KeaneyBlue - The URI Basketball Forum

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:25 am**

TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago Me and ramster are currently, and strangely, on 100% the same wave length.

On April Fools Day no less

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2019 11:55 am**

ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago
TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago

100% disagree. Why don’t we just set some money on fire since we have so much of it lying around to pursue foolish endeavors?
Every athletic program other than men's basketball is lighting money on fire. It's about finding the best ways to do that.
It’s a question of how much money is being “burned” or “invested” in the School depending on how you look at it

To compare Hockey to Golf I’d think Hockey would have a higher cost due to HC and Assistant Salaries, recruiting budgets, Insurance for Injuries, Equipment and Uniforms, Travel, Building Costs, Tickets and Administration.
Do you know what Thor and Dooley think of going D1 Hockey? What are their Pros and Cons
Interesting Bryant doesn’t have D1 Hockey, being in Northern RI. Southern RI does not seem to share the same level of interest as Central and Northern RI.
Only 60 Schools have D1 Hockey Nationally, compared to 353 D1 Basketball teams

Do Thor and Dooley have any plans for D1 Hockey in the future? What would make sense is that we already have the arena.

I wouldn’t want to give up Any current sports for Hockey, especially Football.....IF hockey HAS to be added. I’m just not a Hockey fan. Only Boston Bruins at playoff time, not even during the season. I’ll go to any URI sport, men’s or women’s, and I do, but a Hockey game would be a tough sell for me.

People need to stop thinking about what they personally think of hockey. It's not relevant and you shouldn't want a University athletic department to act on what you like and what your whims are, you should want them to act on what's best for the department. Will costs be higher for hockey than golf? Probably, though I think golf costs are higher than people think. The big difference however is golf brings in zero, or almost zero revenue. That wouldn't be the case for hockey, which between tickets, sponsorships, and even modest TV and conference money would bring in revenue. Plus, while people don't think much of college hockey's visibility, it's certainly higher than that of college golf, which helps the school's reputation in the northeast, which is where most of our students come from, so it pretty relevant.

Why have we had golf over hockey as a northeast school? That's a great question that I have no good answer to. Perhaps it's as simple as we didn't have a rink before and because we have had golf and haven't had hockey we've just kept things the way they were. In my experience doing things the same way that you've always done even when better alternatives exist isn't a good idea

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2019 12:19 pm**

RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago
ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago

Every athletic program other than men's basketball is lighting money on fire. It's about finding the best ways to do that.
It’s a question of how much money is being “burned” or “invested” in the School depending on how you look at it

To compare Hockey to Golf I’d think Hockey would have a higher cost due to HC and Assistant Salaries, recruiting budgets, Insurance for Injuries, Equipment and Uniforms, Travel, Building Costs, Tickets and Administration.
Do you know what Thor and Dooley think of going D1 Hockey? What are their Pros and Cons
Interesting Bryant doesn’t have D1 Hockey, being in Northern RI. Southern RI does not seem to share the same level of interest as Central and Northern RI.
Only 60 Schools have D1 Hockey Nationally, compared to 353 D1 Basketball teams

Do Thor and Dooley have any plans for D1 Hockey in the future? What would make sense is that we already have the arena.

I wouldn’t want to give up Any current sports for Hockey, especially Football.....IF hockey HAS to be added. I’m just not a Hockey fan. Only Boston Bruins at playoff time, not even during the season. I’ll go to any URI sport, men’s or women’s, and I do, but a Hockey game would be a tough sell for me.
People need to stop thinking about what they personally think of hockey. It's not relevant and you shouldn't want a University athletic department to act on what you like and what your whims are, you should want them to act on what's best for the department. Will costs be higher for hockey than golf? Probably, though I think golf costs are higher than people think. The big difference however is golf brings in zero, or almost zero revenue. That wouldn't be the case for hockey, which between tickets, sponsorships, and even modest TV and conference money would bring in revenue. Plus, while people don't think much of college hockey's visibility, it's certainly higher than that of college golf, which helps the school's reputation in the northeast, which is where most of our students come from, so it pretty relevant.

Why have we had golf over hockey as a northeast school? That's a great question that I have no good answer to. Perhaps it's as simple as we didn't have a rink before and because we have had golf and haven't had hockey we've just kept things the way they were. In my experience doing things the same way that you've always done even when better alternatives exist isn't a good idea

I wouldn’t want my personal feelings for a sport impact my decision making as to whether URI should or should not have D1 Hockey.
If Dooley and Thor find that Hockey makes sense for URI then go for it. But only 60 D1 schools have Hockey.......not many.

Another factor is Conference Play. It seems to make more sense when the majority of teams in the A10 all play the same sport in the same Conference. This is not the case with Football and would not be the case with Hockey.

As for a sport like Golf, 11 Schools have Men’s Golf Teams that compete for the A10 Championship every year.
Only UMASS, Duquesne and Saint Louis do not compete. UMASS has a club team. So when the majority of A10 teams play in the A10 it seems better.

