Attendance at the State Tournament

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 11:32 am

In this Let's Play Hockey article Jon Holmes makes some suggestions on ways to boost attendance at the girls state tourney. I think he has several good ideas but one he doesn't mention is the cost of tickets, which is $17 each for adults - the same as the boy's tournament. By was of comparison, I just purchased TWO tickets for this weekend's NCAA game between the Gophers and Boston University for $10 total (a real bargain if there ever was one). Anyway, I'm not sure how much the cost of attending the girl's tourney impacts attendance but I have to believe that for many it at least figures into the equation.

Curious to know what others think of the cost factor and the other ideas Holmes puts forth in his op-ed:

http://www.letsplayhockey.com/online-ed ... ithin.html

goaline · Post by **goaline** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:03 pm

outside of a general disparity between attendance at all male and female sporting events, there are headwinds unique to girls hockey in this state -- one less obvious one is the loss of attendance at the tourney due to boys sectional playoffs -- important quarter and semifinal games impact ALL girls teams participating

wolfman · Post by **wolfman** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:10 pm

For starters move the whole tourney to Ridder Arena. Dont mess with the ticket prices for the first year and see what happens. I have a feeling if it was free there would be about the same amount of people showing up. I just think it would be so much better for the girls and the fans that show up at Ridder. I went one day to girls tourney down in St. Paul and the girls dont need to play at Xcel. IMO

LZ94 · Post by **LZ94** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:24 pm

The X gave the MSHSL the arena for free when the law suit was filed from those Cloquet parents (how'd that work out for you?).

Since their is no charge for the building, the MSHSL will never move the tourney from the X until that changes.

They would have to pay the U to rent Ridder, so it's a better deal to play in an arena with no atmosphere, than to try and make the games better at Ridder.

Perhaps those Cloquet parents can sue again for having to have a state tourney that lacks enthusiasm. Or maybe those parents don't care about the status of girls hockey now that their little susie's have gone on to be professional hockey players.

Hard water fan · Post by **Hard water fan** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:31 pm

Totally agree Wolfman. The Xcel does nothing to enhance the experience. I would even suggest switching locations every other year between Ridder and Amsoil. Amsoil is a fantastic venue for the tourney, and I'm not sure anyone could argue with a better setting than Duluth. I know it's a stretch, but hey- why not? With Blake, BSM, SPU, Edina, Hopkins, EP and HM all starting to rebuild, you'll probably see more finals with teams exclusively from the north anyway. Geographic parity- it's a legitimate Title 10 issue.

Bulldog3489 · Post by **Bulldog3489** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 2:59 pm

Yes, to improve attendance, either Duluth or Topeka.

powerplayer · Post by **powerplayer** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:29 pm

The ticket prices are very high for the Girls State Tournament. I watched one game at the X and would have loved to watch more however I was not going to pay the price. It is already an expensive weekend with having to rent hotel rooms, food, adult beverages (haha) etc. (That is for those of us that come from out of town.) IMO there would be more people attending if the price of tickets weren't so much.

sinbin · Post by **sinbin** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:43 pm

Yes, of course, PP, the cost of tickets and refreshments at the game does put a serious dent in my adult beverage budget, too. After attending most state games over the past 5 years at the X I must admit that Ridder would be a much better experience, IMO. It is cool for the girls to play at the X (everyone deserves a chance to play there once, but after that it loses its "charm") and it's great to be able to sit anywhere you want as a fan and have fantastic sightlines and hear the action as well as see it and no lines at the concession stands or bathrooms. But, yes, Ridder would be a much more exhilirating experience for the players and fans alike. Of course, it's all theoretically if MSHSL is financially tied to the X.

Nimrod · Post by **Nimrod** » Thu Mar 13, 2014 9:15 pm

I would play all games except the final game at Ridder.
That is a much better venue for the girls as it feels like there is a full house there versus the X where you feel like no one showed up. Playing the final at the X gives the girls that get that far the experience of playing in the big lights and maybe limiting it to that one game will drive more interest for the fans to show up. I remain a little disappointed that the boys games are more important than the girls to most fans. The MN girls have far more Division I talent moving on than the boys on a percentage basis so you would hope some day that would draw more interest. Girls rule and boys drool?!!!

