After the Camp Randall Hockey Classic, there was a wave of excitement, harkening to the glory of the sport outdoors in more expansive arenas. It wasn't the first exhibition of its kind as Fenway Park, Ralph Wilson Stadium and Wrigley Field have all played host to similar events.
Well now it's gone too far.
Holding the Frozen Four in Ford Field was all the proof necessary to show that this fad, this gimmick, this trend needs to be kept exactly as it is: a once-in-a-while novelty.
The record attendances not withstanding, a few key issues should serve as a lesson to organizers that hockey belongs in standard hockey arenas (or centers, gardens or ponds).
And it all starts with the ice.
The quality of the Ford Field rink was visibly poor, with noticeable gaps in the paint of the crease. During timeouts, crews with snow shovels came out to scrape off excess ice and dump it into trashcans.
This makes sense because the ice was laid out over field turf and only put in place a few weeks prior to the Frozen Four.
After the title game Mike Eaves was asked about it, and he quickly put an end to the discussion.
""I'll make one comment about the ice, and I don't think we need to address it anymore,"" Eaves said. ""The fact is both teams had to play on it. Was it the best ice? It was slow and soft, but both teams had to play on it. You deal with it.""
One factor in that quick answer may have been a scoring chance for senior forward Michael Davies that was undone by the poor surface. Davies had a breakaway with only the goalie to beat before the puck hit an imperfection in the ice, popping it up and away from his stick.
At the time the score was 1-0 and a goal could have made a big impact on the game (on the other hand, it may have made no impact but in hockey these key moments often make really big impacts).
On another level, the sight of a rink jammed into the end zone of a football stadium for the sport's biggest weekend just seemed wrong. The sightlines on the lower level were pretty poor, meaning that $40 seats had a better view than ones that cost nearly $200.
In the distance you could see the wide expanses of seats behind a massive curtain, a reminder that this sport was a visitor rather than at home in that space.
In fact, there was something akin to a hockey cathedral (Joe Louis Arena) just a few blocks away from Ford Field. There are plenty of great buildings built for hockey that would do better than the home field of one of the NFL's worst teams (another example of those buildings is the Xcel Energy Center, where, not coincidentally, the 2011 Frozen Four will be).
This isn't to say that games in football stadiums are not novel, different or cool once in a while, but they should end at novelty. The most important games of the year need to be played on well-kept ice in stadiums properly equipped for the sport.
This year was an experiment, and the results were less than acceptable.
What do you think of hockey games being played outdoors or in non-hockey venues? E-mail Ben at breiner@wisc.edu.