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2019 1:00 pm**

Basing the decision on hockey based on the schools who play is not entirely fair. On a national level, it’s true. On a local school, every major state university in New England fields a college hockey team. The following are the New England hockey teams: AIC, Bentley, BC, BU, Brown, UCONN, Dartmouth, Harvard, Holy Cross, Maine, UMASS, UMASS-Lowell, Merrimack, UNH, Northeastern, PC, Quinnipiac, Sacred Heart, UVM, and Yale. If you expand further to include New York, you would add in colleges and universities including Army, Canisius, Clarkson, Colgate, Cornell, Niagara, RPI, RIT, St. Lawrence, and Union. College Hockey has a heavy northeastern presence. It’s going to draw better in this area of the country than say baseball.

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2019 1:08 pm**

rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago Basing the decision on hockey based on the schools who play is not entirely fair. On a national level, it’s true. On a local school, every major state university in New England fields a college hockey team. The following are the New England hockey teams: AIC, Bentley, BC, BU, Brown, UCONN, Dartmouth, Harvard, Holy Cross, Maine, UMASS, UMASS-Lowell, Merrimack, UNH, Northeastern, PC, Quinnipiac, Sacred Heart, UVM, and Yale. If you expand further to include New York, you would add in colleges and universities including Army, Canisius, Clarkson, Colgate, Cornell, Niagara, RPI, RIT, St. Lawrence, and Union. College Hockey has a heavy northeastern presence. It’s going to draw better in this area of the country than say baseball.

No, it’s not entirely fair, only a factor, no one factor is the deciding factor.
What is interesting about URI is we already have the Boss Arena and still we don’t go D1. Would be some great discussion with Thor. He has given very clearly his feelings and future vision for Football but I have not heard about Hockey

I’m good with the Club Level as it is and will follow whatever direction Thor and Dooley want to lead us to on this.
.

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2019 2:46 pm**

ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago Basing the decision on hockey based on the schools who play is not entirely fair. On a national level, it’s true. On a local school, every major state university in New England fields a college hockey team. The following are the New England hockey teams: AIC, Bentley, BC, BU, Brown, UCONN, Dartmouth, Harvard, Holy Cross, Maine, UMASS, UMASS-Lowell, Merrimack, UNH, Northeastern, PC, Quinnipiac, Sacred Heart, UVM, and Yale. If you expand further to include New York, you would add in colleges and universities including Army, Canisius, Clarkson, Colgate, Cornell, Niagara, RPI, RIT, St. Lawrence, and Union. College Hockey has a heavy northeastern presence. It’s going to draw better in this area of the country than say baseball.
No, it’s not entirely fair, only a factor, no one factor is the deciding factor.
What is interesting about URI is we already have the Boss Arena and still we don’t go D1. Would be some great discussion with Thor. He has given very clearly his feelings and future vision for Football but I have not heard about Hockey

I’m good with the Club Level as it is and will follow whatever direction Thor and Dooley want to lead us to on this.
.

To be fair, the heart of this arguing back and forth isn't about the totality of the factors based on a decision to field a hockey team (which there are many, many factors), but rather the thought that hockey should not ever be a consideration because it is a nichy, regional sport and the idea that pulling one dollar from any one sport would be a waste of an investment.

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:57 pm**

Worth noting that while PC may be in the Frozen-4, it didn't do particularly well at the gate versus other regional teams. The Friars averaged 2,526 this past season in which they were nationally ranked for much of. That was good for 10th place in the Hockey East only ahead of Merrimack. It wasn't all that much different the previous season as they were 9th in the league. While Schneider Arena only seating 3,030 is a big factor in that, the numbers this past weekend at the much larger DDC show that Friar hockey has a low ceiling. As we all know, PC basketball now annually outdraws all men's basketball programs in New England. That is far from the case in men's hockey. My thinking is that there is only so much interest and support out there during the same span of time. PC hoops is very popular with the school's fans and soaks up nearly all the energy. It is tough for schools in New England to support two programs in large numbers simultaneously. Look no further than the the top home draws in HE this past season - UNH, UMass-Amherst, and UMass-Lowell. They all drew well for hockey but not so much for basketball.

Hockey East Attendance 2018-19
http://hockeyeastonline.com/men/statist ... attend.php

Hockey East Attendance 2018-19
http://hockeyeastonline.com/men/statist ... attend.php

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2019 4:12 pm**

Well yes. PC fans are PC basketball fans, and that's their only connection to the college, as has been discussed in depth here. Also, UNH, UMass, and Lowell basketball suck, so of course they're not going to get fans

Posted: **Mon Apr 01, 2019 4:31 pm**

I think part of that problem you speak of deals with demographics. The P-Bruins, a professional minor league hockey team, play right down the street. During the peak of the Nate Leaman era, the P-Bruins have averaged 8,254 fans per game, often sharing one common game night (Friday nights). If you are a casual hockey fan who is primarily a Boston Bruins fan, are you committing your attendance and interest to PC hockey or Providence Bruins hockey? While part of it might be the fact that PC hoops takes away some of the interest, I think a bigger piece is the amount of quality hockey taking place. It also didn't help that PC did not have a good hockey program for a long time. From 1992 - 2013, made 2 NCAA Tournaments. That's not going to pull anyone away from the basketball team or the P-Bruins. Playing catch-up now but that takes a long time. And it's probably all null-and-void if Leaman takes an NHL head coaching job.