Froggy Richards · Post by **Froggy Richards** » Fri Mar 14, 2014 10:48 am

Nimrod wrote:I would play all games except the final game at Ridder.
That is a much better venue for the girls as it feels like there is a full house there versus the X where you feel like no one showed up. Playing the final at the X gives the girls that get that far the experience of playing in the big lights and maybe limiting it to that one game will drive more interest for the fans to show up. I remain a little disappointed that the boys games are more important than the girls to most fans. The MN girls have far more Division I talent moving on than the boys on a percentage basis so you would hope some day that would draw more interest. Girls rule and boys drool?!!!

The boy's sports will always attract more fans than the girls. It's always been that way and it always will. I don't think I'm saying anything controversial by pointing out that the quality of play is night and day between the boys and girls. Nobody cares who produces more D1 talent, they want to watch the best product and be entertained. Nothing against girls hockey, I watched most of the Olympic games and was VERY impressed. But this is High School. With limited time and resources casual fans are not going to choose the Girls tourney.

luckyEPDad · Post by **luckyEPDad** » Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:36 am

Froggy Richards wrote:
Nimrod wrote:I would play all games except the final game at Ridder.
That is a much better venue for the girls as it feels like there is a full house there versus the X where you feel like no one showed up. Playing the final at the X gives the girls that get that far the experience of playing in the big lights and maybe limiting it to that one game will drive more interest for the fans to show up. I remain a little disappointed that the boys games are more important than the girls to most fans. The MN girls have far more Division I talent moving on than the boys on a percentage basis so you would hope some day that would draw more interest. Girls rule and boys drool?!!!
The boy's sports will always attract more fans than the girls. It's always been that way and it always will. I don't think I'm saying anything controversial by pointing out that the quality of play is night and day between the boys and girls. Nobody cares who produces more D1 talent, they want to watch the best product and be entertained. Nothing against girls hockey, I watched most of the Olympic games and was VERY impressed. But this is High School. With limited time and resources casual fans are not going to choose the Girls tourney.

The "quality of play" argument is lame. Boys HS hockey stinks when compared to even the worst professional team. If you made your viewing decision based on quality of play you would never watch any HS hockey game, boys or girls. HS tournament hockey does have an emotional intensity that pro hockey lacks, but when it comes to emotional intensity the boys have nothing on the girls.

Looking in as an outsider I can't help but think a packed venue for a boys hockey game is odd. I assure you most reading that SI article about the Minnesota High School Hockey Tournament thought "How pathetic! I suppose it beats ice fishing." You cannot understand this thing unless you wrap it in culture, history, and a little Minnesota quirkiness. Watching the boys HS hockey tournament is as much a part of being Minnesotan as ice fishing or deer hunting or having a lake cabin.

So on the boys side we have almost 80 years of tradition, a slightly higher skill level, and a gender bias that though weakening is still not hard to see. On the girls side we have 20 years of being mostly ignored. You're right, it is pretty easy to guess where people will spend their money. But after 20 more years of girls players growing up to be board members, coaches, officials and moms of new girls hockey players we will revisit this debate. The last 20 years have seen huge strides. Not it is time for sweeping change.

