Big Ten retaliation

[ts8801]

Now that the BTHC is more or less a lock, and the teams leaving at the expense of their former conferences, and college hockey in general. Why doesn't the WCHA and CCHA make them play as independents until the BTHC comes to fruition? I know they wouldn't do this, but they could at least threaten to do so. If the make the threat of doing to maybe they could get some sort of contract for fair scheduling (1:1). As soon as the BTHC forms weaker schools like lake superior, MTU etc. will only be able to get the BT teams to come play at their arenas in 2:1's and 3:1's. I could see a lot of those teams folding in the next decade because of the revenue loss from those games. (as well as not having the BT teams in their conference for recruiting reasons)

[Skeeterman]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

What he said.

[Timothy A]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

The CCHA and WCHA still want to grab the money the next 2 years while they can. And they still want B6 teams to possibly come play some of their teams as n/c games. Retaliation would be very short sighted.

[uaafanblog]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

Kick them to the curb!

[dggoddard]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

While its a funny idea to think about, you'd have to follow WCHA by-laws and be ready for litigation.

[JF_Gophers]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

Because unlike people on this board, the conferences aren't going to overreact.

[Rhett]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

Um... if the 5 schools got kicked out of the WCHA and CCHA tomorrow, they would just start a scheduling agreement immediately. No autobid, but I think they'd be fine until PSU was ready. It would probably accelerate the formation of the Big Ten hockey conference by one more season, to PSU's debut in 2012.

The big winner would be UAH... they'd get some great late season scheduling with an odd-number of BT indys while everyone else is in the conference season home stretch.

Weak plan.

[ts8801]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

The CCHA and WCHA still want to grab the money the next 2 years while they can. And they still want B6 teams to possibly come play some of their teams as n/c games. Retaliation would be very short sighted.

For the WCHA UMN is still going to play UND and the Minnesota teams, either as a 1:1 or otherwise. I could care less about UW so they can do what every they want, I wouldn't mind if we only play them come NCAA time. Forming the BT is short sighted in itself, it is giong to kill at least one program, and I don't see it as that much of step up for the schools invovled except for OSU, and PSU. I have always thought the fans you pick up by playing your other BT rivals aren't going to be hockey fans, so if you want some drunk frat bro to come to your games to cheer against UMich you can have them.

[ts8801]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

... I know they wouldn't do this, but they could at least threaten to do so. If the make the threat of doing to maybe they could get some sort of contract for fair scheduling (1:1). As soon as the BTHC forms weaker schools like lake superior, MTU etc. will only be able to get the BT teams to come play at their arenas in 2:1's and 3:1's. ...

Um... if the 5 schools got kicked out of the WCHA and CCHA tomorrow, they would just start a scheduling agreement immediately. No autobid, but I think they'd be fine until PSU was ready. It would probably accelerate the formation of the Big Ten hockey conference by one more season, to PSU's debut in 2012.....

wait, didn't I more or less say that?

[Juanit0]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

I completely agree about the short-sightedness of the OP's post. This isn't just any group of schools we're talking about. These are schools with name recognition that extends far beyond the reaches of college hockey. This will be a league that now boasts more national championships than any other league in college hockey with member institutions that rival any other school in hockey tradition. This will be a league with its own sports network behind it willing to broadcast 40+ games per season nationwide in high def meaning a pickup of a ton of casual fans in addition to the die-hards that follow these specific schools. Whether you want to admit it or not, this will be a league that deserves instant respect based on tradition, and will bring a larger hammer than anyone else with regards to revenue.

Having a knee-jerk reaction and ticking off the Big Ten institutions as a whole is the last thing you would want to do as a conference if you ever want to play any of these schools again after the BTHC starts. If we've learned one thing about the commissioner of the Big Ten Conference, it is that he can hold a grudge for eternity.

Instead of focusing on the negative aspects of a BTHC like everyone else is, think of it this way. Up until this happened, expansion was basically impossible in D-I hockey. The WCHA will now have two spots available for expansion, and the CCHA will now have 4. The BTHC will have 6 (which will never be filled all the way because only Big Ten members could be involved and they won't all add hockey).