Posted: **Wed Apr 03, 2019 4:59 pm**

PC does not even have a baseball team.
They can't even come up for the $$ for that and people want URI to have a hockey team.

Posted: **Wed Apr 03, 2019 5:03 pm**

PC has no mens baseball, tennis or golf

Posted: **Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:33 pm**

Hal Kopp wrote: ↑5 years ago PC does not even have a baseball team.
They can't even come up for the $$ for that and people want URI to have a hockey team.

I would say it’s uniquely different situations.

URI has the existing infrastructure to get a hockey program off the ground. They have an ice rink, they have equipment, etc.

PC does not have a baseball field on campus. They'd have to find flat land with no existing plans for use. It's non-existent.

Then you would have to get into the scholarship games. For PC to add men's baseball, that probably means adding women's lacrosse + one additional sport. PC does not have flexibility to remove men's programs to create scholarships.

So now PC has to build a baseball facility from scratch and add multiple additional sports, none of which will be relevant, baseball included. That's why it hasn't be revisited.

Posted: **Thu Apr 04, 2019 6:07 pm**

My understanding is that to fund a new sport for men it sets off a chain of events...

....if you increase scholarships to men by say 24 ( is that the number allowed in NCAA hockey ?) ...then you either drop 24 men's scholarships from other sports...or their equivalent....

Say the baseball team gives out a total of 10 scholarships in various fractions.....then you can reduce a few through smaller fractions....

Then you can take some away piecemeal from other non-revenue sports to try to total 24....

Whatever number reduces the 24....let's say 10...brings us to 14...then we must increase total scholarships for women by 14 full scholarships or fractional scholarships to add up to 14...

It is painful no matter which way you go.....I love hockey.....but I don't think we can afford it....financially or the damage done to existing sports by cutting scholarships....

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 6:36 am**

RF1 wrote: ↑5 years ago Was in downtown Providence by the Dunkin Donuts Center while the two hockey games (PC-Minneota State and Northeastern-Cornell) were going on yesterday. Was surprised by the lack of activity in the area. Would not have known there really was any event going on based on the view outside the arena while fans were inside watching the games. Did not really see much activity in the businesses near the arena nor much signage proclaiming the presence of the event nor welcoming fans. It was far different than the atmosphere that has surrounded the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament when the arena and city have hosted in the past.

I must say I was shocked at how quiet it was by LaSalle Square yesterday. One of the teams in this regional, PC, is located in the city just 2 miles away. The Northeastern Huskies are just an hour up the road in Boston. Cornell may be six hours away in New York state but it has a lot of alumni much closer. Only Minnesota State came a long distance and was a difficult trip for its fans. Given the lack of any real atmosphere for the event outside the arena or anywhere downtown for that matter, I was curious to see what the attendance for the event was. Only 7,180 filled the 11,075 seat hockey configuration of the DDC. That translated to just 64% of the facility's seats being occupied for one of the four regionals for college hockey's D1 national championship tournament, its premier event.

My experience having been by the DDC for both an NCAA Men's basketball and hockey regional showed stark contrasts between the events. Not being a big follower of college hockey, it surprised me a bit to see what little excitement and fans it generated. It further confirmed my feeling, that while there are some very passionate fans, the overall fan numbers are not large and illustrated to me that hockey is much more a niche sport than is basketball. I had thought it was a unfair for PC to be sited at the DDC given it would likelly be a big home advantage to them. I found it strange that the NCAA has routinely put them at the DDC several times. What I saw yesterday around the DDC and today when I looked up the box score attendance however helped explain why. The college NCAA hockey tournament is not really a big draw on its own. It desperately needs local team's fans just to fill a little over half an arena for its premier event.

Ticket prices for the Frozen Four Hockey National Championships continue to drop

Can now buy on StubHub a ticket to the National Championship for just $80
Or get all Sessions for $150 - includes both Semifinal games and National Championship game

But if you wait will likely get cheaper

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:19 am**

Ramulous wrote: ↑5 years ago My understanding is that to fund a new sport for men it sets off a chain of events...

....if you increase scholarships to men by say 24 ( is that the number allowed in NCAA hockey ?) ...then you either drop 24 men's scholarships from other sports...or their equivalent....

Say the baseball team gives out a total of 10 scholarships in various fractions.....then you can reduce a few through smaller fractions....

Then you can take some away piecemeal from other non-revenue sports to try to total 24....

Whatever number reduces the 24....let's say 10...brings us to 14...then we must increase total scholarships for women by 14 full scholarships or fractional scholarships to add up to 14...

It is painful no matter which way you go.....I love hockey.....but I don't think we can afford it....financially or the damage done to existing sports by cutting scholarships....

If you add both men's and women's hockey with the same # of scholarships, don't they even out?

