HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

I just read in the newspaper that the cost of the state tourney was 17.00 for an adult and 11.00 per student. I think that crazy! So for a family of 4 to attend a game it would be 56.00 + add on treats and drinks, you are looking at 75.00 per game. Assuming your team makes it all the way that could be almost 300.00 to support your team. I know these fees help off set the cost of having it at the "X" but I think the MSHSL should really try to make this event more affordable to the masses. Girls hockey is still a growing sport and the state tourney should be it's #1 showcase. I just wonder how many families are turned off about bringing their daughter down to the games unless they know someone because of the cost.

gopher25 wrote:I just read in the newspaper that the cost of the state tourney was 17.00 for an adult and 11.00 per student. I think that crazy! So for a family of 4 to attend a game it would be 56.00 + add on treats and drinks, you are looking at 75.00 per game. Assuming your team makes it all the way that could be almost 300.00 to support your team. I know these fees help off set the cost of having it at the "X" but I think the MSHSL should really try to make this event more affordable to the masses. Girls hockey is still a growing sport and the state tourney should be it's #1 showcase. I just wonder how many families are turned off about bringing their daughter down to the games unless they know someone because of the cost.

Who would you like to subsidize your attendance?
1. MSHSL (aka the schools)
2. Tax payers
3. Other event attendees

This isn't a cheap event to put on and the MSHSL already "extorts" the TV broadcasters and other advertisers who want to support the boys to also support the girls tournament. They also get a heck of a deal from the Xcel.

I understand the prices to attend and concessions per the costs to stage the tournament. What bothers me is the cost to park in the Xcel Energy Center ramp. I know there are cheaper alternatives within a reasonable distance...but that's where I like to park for convenience and the cost is excessive IMO.

brookyone wrote:I understand the prices to attend and concessions per the costs to stage the tournament. What bothers me is the cost to park in the Xcel Energy Center ramp. I know there are cheaper alternatives within a reasonable distance...but that's where I like to park for convenience and the cost is excessive IMO.

The ramp on the west side of the arena (corner of Kellogg and Smith)...two blocks from the X, is $10. It's just on the other side of the open lot the buses park in (which is $15). I always park at that $10 ramp. Lots of space, easy to get out of and the right price.

Sparlimb wrote:

brookyone wrote:I understand the prices to attend and concessions per the costs to stage the tournament. What bothers me is the cost to park in the Xcel Energy Center ramp. I know there are cheaper alternatives within a reasonable distance...but that's where I like to park for convenience and the cost is excessive IMO.

The ramp on the west side of the arena (corner of Kellogg and Smith)...two blocks from the X, is $10. It's just on the other side of the open lot the buses park in (which is $15). I always park at that $10 ramp. Lots of space, easy to get out of and the right price.

Good call Sparlimb

For those directionally challenged, a landmark close to the ramp, is McGovern's, ramp is next door, one block off 7th St...

I agree the cost is out of hand. 4 years ago it was $10. As stated earlier, this tournament is still trying to build a following. I think the real fans of this tournament are the people who have or had girls playing. It's biggest supporters are going to be those families. But when you put it out of reach for them to afford to go, you're killing it. That lawsuit is ruining the whole thing. When I got there on Wednesday for the first "A" game, there was only about 200 people there. Seriously.

As far as parking, the lot behind Catholic Charities is only $4 for the entire day. It's only 2 blocks away. No attendant it's an honor system where you put your money in an envelope, write your plate number on it and place it in a metal box. Nice part is if you have to run somewhere between sessions, you can park back there again on the same $4. Bad part though, I would not recommend this spot for the ladies attending. Especially alone.

Why did they ever move the Girls Tourney from Ridder Arena? That was the best atmosphere and much cheaper. The crowd looks lost in the X.

WB6162 wrote:Why did they ever move the Girls Tourney from Ridder Arena? That was the best atmosphere and much cheaper. The crowd looks lost in the X.

This question comes up every year. I will try to sum it up. It was moved to the X because there was a lawsuit brought alleging discrimination against the girls because the boys got the X and the girls were given lowly? Ridder. Some (especially the players) are happy its at the X where the Wild play and some think the games are more exciting at a venue like Ridder where the excitement of a full house adds to the atmosphere. Almost every female skater I have talked to about this wants to play at the X so I'm happy for the girls even though I personally would like to see it at Ridder.

OntheEdge wrote:

WB6162 wrote:Why did they ever move the Girls Tourney from Ridder Arena? That was the best atmosphere and much cheaper. The crowd looks lost in the X.

This question comes up every year. I will try to sum it up. It was moved to the X because there was a lawsuit brought alleging discrimination against the girls because the boys got the X and the girls were given lowly? Ridder. Some (especially the players) are happy its at the X where the Wild play and some think the games are more exciting at a venue like Ridder where the excitement of a full house adds to the atmosphere. Almost every female skater I have talked to about this wants to play at the X so I'm happy for the girls even though I personally would like to see it at Ridder.