The only way hockey programs start folding now is if the WCHA does something foolish and pulls Miami and ND into their conference leaving 6 institutions that can't hold together a league on their own. The BTHC will finally give our sport a television spotlight capable of matching the CHL for exposure, and might start turning the tide of recruiting in our favor. Continuing to be petty does nothing for the sport except build grudges that would be detrimental to the growth of the sport as a whole.

[Rhett]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

wait, didn't I more or less say that?

Not really. Those statements aren't close at all, actually.

[ts8801]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

Not really. Those statements aren't close at all, actually.

ya because using a threat to get a fair scheduling agreement, and use of a threat leading to a scheduling agreement are oceans apart....

[ACSabercat]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

Everyone needs to take a chill pill in regards to this B10 thing. It is fun to speculate, but.......

No one is getting kicked out any conference. These teams have played together for decades and they will continue to play each other at some point for many years to come.

The B10C is not going to start for another 2 seasons. Beyond that I'm sure the WCHA and CCHA will give it at least 2 seasons, a couple scheduling cycles, before making any changes moving forward. Given the schedules are, for the most part, projected out a couple seasons in advance I think you're looking at 5-6 years down the road from now before any large scale conference restructuring occurs.

Despite what some may think the B10 is not the evil empire out to see programs fold. The new B10 teams will need the WCHA teams and CCHA teams as much, if not more, than than the WCHA/CCHA needs the B10. They need to fill a NC schedule - especially at home. I can't see MN bringing in Bobby Mo, Bentley, or Huntsville - and be willing to go to their barn the next year.

You can bet many closed door meetings and email exchanges took place between the WCHA, CCHA, coaches, ADs, school admins, etc. Wouldn't you love to see Serratore's or Blais' 'inbox'. If it were going to be a really, really negative thing that would threaten other programs seriously I don't think they would have announced things at this point. At some point the major stake holders were brought to the table and effectively signed off on things moving forward otherwise they would still be talking about it.

[ts8801]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

I completely agree about the short-sightedness of the OP's post. This isn't just any group of schools we're talking about. These are schools with name recognition that extends far beyond the reaches of college hockey. This will be a league that now boasts more national championships than any other league in college hockey with member institutions that rival any other school in hockey tradition. This will be a league with its own sports network behind it willing to broadcast 40+ games per season nationwide in high def meaning a pickup of a ton of casual fans in addition to the die-hards that follow these specific schools. Whether you want to admit it or not, this will be a league that deserves instant respect based on tradition, and will bring a larger hammer than anyone else with regards to revenue.

Having a knee-jerk reaction and ticking off the Big Ten institutions as a whole is the last thing you would want to do as a conference if you ever want to play any of these schools again after the BTHC starts. If we've learned one thing about the commissioner of the Big Ten Conference, it is that he can hold a grudge for eternity.

Instead of focusing on the negative aspects of a BTHC like everyone else is, think of it this way. Up until this happened, expansion was basically impossible in D-I hockey. The WCHA will now have two spots available for expansion, and the CCHA will now have 4. The BTHC will have 6 (which will never be filled all the way because only Big Ten members could be involved and they won't all add hockey).

The only way hockey programs start folding now is if the WCHA does something foolish and pulls Miami and ND into their conference leaving 6 institutions that can't hold together a league on their own. The BTHC will finally give our sport a television spotlight capable of matching the CHL for exposure, and might start turning the tide of recruiting in our favor. Continuing to be petty does nothing for the sport except build grudges that would be detrimental to the growth of the sport as a whole.

The WCHA will mostlikely stay at 10 teams, they only way I could see that changing is if ND or Miami want to join. Even if that doesn't happen I could see 2 schools easily folding with in ten years in BGSU and LSSU

[Rhett]

Re: Big Ten retaliation

ya because using a threat to get a fair scheduling agreement, and use of a threat leading to a scheduling agreement are oceans apart....

I'm sorry... I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do with this. I responded with a different take and you called me out for making the same point. I guess, since it's the same general topic and I was responding to your post, that if you took our responses, focused only on one inference from both, then made a stawman argument, you could say we said the same thing. Everyone would see through that though, so only a crazy person would take that tact on a public board where most posters are much smarter than him. Honestly, who would waste time with that?