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:42 am**

Hal Kopp wrote: ↑5 years ago PC does not even have a baseball team.
They can't even come up for the $$ for that and people want URI to have a hockey team.

Well that's smart on PC's part. Northeast baseball doesn't produce revenue, northeast hockey does. This doesn't even get into something like golf which we sponsor

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:47 am**

Yeah but golf and baseball are good sports and hockey is not so

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:48 am**

Ramulous wrote: ↑5 years ago My understanding is that to fund a new sport for men it sets off a chain of events...

....if you increase scholarships to men by say 24 ( is that the number allowed in NCAA hockey ?) ...then you either drop 24 men's scholarships from other sports...or their equivalent....

Say the baseball team gives out a total of 10 scholarships in various fractions.....then you can reduce a few through smaller fractions....

Then you can take some away piecemeal from other non-revenue sports to try to total 24....

Whatever number reduces the 24....let's say 10...brings us to 14...then we must increase total scholarships for women by 14 full scholarships or fractional scholarships to add up to 14...

It is painful no matter which way you go.....I love hockey.....but I don't think we can afford it....financially or the damage done to existing sports by cutting scholarships....

The maximum for hockey is 18. How many do we offer to golf and the various track and field programs? Those would be the most logical places to take scholarships from. Let's say you replace golf with hockey and offer the full complement of scholarships. Golf has a maximum of 4.5 scholarships, though I don't know how much we offer. For the sake of argument let's say 4. That means you only need to reallocate 14 scholarships from other men's programs that don't bring in revenue, thus meaning hockey costs almost no extra money and actually brings something in, or you have to add 14 women's scholarships. That DOESN'T necessarily mean you need to add women's hockey or another women's sport. You can also fully allocate scholarships to existing programs if you aren't already

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:49 am**

TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago Yeah but golf and baseball are good sports and hockey is not so

And you don't know your ass from your elbow on this topic and other people do so

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:50 am**

ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
RF1 wrote: ↑5 years ago Was in downtown Providence by the Dunkin Donuts Center while the two hockey games (PC-Minneota State and Northeastern-Cornell) were going on yesterday. Was surprised by the lack of activity in the area. Would not have known there really was any event going on based on the view outside the arena while fans were inside watching the games. Did not really see much activity in the businesses near the arena nor much signage proclaiming the presence of the event nor welcoming fans. It was far different than the atmosphere that has surrounded the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament when the arena and city have hosted in the past.

I must say I was shocked at how quiet it was by LaSalle Square yesterday. One of the teams in this regional, PC, is located in the city just 2 miles away. The Northeastern Huskies are just an hour up the road in Boston. Cornell may be six hours away in New York state but it has a lot of alumni much closer. Only Minnesota State came a long distance and was a difficult trip for its fans. Given the lack of any real atmosphere for the event outside the arena or anywhere downtown for that matter, I was curious to see what the attendance for the event was. Only 7,180 filled the 11,075 seat hockey configuration of the DDC. That translated to just 64% of the facility's seats being occupied for one of the four regionals for college hockey's D1 national championship tournament, its premier event.

My experience having been by the DDC for both an NCAA Men's basketball and hockey regional showed stark contrasts between the events. Not being a big follower of college hockey, it surprised me a bit to see what little excitement and fans it generated. It further confirmed my feeling, that while there are some very passionate fans, the overall fan numbers are not large and illustrated to me that hockey is much more a niche sport than is basketball. I had thought it was a unfair for PC to be sited at the DDC given it would likelly be a big home advantage to them. I found it strange that the NCAA has routinely put them at the DDC several times. What I saw yesterday around the DDC and today when I looked up the box score attendance however helped explain why. The college NCAA hockey tournament is not really a big draw on its own. It desperately needs local team's fans just to fill a little over half an arena for its premier event.
Ticket prices for the Frozen Four Hockey National Championships continue to drop

Can now buy on StubHub a ticket to the National Championship for just $80
Or get all Sessions for $150 - includes both Semifinal games and National Championship game

But if you wait will likely get cheaper

As literally 95% of events do on StubHub

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:53 am**

RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago
ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
RF1 wrote: ↑5 years ago Was in downtown Providence by the Dunkin Donuts Center while the two hockey games (PC-Minneota State and Northeastern-Cornell) were going on yesterday. Was surprised by the lack of activity in the area. Would not have known there really was any event going on based on the view outside the arena while fans were inside watching the games. Did not really see much activity in the businesses near the arena nor much signage proclaiming the presence of the event nor welcoming fans. It was far different than the atmosphere that has surrounded the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament when the arena and city have hosted in the past.

I must say I was shocked at how quiet it was by LaSalle Square yesterday. One of the teams in this regional, PC, is located in the city just 2 miles away. The Northeastern Huskies are just an hour up the road in Boston. Cornell may be six hours away in New York state but it has a lot of alumni much closer. Only Minnesota State came a long distance and was a difficult trip for its fans. Given the lack of any real atmosphere for the event outside the arena or anywhere downtown for that matter, I was curious to see what the attendance for the event was. Only 7,180 filled the 11,075 seat hockey configuration of the DDC. That translated to just 64% of the facility's seats being occupied for one of the four regionals for college hockey's D1 national championship tournament, its premier event.