Perfect explanation and sums up my thoughts exactly!

P.S. If you watch the girls as they're being introduced before the game plus their interviews on TV you can see how excited they are to play there...totally unlike any other venue they play at growing up and in high school. I disagreed with the lawsuit and as a fan would rather see it at Ridder, but you have to appreciate and take into consideration how the girls feel about it.

I haven't watched much girl's hockey, but I am watching the CR vs Tonka game since my buddy's daughter plays for CR. I can see your point, the girls really look excited about the game.

What is more important that that?

What is wrong with going to the X and having the whole corner section to yourself? Have you ever been to a game where the person next to you thinks they are the play by play announcer? Leave the format the way it is.


Can't beat the X or St. Paul for any hockey event.

I think the X is an awesome venue and everyone should feel pretty good about being able to play there

WB6162 wrote:I haven't watched much girl's hockey, but I am watching the CR vs Tonka game since my buddy's daughter plays for CR. I can see your point, the girls really look excited about the game.

What is more important that that?

Ok I probably shouldn't do this but since you asked. Yes the girls really like it and it is an important factor but there are other factors to consider.

A smaller venue arguably would give a more charged atmosphere and create a certain buzz that I think could help make girls hockey more popular.

From a business standpoint, the X holds 18,000 and it is expensive to rent. I would think Ridder or Aldrich would be much less expensive and could easily accommodate the fans. You probably wouldn't have to charge $17 for adults to cash flow the tournament. Cheaper tickets might mean more fans.

From a legal standpoint, the lawsuit was never decided so the merits of the case are questionable. I think the suit was brought under Title IX but it is by no means an open and shut case. Title IX states: With respect to athletic programs, the Dept. of Education evaluates the following factors in determining whether equal treatment exists:[ (1) Whether the selection of sports and levels of competition effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of members of both sexes (2) The provision of equipment and supplies; (3) Scheduling of games and practice time; (4) Travel and per diem allowance; (5) Opportunity to receive coaching and academic tutoring on mathematics only; (6) Assignment and compensation of coaches and tutors; (7) Provision of locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities; (8) Provision of medical and training facilities and services; (9) Provision of housing and dining facilities and services; (10) Publicity. Unequal aggregate expenditures for members of each sex or unequal expenditures for male and female teams if a recipient operates or sponsors separate teams will not constitute noncompliance with this section, but the Assistant Secretary [of Education for Civil Rights] may consider the failure to provide necessary funds for teams for one sex in assessing equality of opportunity for members of each sex.

No one factor is determinate of the issue.

Therefore IMO its a balancing act of the girls desires, economic factors and legal principles. We want the girls to have the same opportunities as the boys but we can't be blind to the economics or the legal factors. I think you must look at what is in the best interests of the sport of girls hockey as a whole when making the decision.

Gov78 wrote:

gopher25 wrote:I just read in the newspaper that the cost of the state tourney was 17.00 for an adult and 11.00 per student. I think that crazy! So for a family of 4 to attend a game it would be 56.00 + add on treats and drinks, you are looking at 75.00 per game. Assuming your team makes it all the way that could be almost 300.00 to support your team. I know these fees help off set the cost of having it at the "X" but I think the MSHSL should really try to make this event more affordable to the masses. Girls hockey is still a growing sport and the state tourney should be it's #1 showcase. I just wonder how many families are turned off about bringing their daughter down to the games unless they know someone because of the cost.

Who would you like to subsidize your attendance?
1. MSHSL (aka the schools)
2. Tax payers
3. Other event attendees

This isn't a cheap event to put on and the MSHSL already "extorts" the TV broadcasters and other advertisers who want to support the boys to also support the girls tournament. They also get a heck of a deal from the Xcel.

How about number 2, but limit it to the top 5%. That would make the Governor happy.

Ridder would be a good option but Aldrich arena is too small and would be a poor choice. I guess It's great to debate but I don't see a change in venue happening anytime soon if ever.

OntheEdge wrote:No one factor is determinate of the issue.

According to a MSHSL official in an interview after the move was made, that organization conceded the issue of venue based primarily on one factor, or objective. That was as he put it, it's clear the kids like it and enjoy playing there immensely, and are excited to do so, and the excitement / fun factor for the kids to relish the experience is our primary goal.

I think you have to consider the possibility that avoiding the lawsuit played a part in the decision. I wasn't a fan of the move way back when, but I have definitely enjoyed watching games at the X. Ridder concessions are horrible. Worst in the WCHA...concessions may be more important to me than others. I've come to agree, if the kids enjoy it more, then the X it should be. I won't deny the cost is a little painful.