Froggy Richards · Post by **Froggy Richards** » Fri Mar 14, 2014 1:19 pm

luckyEPDad wrote:
Froggy Richards wrote:
Nimrod wrote:I would play all games except the final game at Ridder.
That is a much better venue for the girls as it feels like there is a full house there versus the X where you feel like no one showed up. Playing the final at the X gives the girls that get that far the experience of playing in the big lights and maybe limiting it to that one game will drive more interest for the fans to show up. I remain a little disappointed that the boys games are more important than the girls to most fans. The MN girls have far more Division I talent moving on than the boys on a percentage basis so you would hope some day that would draw more interest. Girls rule and boys drool?!!!
The boy's sports will always attract more fans than the girls. It's always been that way and it always will. I don't think I'm saying anything controversial by pointing out that the quality of play is night and day between the boys and girls. Nobody cares who produces more D1 talent, they want to watch the best product and be entertained. Nothing against girls hockey, I watched most of the Olympic games and was VERY impressed. But this is High School. With limited time and resources casual fans are not going to choose the Girls tourney.
The "quality of play" argument is lame. Boys HS hockey stinks when compared to even the worst professional team. If you made your viewing decision based on quality of play you would never watch any HS hockey game, boys or girls. HS tournament hockey does have an emotional intensity that pro hockey lacks, but when it comes to emotional intensity the boys have nothing on the girls.

Looking in as an outsider I can't help but think a packed venue for a boys hockey game is odd. I assure you most reading that SI article about the Minnesota High School Hockey Tournament thought "How pathetic! I suppose it beats ice fishing." You cannot understand this thing unless you wrap it in culture, history, and a little Minnesota quirkiness. Watching the boys HS hockey tournament is as much a part of being Minnesotan as ice fishing or deer hunting or having a lake cabin.

So on the boys side we have almost 80 years of tradition, a slightly higher skill level, and a gender bias that though weakening is still not hard to see. On the girls side we have 20 years of being mostly ignored. You're right, it is pretty easy to guess where people will spend their money. But after 20 more years of girls players growing up to be board members, coaches, officials and moms of new girls hockey players we will revisit this debate. The last 20 years have seen huge strides. Not it is time for sweeping change.

I disagree. The NHL is definitely not the best form of hockey to watch. It's better than it used to be because they got rid of some of the clutching and grabbing, but I think High School and College brings out the beauty of the game more. The NHL players have just gotten too big, too strong and too fast and the rink size has stayed the same. Tough to bring out the best of the game in that format.

I don't think awareness is the issue. Everybody knows that girl's hockey is there and they still choose not to go. The Women's Olympic Games was some of the best hockey that I've seen, but I'm still going to watch the Men's if I have to make a choice. It's just better hockey. Same reason that I try to get to as many Twins games during the summer as possible, but I've never been to a St. Paul Saints Game. Can't call that "Gender Bias." Let's be honest here, the Boys do not have a "slightly" higher skill level. The Edina High School team would beat the Gophers women by 30 goals. They would probably beat the US Women's Olympic team by 10. That's not "Gender Bias," that's just reality.

cake83 · Post by **cake83** » Fri Mar 14, 2014 1:38 pm

luckyEPDad wrote:
Froggy Richards wrote:
Nimrod wrote:I would play all games except the final game at Ridder.
That is a much better venue for the girls as it feels like there is a full house there versus the X where you feel like no one showed up. Playing the final at the X gives the girls that get that far the experience of playing in the big lights and maybe limiting it to that one game will drive more interest for the fans to show up. I remain a little disappointed that the boys games are more important than the girls to most fans. The MN girls have far more Division I talent moving on than the boys on a percentage basis so you would hope some day that would draw more interest. Girls rule and boys drool?!!! The "quality of play" argument is lame. Boys HS hockey stinks when compared to even the worst professional team. If you made your viewing decision based on quality of play you would never watch any HS hockey game, boys or girls. HS tournament hockey does have an emotional intensity that pro hockey lacks, but when it comes to emotional intensity the boys have nothing on the girls.

Looking in as an outsider I can't help but think a packed venue for a boys hockey game is odd. I assure you most reading that SI article about the Minnesota High School Hockey Tournament thought "How pathetic! I suppose it beats ice fishing." You cannot understand this thing unless you wrap it in culture, history, and a little Minnesota quirkiness. Watching the boys HS hockey tournament is as much a part of being Minnesotan as ice fishing or deer hunting or having a lake cabin.