My experience having been by the DDC for both an NCAA Men's basketball and hockey regional showed stark contrasts between the events. Not being a big follower of college hockey, it surprised me a bit to see what little excitement and fans it generated. It further confirmed my feeling, that while there are some very passionate fans, the overall fan numbers are not large and illustrated to me that hockey is much more a niche sport than is basketball. I had thought it was a unfair for PC to be sited at the DDC given it would likelly be a big home advantage to them. I found it strange that the NCAA has routinely put them at the DDC several times. What I saw yesterday around the DDC and today when I looked up the box score attendance however helped explain why. The college NCAA hockey tournament is not really a big draw on its own. It desperately needs local team's fans just to fill a little over half an arena for its premier event.
Ticket prices for the Frozen Four Hockey National Championships continue to drop

Can now buy on StubHub a ticket to the National Championship for just $80
Or get all Sessions for $150 - includes both Semifinal games and National Championship game

But if you wait will likely get cheaper
As literally 95% of events do on StubHub

The major point is how cheap the tickets are for the Final 4 and Championship Game.
Plays to how quiet and unattended the Hockey was in Providence as RF1 began the thread with.
Not only was it dead in Providence, sounds like not so much excitement in Buffalo either.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:56 am**

Article when PC Cut Baseball, Tennis and Golf
John Marinatto was in charge - e'nuff said

Baseball's seven scholarships will be distributed to women's soccer, softball, ice hockey and field hockey as baseball players graduate or transfer. Operating funds will move to the women's athletic program.
Athletic director John Marinatto said Providence did not have the resources to add more women's programs.
"It's frustrating to our kids, knowing what they've committed to and worked for and the success they've had," Providence baseball coach Charlie Hickey said.
Most of Providence's underclassmen on the baseball team aren't staying. Scott, a Darien, Conn., native, is transferring to Connecticut. Keith Reed, a junior outfielder, probably will be selected in June's major league baseball draft.
"Our motivation is to win the Big East Tournament, get a bid to the (NCAA) regionals and shove it in the face of the administration," Scott said. "Just to come back and say, `Look what you did, look what you're cutting."'

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. ... ug=2959637

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:24 am**

ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago
ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago

Ticket prices for the Frozen Four Hockey National Championships continue to drop

Can now buy on StubHub a ticket to the National Championship for just $80
Or get all Sessions for $150 - includes both Semifinal games and National Championship game

But if you wait will likely get cheaper
As literally 95% of events do on StubHub
The major point is how cheap the tickets are for the Final 4 and Championship Game.
Plays to how quiet and unattended the Hockey was in Providence as RF1 began the thread with.
Not only was it dead in Providence, sounds like not so much excitement in Buffalo either.

Just because tickets on Stubhub have not sold yet isn't quite indicative of anything.
The Frozen Four isn't until next week.
For the last decade has at-worst been a near sellout, and typically is a sellout.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:33 am**

TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago Yeah but golf and baseball are good sports and hockey is not so

I guess the point is, why does that opinion matter? When is the last time you went to a golf match? When is the last time you went to a baseball game? If these are so widely popular, how come no one goes to them? How come baseball, a nationally-known, "America's past-time," non-nichy sport has only 200 in attendance, and the crappy, nichy, regional club sports team out-draws them? Isn't it kind of embarrassing that group of students that were accepted at URI for their academics and often have to pay for aspects of their participation in a team have more in attendance than a team that is funded by the athletic department and given scholarships due to their athletic abilities? And to be clear, it's not embarrassing to the players. I think it’s embarrassing to the people like you who puff their chests about hockey is stupid and a bad sport and how no one cares about it compared to baseball, yet no one goes to watch baseball and more people do go to watch non athletic department hockey program. I’m not even much of a hockey fan myself for the record, I just think the uneducated dismissiveness people talk about hockey is gross.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 10:16 am**

I think it’s mostly that I want a thing that I care about and am invested in emotionally and financially to be associated with things that I think are good and not bad. If URI had the #1 hockey program in the country every year and turned out NHL players like Kentucky turns out NBA players, I’d be more embarrassed than anything.

That is my feeling as a fan, and it is at least partially in jest. I am helped in this instance by also being able to make the credible argument that there is no reason to change course here because there is not a material benefit to adding hockey and it would mean taking food off the table of other programs or ending them altogether. That is the more serious point to me. That the other programs are sports that I like and hockey is not certainly makes the argument easier for me to make, but it is really only a secondary consideration.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 10:18 am**

I guess I just don’t understand it - Why would you be embarrassed that your alma mater was pumping out elite NHL talent? From a financial standpoint, that scenario probably helps the sports you do care about as those alumni make money and give back to the school.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 10:22 am**

rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago I guess I just don’t understand it - Why would you be embarrassed that your alma mater was pumping out elite NHL talent? From a financial standpoint, that scenario probably helps the sports you do care about as those alumni make money and give back to the school.

