ECAC Finals Weekend not on TV

[adamw]

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)

[Jordan 04]

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.

[Beeeej]

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.

[adamw]

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.

[Josh '99]

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.

[RichH]

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
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.

[jtwcornell91]

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...

[Beeeej]

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
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.

[RichH]

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.)

[Ben]

tl;dr

[Rosey]

tl;dr

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

[Trotsky]

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?

[Trotsky]

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?

[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

[css228]

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.