So on the boys side we have almost 80 years of tradition, a slightly higher skill level, and a gender bias that though weakening is still not hard to see. On the girls side we have 20 years of being mostly ignored. You're right, it is pretty easy to guess where people will spend their money. But after 20 more years of girls players growing up to be board members, coaches, officials and moms of new girls hockey players we will revisit this debate. The last 20 years have seen huge strides. Not it is time for sweeping change.
I don't disagree with you at all really (especially about the history), but I think the "quality" discussion is a slippery slope but has some validity. What I mean is that, due to obvious differences in men and women athletes, the product they produce is just different. This is not to say one is better than the other, but that they are different. It's maybe best seen in the NBA vs the WNBA. I don't really watch either, but I would understand someone favoring one over the other because they play so different from each other. Same sport, very different product. Most people will gravitate to what they are familiar with (by gender or history or what-not), but it is worth noting that boys hockey isn't the exact same as girls hockey. Men's and women's sports will always be somewhat different products.

Tigers33 · Post by **Tigers33** » Fri Mar 14, 2014 4:13 pm

Anyone know what it costs to go watch the gophers play BU in women's hockey? My family just bought two tickets. The tickets were $5 each plus a $1 each for a handling fee. That's $12 total!!

Mshsl take notes!! Charge less and get more to go!! Duh...

luckyEPDad · Post by **luckyEPDad** » Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:27 pm

Tigers33 wrote:Anyone know what it costs to go watch the gophers play BU in women's hockey? My family just bought two tickets. The tickets were $5 each plus a $1 each for a handling fee. That's $12 total!!

Mshsl take notes!! Charge less and get more to go!! Duh...

A price cut should extend to the regular season. If you want more butts in the Xcel you need more butts in the stands for regular season games.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:11 pm

Tigers33 wrote:Anyone know what it costs to go watch the gophers play BU in women's hockey? My family just bought two tickets. The tickets were $5 each plus a $1 each for a handling fee. That's $12 total!!

Mshsl take notes!! Charge less and get more to go!! Duh...

I bought two also. One for me (senior) and one for my daughter (student). Total cost including handling fee = $8! This, for a quarterfinal NCAA tournament game. Print tickets at home on your computer - very convenient and you won't have to stand in line to buy a ticket. There is no better bargain in the Twin Cities for a hockey game - period - and if this game doesn't sell out I don't know what women's hockey game ever will.

https://www.mygophersports.com/Online/w ... postseason

BP · Post by BP » Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:23 pm

Agreed with taking it to Ridder. Every player and coach wants it.

BUT, it wil never happen. Title IX and the lawyers will never let it happen, maybe ever

luckyEPDad · Post by **luckyEPDad** » Sat Mar 15, 2014 11:17 am

BP wrote:Agreed with taking it to Ridder. Every player and coach wants it.

BUT, it wil never happen. Title IX and the lawyers will never let it happen, maybe ever

I thought the same, but after asking several players not one said she'd rather play at Ridder. Each one thought Xcel is a much nicer facility and they are so used to nobody watching games that it doesn't matter that the seats are empty.

Marty · Post by **Marty** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 10:08 am

If the economic penalty "loss" is less by booking tournament at Ridder, then they should move the tournament. If the lease rates are similar between the two facilities then let them stay at XCEL.

I doubt Title IX demands that the girls play at the same place as the boys.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 2:10 pm

With the "free rent" at the Xcel it would seem that it would be more expensive for the MSHSL to move it to a different arena, including Ridder. But the location discussion is an old one, and even if the venue were changed I doubt that the move alone would do anything to boost attendance (refer back to the article in the first post of this thread).

After thinking about this some more I'm all but certain that the girls' tournament will never attract the same kind of huge crowds as the boys', even though I do think there is plenty of room for improvement from where we are today. But for that to happen I think we will need to see a continued increase in the number of both players and parents who remain fans and supporters of the game after their playing days are over. It's always been a little disappointing to me how so many players immediately leave the game behind, rather than continue to support the sport they grew up having so much fun playing...and parents stop going to the games as soon as soon as their daughters are no longer out there for them to watch.