I guess my solution to the cost would be, distribute tickets at a heavy discount to the associations of the teams involved, maybe have youth fees be 5.00 per ticket and adults 10.00. Encourage the high school coaches to get involved with the youth associations to make sure the players attend the tournament.
I would also partner with Minnesota hockey and make the tickets available on the minnesota hockey website at the same discounted price. Keep the walk up fees the same. They could do the same thing for the Boy's Class A tournament as that does not sell out either.

I bet if you double or tripple the number of people going to the tournament you will more than make up the $$$ on concessions. If you could get the lower bowl full for AA sessions I think the atmosphere would be awesome. I just think it's a lot to ask a family not involved with the tournament to go spend 75.00- 100.00 on one game.

After 2-3 years of doing this if the numbers haven't gone up then go back to high prices we have right now.

Gov78 wrote: Who would you like to subsidize your attendance?
1. MSHSL (aka the schools)
2. Tax payers
3. Other event attendees

This isn't a cheap event to put on and the MSHSL already "extorts" the TV broadcasters and other advertisers who want to support the boys to also support the girls tournament. They also get a heck of a deal from the Xcel.

No need to subsidize. Lower the ticket prices and increase advertising. Use increased attendance to increase the gate. Most of the costs are fixed, so any increased revenue is a net gain. The boys state hockey tournament wasn't always the huge draw it is today. The girls have a good product. It just needs better marketing.

luckyEPDad wrote:

Gov78 wrote: Who would you like to subsidize your attendance?
1. MSHSL (aka the schools)
2. Tax payers
3. Other event attendees

This isn't a cheap event to put on and the MSHSL already "extorts" the TV broadcasters and other advertisers who want to support the boys to also support the girls tournament. They also get a heck of a deal from the Xcel.

No need to subsidize. Lower the ticket prices and increase advertising. Use increased attendance to increase the gate. Most of the costs are fixed, so any increased revenue is a net gain. The boys state hockey tournament wasn't always the huge draw it is today. The girls have a good product. It just needs better marketing.

What turnip truck did you fall off of there EPdad the girls tournament does not draw because it is BAD hockey. For your information the boys tournament is the MSHSL cash cow which nets 1.2 million a year and covers your cost. You should thank the boys for that!!!! For your information EPdad the BOYS tournament has ALWAYS done well!!! Enough of the revisionist history.

If girls hockey is so "bad"....please take your comments over to the boy's forum and stay there.

northwoods oldtimer wrote:

luckyEPDad wrote:

Gov78 wrote: Who would you like to subsidize your attendance?
1. MSHSL (aka the schools)
2. Tax payers
3. Other event attendees

This isn't a cheap event to put on and the MSHSL already "extorts" the TV broadcasters and other advertisers who want to support the boys to also support the girls tournament. They also get a heck of a deal from the Xcel.

No need to subsidize. Lower the ticket prices and increase advertising. Use increased attendance to increase the gate. Most of the costs are fixed, so any increased revenue is a net gain. The boys state hockey tournament wasn't always the huge draw it is today. The girls have a good product. It just needs better marketing.

What turnip truck did you fall off of there EPdad the girls tournament does not draw because it is BAD hockey. For your information the boys tournament is the MSHSL cash cow which nets 1.2 million a year and covers your cost. You should thank the boys for that!!!! For your information EPdad the BOYS tournament has ALWAYS done well!!! Enough of the revisionist history.

I read that article too. Boys hockey is big. It's been around over 70 years. It has history and a large fan base that has more to do with nostalgia than than the quality of the product on the ice. A significant number of those attending the tournament either play hockey or played when they were young. Girls HS hockey has only been around 15 years. Back around WWII were they packing 18,000 people into arenas to watch boys HS hockey? I don't think so.

When I first started watching girls HS hockey (I think in '96) the quality of play was about what I see from a good squirt team today. In the 15 years since it has improved drastically. This summer my daughter's 14U AAA team will be playing mostly against Bantam B1 teams and I expect they'll win more than they lose.

If I want to watch hockey played at the highest skill level I'll watch the NHL. I like HS hockey because of the passion and intensity. Girls hockey may not quite be there with the skill level (yet), but there is no shortage of passion. If you can't see that I pity you.

luckyEPDad wrote:If I want to watch hockey played at the highest skill level I'll watch the NHL. I like HS hockey because of the passion and intensity. Girls hockey may not quite be there with the skill level (yet), but there is no shortage of passion. If you can't see that I pity you.

Great comment! I'm sure most of us played sport at some level. Its not about the level of competition of the sport, its about the passion, commitment and competitiveness. If it was about level, why watch any high school or college sport when the NHL, MLB, NBA, and NFL are superior leagues with superior talent? I have played sports at the college level and I have coached girls' sports. There's just as much passion, commitment and competitiveness with female athletes as with male athletes.