You’re taking a farcical and hyperbolic argument way too literally. The main gist here is that adding hockey does nothing for me as a fan. I’ll never go to a hockey game, either. At least if the golf or baseball team does well, it puts a smile on my face. In reality, the school isn’t going to have a hockey program that benefits the other sports programs so that really isn’t a worthwhile thing to argue about.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 10:32 am**

RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago
TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago Yeah but golf and baseball are good sports and hockey is not so
And you don't know your ass from your elbow on this topic and other people do so

I know exactly what I’m talking about. I get that you don’t like my opinion and you’d prefer I share your wrong opinion, but that doesn’t mean I don’t know what I’m talking about.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 10:51 am**

TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago
rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago I guess I just don’t understand it - Why would you be embarrassed that your alma mater was pumping out elite NHL talent? From a financial standpoint, that scenario probably helps the sports you do care about as those alumni make money and give back to the school.
You’re taking a farcical and hyperbolic argument way too literally. The main gist here is that adding hockey does nothing for me as a fan. I’ll never go to a hockey game, either. At least if the golf or baseball team does well, it puts a smile on my face. In reality, the school isn’t going to have a hockey program that benefits the other sports programs so that really isn’t a worthwhile thing to argue about.

But I guess this is what I’m getting at - I think you are part of a majority, a majority that lives in a world that says “Baseball is great and it’s America’s team and every college should have baseball (or golf).” But yet if I’m a betting man, I’m going to bet that since you (and most like you) graduated URI, the amount of URI baseball or golf you’ve attended is probably counted on one hand. You probably don’t go out of your way to watch any games, with the exception of late-season/postseason play. Yet the thought of getting more people excited on campus with a division one hockey team is a non-starter for you just because you don’t “love” hockey, when in reality you are doing nothing to support the other sports besides that “smile” you make when you see the team is semi-successful. You should want what is best for your alma mater, period. If someone decided they could make hockey fit and they felt resources would be better used there, you should support that. And if you love golf so much that it would pain you to see resources allocated away from it, maybe you should find different ways to support them now. And if at that future (probably non-existent) time someone would say “Sorry we are taking away golf scholarships and moving them to hockey,” I will build the twenty foot pulpit for you to preach from about how terrible an idea it is. It’s just about consistency. And maybe I’m really off-base, but the 200 people attending the baseball games does not speak to a large number of students, alumni, or local fans expressing much interest in the program, yet would suffer brain aneurysms if one penny was allocated from baseball to hockey.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 11:37 am**

If I were convinced that, on the whole, hockey would be a net benefit for the school or athletic department as a whole, I’d be very willing to support the idea of adding it. My position on hockey at URI is based on my impression that it will be a very expensive initial lift to get it off the ground and that on a go-forward basis, even factoring in the expectation that it would outdraw say golf and baseball combined, it would be every bit as much of a money pit as those sports could ever be. If one alternative is to drop other sports to add hockey, I think even that will have a net negative impact on athletic department finances, and because of how I feel about having a baseball and golf team plus my concerns about funding for football and basketball the idea of adding hockey doesn’t appeal to me. If another option is keeping all current sports and adding men’s and women’s hockey, I just don’t think you can do that without severely damaging your other sports, particularly your two main sports (basketball and football) plus all the peripheral sports that currently are pretty competitive (baseball, soccer and golf are all solid for the region even if they aren’t national powers).

Last point - at some level, the sports you play says something about your values and your culture and isn’t only about economics. It used to be that all sports cost schools money, and decisions about which ones you competed in were entirely about which ones you liked the best. I’m not overly concerned about how baseball draws compared to hockey because what I think the decision to play baseball and not hockey says about our culture and values. This is admittedly a harder thing to flesh out and articulate, but it is how I feel.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:01 pm**

Stevie questioned "If you add both men's and women's hockey with the same # of scholarships, don't they even out?"

yes they do.....but that adds 36 scholarships to our total...they don't want that cost....

Let's say there are 100 scholarships total for men....and there are 100 total for women...add 36 and we are now at 236 total...if they want hockey but only will commit to 220 scholarships total....they have to cut 16 scholarships from other sports on a gender equal basis...

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:10 pm**

I think you are giving too much credit to baseball. I think culture can be noticed with football, I also think culture can be noticed with basketball. I don’t think the average Joe Blow gives two shits about whether URI has a baseball team, a golf team, or a tennis team. I don’t think people at the University of Alabama think URI has a high-class athletic operation because baseball is an offering, nor do I think anyone gives two Fs that Alabama offers men’s golf or men’s tennis. My opinion would be different if URI baseball was similar to that of Arkansas (my college baseball team of choice) who averages over 8K per night at Baum. I just don’t know what culture and values you say URI gets by participating in those sports but not hockey and how that impacts the campus experience or national impression. We live in New England, not South Beach.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 2:20 pm**

There are 297 Division 1 Baseball Teams and only 60 Division 1 Hockey Teams - 5 times as many Baseball vs Hockey