The boys' tournament has had a much longer time to build a tradition, but it's been able to maintain its fan base because far more former players and their parents stay interested and continue to follow the game after graduation. It's pretty obvious that the same type of thing needs to happen if the girls' tournament is ever going to move beyond being mainly an attraction for just the players, their parents and relatives, and current students and band members.

P.S. Even though the current interest level and tournament attendance is not what it potentially could be, everything's relative: When it comes to girls high school hockey we are still way beyond what any other state has!

But like most other things, if you stand still and don't get better, others will eventually catch and pass you up!

about22pandas · Post by **about22pandas** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:02 pm

Why does everyone think the girls want to go to Ridder?

The Cloquet girls didn't and the girls out there now don't, either.

The biggest problem with attendance is the fact that boys sectionals are the same weekend. The cost matters, but slightly.

If you want the girls state tournament to get headway, amazing attendance and something that wont affect the boys tournament?
Move the girls to the weekend after the boys, instead of 2 weeks beforehand.

For instance, I am dating one of the "Cloquet girls" that get thrown under the bus by everyone. Her coach in 2004 or 05 cared more about watching his son play sections rather than them advancing in the consolation bracket, so they put in their backup goalie who didn't start the entire year and they got demolished since she was terrible. He did this so they didn't have to play Saturday so he could watch his son play instead of being stuck in St Paul.

If the girls tournament was after the boys I guarantee attendance would double. Its just a hard sale when you have boys sections and youth tournaments going on, on top of all the other hockey. Switch seasons or just have the girls start a week later then the boys in November and problem solved.

sinbin · Post by **sinbin** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 5:32 pm

Not sure that everyone wants to go to Ridder, I haven't seen a show of hands. My daughter and many (not all) of her teammates would prefer it, but they've also played "enough" games at Xcel, so crave that higher energy level of a packed house. They may well be in the minority, though. Again, playing on the big stage at the X is something everyone should get to do at least once, but the atmospheres are night and day.

I do think attendance has more to do with the competition of time than the cost, but that cost does eat into one's adult beverage budget, so one must plan accordingly.

LZ94 · Post by **LZ94** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:09 pm

about22pandas wrote:Why does everyone think the girls want to go to Ridder?

The Cloquet girls didn't and the girls out there now don't, either.

The biggest problem with attendance is the fact that boys sectionals are the same weekend. The cost matters, but slightly.

If you want the girls state tournament to get headway, amazing attendance and something that wont affect the boys tournament?
Move the girls to the weekend after the boys, instead of 2 weeks beforehand.

For instance, I am dating one of the "Cloquet girls" that get thrown under the bus by everyone. Her coach in 2004 or 05 cared more about watching his son play sections rather than them advancing in the consolation bracket, so they put in their backup goalie who didn't start the entire year and they got demolished since she was terrible. He did this so they didn't have to play Saturday so he could watch his son play instead of being stuck in St Paul.

If the girls tournament was after the boys I guarantee attendance would double. Its just a hard sale when you have boys sections and youth tournaments going on, on top of all the other hockey. Switch seasons or just have the girls start a week later then the boys in November and problem solved.

So if you don't take her to the nicest restaurant, does she get really pissed?

Marty · Post by **Marty** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:09 pm

Girls hockey has a very limited draw. It would not matter what weekend you ran the tournament. Few other people show up for the tournament other than parents of the players and students from the participating schools.

Girls hockey players attend the boys tournament in heavier numbers than the girl's tournament. Look around for the team apparel and you will see for yourself.

Even the Gopher women's hockey team rarely sells out. The Women's Frozen Four is only available via online streaming from the NCAA. Not even ESPN Ocho will make time to cover it.

The idea for playing at Ridder is to give the girls the experience of playing in a full areana. Something most never get to experience.

Marty · Post by **Marty** » Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:15 pm

Boy's hockey is a faster and higher skill level game. A few girls can make the grade at the Bantam level, but few will excel at the boy's HS level.

Remember when Warroad HS beat the USA Women's (pre-Olympic) team in 2006 ?