for a Cable TV outlet to pick it up?

4) Fan Friendliness: Accommodations for us. Hotels, bars, restaurants, "things to do." Is it cheap or expensive? City or suburban? How easy is transit? How easy is parking? Will people whine about it being "too dumpy" or "too dangerous" or not "family friendly?"

All that said, I rank the usual suspects thusly:

1) Albany
2) Providence
3) Worcester
4) Rochester
5) Hartford
6) Syracuse
7) Boston
8) Bridgeport
9) Springfield
10) Glens Falls

Also receiving votes: Lake Placid, Manchester, Newark, Binghamton

As someone who grew up in a small Upstate NY town, forget about NYC. Regardless of reality and what you think about it, a huge majority of people outside the Metro NY region are TERRIFIED of NYC, and would be sticker-shocked at what the hotel & parking rates would be. Yes, you have local alumni, but frankly, I'd rather cater more to the students & townies who have been going to the games all along. Ma & Pa from Potsdam aren't going to even consider NYC, or feel comfortable letting Junior go for a weekend tournament. Boston just doesn't have the same stigma.

Albany is the best available of all worlds. Geographically, it's the heart of the league. It can cater to people who feel comfortable in a city, as well as people who feel more used to the stuff around Wolff Road or the surrounding towns. It's big enough that there's plenty of entertainment & historical stuff around, and the Times-Union (both the arena and the paper) has always treated us well. Hell, they used to cover a Pearl St. building with the league Tournament bracket.

Good list, though 1 and 2 should be more important than 3 and 4.

Regarding 3, we have to remember we're a middle-tier conference in a sport that no one outside of it really cares about or are even that aware exists; I know it sucks to say, but let's be honest. Plus we're the same weekend as the first weekend of the basketball tournament, with games from sunrise to sunset. So to think that magically due to our location we're going to pull in anything more than a trivial number of casual fans is to me ridiculous, and any attempt to ignore other factors (such as proximity to fans who actually care) is only going to hurt attendance in the end.

Regarding 4, while it is important to have a few restaurants, a few bars, and a few affordable hotels, I don't how having a lot of extra "things to do" will really help numbers. Let's face it, we're all more than happily spending a weekend, and for the younger folks half of their spring break, watching a college hockey conference tournament in some random section of the northeast. We're not really going to balk if there's not an amusement park or a casino next door, we're already sold on the hockey and beyond that we're not hard sells.

So given that the probability of random casual fans is low in any case, and that those of us fans who care will come regardless of location, it really comes down to making sure the location is decent and central, and that the location has the barest of amenities (hotels, restaurants, bars). And while Albany is not the shiny jewel of northeastern cities, it really fits that the best.

 

___________________________
03/23/02: Maine 4, Harvard 3
03/28/03: BU 6, Harvard 4
03/26/04: Maine 5, Harvard 4
03/26/05: UNH 3, Harvard 2
03/25/06: Maine 6, Harvard 1

I wonder if they should go and try a rotation of some kind.. I think anyplace other than Boston people would get bored after a couple years. Albany is great for location and ease, not so great for other stuff for many people. For my money I would go to Albany and then every few years go to Boston. the best times were when the ECAC and Hockey East were both in the bldg, great crowds and energy.. Maybe logistically it doesnt work but i would try it .

one thing that has changed since we left boston is people want to spend less money unless they are getting bang for the buck.. Boston was a destination with a couple games.. Albany is a couple games with a dinner/bar outing thrown in.

upprdeck
I wonder if they should go and try a rotation of some kind.. I think anyplace other than Boston people would get bored after a couple years. Albany is great for location and ease, not so great for other stuff for many people. For my money I would go to Albany and then every few years go to Boston. the best times were when the ECAC and Hockey East were both in the bldg, great crowds and energy.. Maybe logistically it doesnt work but i would try it .

one thing that has changed since we left boston is people want to spend less money unless they are getting bang for the buck.. Boston was a destination with a couple games.. Albany is a couple games with a dinner/bar outing thrown in.

One has to wonder whether or not there would be a way to make Philly work. After all if you're going to go as far south as AC, you might as well come to a real destination city.The Wells Fargo (a.k.a. Wachovia (a.k.a. First Union (a.k.a. CoreStates))) Center is probably too big to be a reasonable rink for ECAC (plus its now the only major arena in town since the Spectrum was torn down, so it probably wouldn't want to book us given its demand. The Liacorous Center at Temple actually may work though. It was the home of the Philadelphia Kixx of the MISL for a year, so we know they can put a 200x85 hockey rink sized playing surface in there. Unless it gets a first round Women's NCAA tourney game, or the Harmlem Globetrotters (those are the only things other than Temple games it seems to host). It seats 10,200 for basketball so probably a little fewer for hockey. So its a big arena, but no so big as to be unreasonable, in a major city, which while outside the league footprint, people actually want come to. I mean maybe it doesn't have the ice making capacity, and it is in a pretty bad neighborhood, but its worth a thought.

How come the whole 37,500 seats at fenway aren't counted in the denominator? THAT would give the real per cent of capacity. Just sayin'...

As I stated earlier, I think a NYC location would be ideal so I looked into what arenas are in NY other than MSG and the Barclays. A good choice might be St. John's Carnesecca Arena, which seats 5,600. It's a basketball arena, not a hockey arena (I don't know too much about the conversion process, but it should be feasible), but it seats a decent number of people (I also looked up Columbia and Fordham's basketball arenas, which both seat about 3,500), is relatively close to the schools in the ECAC (especially Princeton, Yale, and Quinnipiac, and to a lesser extent Cornell and Colgate and even Union and RPI), is in a major city, and shouldn't have any scheduling conflicts the weekend of the ECAC Tournament (if St. John's basketball season is still ongoing, they would be in the NCAA Tournament which hasn't been hosted in Carnesecca since 1974).