Baseball is more popular at URI than I think is being credited here

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 2:43 pm**

I don't see what the number of teams in D1 has to do with what is financially best for the university, it's an irrelevant statistic. Also I don't think anyone has suggested cutting baseball. But the attendance numbers are what they are

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:02 pm**

ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago There are 297 Division 1 Baseball Teams and only 60 Division 1 Hockey Teams - 5 times as many Baseball vs Hockey

Baseball is more popular at URI than I think is being credited here

But if baseball is so popular, how come no one goes to the games? URI has 15k undergrads, another 50k that have graduated in the last 10 years, and plenty of baseball fans in south county. Yet the average attendance is 200 fans. Parents, family, and friends probably encompass most of that number.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:05 pm**

Because they’re played during the day when people are working and it’s typically 40-50 degrees out. Obviously baseball was not built for a college student audience, especially in 2019, for attention span reasons. How did we land on number of people attending games live as the all-important factor here? Do college sports exist solely to provide entertainment to people who live near campus?

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:21 pm**

TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago Because they’re played during the day when people are working and it’s typically 40-50 degrees out. Obviously baseball was not built for a college student audience, especially in 2019, for attention span reasons. How did we land on number of people attending games live as the all-important factor here? Do college sports exist solely to provide entertainment to people who live near campus?

It's not the end all and be all, but it's a lot better factor than The True Point HotTakezzzz Best Sports Power Index Poll. Also attendance has come up because people that don't want hockey say we shouldn't have it because of attendance reasons.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:24 pm**

TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago Because they’re played during the day when people are working and it’s typically 40-50 degrees out. Obviously baseball was not built for a college student audience, especially in 2019, for attention span reasons. How did we land on number of people attending games live as the all-important factor here? Do college sports exist solely to provide entertainment to people who live near campus?

When we are talking about how popular and important a sport is on campus, how else do you measure interest? This whole thread started off a post discussing attendance. Obviously not all sports are about attendance production, but baseball specifically came up when you declared how much more popular it was. Popularity should correlate with attendance, no?

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:50 pm**

RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago
TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago Because they’re played during the day when people are working and it’s typically 40-50 degrees out. Obviously baseball was not built for a college student audience, especially in 2019, for attention span reasons. How did we land on number of people attending games live as the all-important factor here? Do college sports exist solely to provide entertainment to people who live near campus?

it's a lot better factor than The True Point HotTakezzzz Best Sports Power Index Poll

Strong disagree

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:57 pm**

RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago
TruePoint wrote: ↑5 years ago Because they’re played during the day when people are working and it’s typically 40-50 degrees out. Obviously baseball was not built for a college student audience, especially in 2019, for attention span reasons. How did we land on number of people attending games live as the all-important factor here? Do college sports exist solely to provide entertainment to people who live near campus?
It's not the end all and be all, but it's a lot better factor than The True Point HotTakezzzz Best Sports Power Index Poll. Also attendance has come up because people that don't want hockey say we shouldn't have it because of attendance reasons.

In all seriousness, I feel like in between quasi-trolling provocations of hockey fans, I have actually laid out the real case against adding hockey. The argument from me has never been that literally nobody will go watch a hockey game, it’s a cost benefit analysis that assumes hockey will not attract enough of an audience to make adding it worthwhile. Baseball has value as a connector with Americana, with other schools around the country, with tradition (in a general sense, not specifically citing any glorious URI-specific baseball tradition, although I assume we have been playing for a long time). Baseball got brought into this because someone said basically “hey if you think not enough people attend hockey, what about baseball” but really it shouldn’t be part of this discussion. The tl;dr version of this whole argument is that hockey would require a financial commitment that I don’t think is justifiable, either by cutting other sports or taking away from other sports’ funding - or more likely both/and.

Posted: **Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:37 pm**

Some of the arguments here sound just like when the Student Council in the early 90's wouldn't recognize the Hockey Team as a Club Sport.

Posted: **Thu Apr 11, 2019 3:42 pm**

rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago
ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago

As literally 95% of events do on StubHub
The major point is how cheap the tickets are for the Final 4 and Championship Game.
Plays to how quiet and unattended the Hockey was in Providence as RF1 began the thread with.
Not only was it dead in Providence, sounds like not so much excitement in Buffalo either.
Just because tickets on Stubhub have not sold yet isn't quite indicative of anything.
The Frozen Four isn't until next week.
For the last decade has at-worst been a near sellout, and typically is a sellout.

Can get tix for both games in the semifinals today for only 32.50 each. Very cheap for a Final 4.

Posted: **Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:48 pm**

ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago
ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago

The major point is how cheap the tickets are for the Final 4 and Championship Game.
Plays to how quiet and unattended the Hockey was in Providence as RF1 began the thread with.
Not only was it dead in Providence, sounds like not so much excitement in Buffalo either.
Just because tickets on Stubhub have not sold yet isn't quite indicative of anything.
The Frozen Four isn't until next week.
For the last decade has at-worst been a near sellout, and typically is a sellout.
Can get tix for both games in the semifinals today for only 32.50 each. Very cheap for a Final 4.

It’s just literally a moronic take. You can’t compare hockey to basketball or football. You can literally go to buy baseball tickets for the entire College World Series for 56 cents per game. So if $32 is cheap for hockey, what does that make baseball? So clearly you don’t know what Final Four tickets go for in most sports, unless of course you are trying to compete the Frozen Four to the Final Four.

Posted: **Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:18 pm**

rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago
ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago

Just because tickets on Stubhub have not sold yet isn't quite indicative of anything.
The Frozen Four isn't until next week.
For the last decade has at-worst been a near sellout, and typically is a sellout.
Can get tix for both games in the semifinals today for only 32.50 each. Very cheap for a Final 4.
It’s just literally a moronic take. You can’t compare hockey to basketball or football. You can literally go to buy baseball tickets for the entire College World Series for 56 cents per game. So if $32 is cheap for hockey, what does that make baseball? So clearly you don’t know what Final Four tickets go for in most sports, unless of course you are trying to compete the Frozen Four to the Final Four.

As usual RJ you have to resort to calling people morons. Stop with the insults.
Read the whole thread to understand what it is about.
You often read part of a thread and resort to insults.
Now I’ll go back to rooting for Minnesota Duluth

Posted: **Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:40 pm**

Since I’ve contributed to the entire thread I think I’m well-versed in what it says. I thought calling the comment moronic was kind, since it was a horrific take. You are the one who chose to add the commentary “very cheap for a Final Four” so you can’t blame me for backing up how stupid of a statement that was with facts because you are literally trying to compare a hockey final four with basketball or football and not in the realm of secondary sports.

And for the record, I did not insult you and I did not call you a moron. I called the comment moronic. We all have moronic takes. If you can’t see why this was one horrific I can’t help you there. If you got a $1 every time I said something stupid, you’d probably have $250 this year alone.

Posted: **Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:48 pm**

rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago
ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago
rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago

Just because tickets on Stubhub have not sold yet isn't quite indicative of anything.
The Frozen Four isn't until next week.
For the last decade has at-worst been a near sellout, and typically is a sellout.
Can get tix for both games in the semifinals today for only 32.50 each. Very cheap for a Final 4.
It’s just literally a moronic take. You can’t compare hockey to basketball or football. You can literally go to buy baseball tickets for the entire College World Series for 56 cents per game. So if $32 is cheap for hockey, what does that make baseball? So clearly you don’t know what Final Four tickets go for in most sports, unless of course you are trying to compete the Frozen Four to the Final Four.

I wonder what he'll find if he researches prices for the college golf championship

Posted: **Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:59 pm**

RhowdyRam02 wrote: ↑5 years ago
rjsuperfly66 wrote: ↑5 years ago
ramster wrote: ↑5 years ago

Can get tix for both games in the semifinals today for only 32.50 each. Very cheap for a Final 4.
It’s just literally a moronic take. You can’t compare hockey to basketball or football. You can literally go to buy baseball tickets for the entire College World Series for 56 cents per game. So if $32 is cheap for hockey, what does that make baseball? So clearly you don’t know what Final Four tickets go for in most sports, unless of course you are trying to compete the Frozen Four to the Final Four.
I wonder what he'll find if he researches prices for the college golf championship

The sad thing is since I’m on the Arkansas marketing list, I know the answer to this question. Free, they are free. Very cheap for a Finals. I don’t know why anyone would pay $9 to go to Omaha when you can go to Fayetteville, Arkansas and watch elite collegiate men’s golf for free.

Posted: **Fri Apr 12, 2019 7:25 am**

UMASS beats Denver 4-3 in Overtime
Denver tied 3-3 with 2 goals in the last 10 minutes of the 3rd period to force the IT
Denver was playing in their 17th Frozen Four

UMASS is playing in their 1st ever Frozen Four so congrats to UMASS

UMASS plays Minnesota-Duluth in the Championship game on Saturday

Posted: **Fri Apr 12, 2019 11:01 am**

A crowd of 13,051 came out to see the two opening Frozen Four games at the 19,070 seat KeyBank Center in Buffalo, NY. The three games of the Frozen Four are the NCAA Men's Hockey finale and premier annual event.

Posted: **Fri Apr 12, 2019 2:37 pm**

RF1 wrote: ↑5 years ago A crowd of 13,051 came out to see the two opening Frozen Four games at the 19,070 seat KeyBank Center in Buffalo, NY. The three games of the Frozen Four are the NCAA Men's Hockey finale and premier annual event.

True RF1, only 68% of capacity.

Most people would likely only watch the game their team is involved with. That’s the way it looks in the stands.

If half the seats are occupied that were sold then only 34% of total seats in the arena are occupied. That’s about how it looks on TV.

Will be interesting to see attendance when down to just two teams on Saturday - Minnesota-Duluth vs Massachusetts. Minnesota-Duluth will be playing in the National Championship game for the 3rd straight year. Game is at 8:30pm

KeaneyBlue - The URI Basketball Forum

Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional

Re: Providence 2019 NCAA Men's Hockey Regional