Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Michigan Getting a Women's Team?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    Originally posted by tedlasso View Post
    I think this is a long way off at this point. While many of the higher ups are behind starting a womens team in principle, the Title IX implications are substantial. If Michigan adds a womens hockey team of say 30 players, they have to either add something on the mens side or eliminate something on the mens or womens side. Assuming that Michigan is currently in Title IX compliance, which I have to assume they are, adding a team brings with it more complications than just the rink situation.
    Unless the rules require something added on the men's side financially equivalent to women's hockey it could be something as cheap as a dart team if you get my meaning.
    Michigan whined for years they don't have the money for women's hockey but that's just an excuse, not only do they have the money but no doubt the Illich family would be quite generous towards facilities. I think the University was finally taking public, media & alumni criticism seriously for not having women's hockey and can no longer give adequate justification for not having it. It also probably galla them seeing Ohio State win those Natty's! LOL!

    Leave a comment:


  • tedlasso
    replied
    I think this is a long way off at this point. While many of the higher ups are behind starting a womens team in principle, the Title IX implications are substantial. If Michigan adds a womens hockey team of say 30 players, they have to either add something on the mens side or eliminate something on the mens or womens side. Assuming that Michigan is currently in Title IX compliance, which I have to assume they are, adding a team brings with it more complications than just the rink situation.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    Originally posted by robertearle View Post
    I wonder if the Mankatos and Bemidjis of the world are as 'fond' of the WCHA. Maybe they'd like a WCHA that isn't dominated by the same few teams every year. I guess the problem might be Duluth; would they dominate, or would the others catch up to them?
    No one is stopping those teams from getting stronger.

    Leave a comment:


  • robertearle
    replied
    I wonder if the Mankatos and Bemidjis of the world are as 'fond' of the WCHA. Maybe they'd like a WCHA that isn't dominated by the same few teams every year. I guess the problem might be Duluth; would they dominate, or would the others catch up to them?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    I don't want the WCHA to be damaged either, we all saw the impact to the conferences when the men's Big Ten hockey conference formed.

    Leave a comment:


  • TonyTheTiger20
    replied
    I am team Break Up The WCHA. No idea why I feel this way it's a total mystery!

    Leave a comment:


  • StPaulSam
    replied
    Originally posted by Timothy A View Post
    Perfect, thanks. I for one do NOT want to see the WCHA broken up in any way, shape or form, I am a traditionalist. If MI starts one, they can join CHA.
    That I find myself in frequent agreement with dear Timothy is always concerning (wink wink) but I think this is more than reasonable.

    Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post
    Yes, there is an eventual risk to the WCHA which I think is inevitable but not in the very near future. If Illinois gets back on track with their efforts to start hockey which stalled with COVID that along with Michigan would give the Big Ten the required six teams.
    ...and god help us if they do use this as a chance to bring it into the B1G. Despite the fact that it would have a dramatic impact on long standing Gopher rivalries, I can envision a world where the galaxy brains in Bierman (our athletics department) are all for it in the name of efficiency. WHockey is the only sport we have that isn't already...emB1Gened, if you would.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    Originally posted by Windchill22 View Post

    Looks like there's some traction. While I'm all for this, I fear what it will eventually mean for the WCHA.
    Yes, there is an eventual risk to the WCHA which I think is inevitable but not in the very near future. If Illinois gets back on track with their efforts to start hockey which stalled with COVID that along with Michigan would give the Big Ten the required six teams.
    ​​​I have no doubt Michigan will get their varsity program as I know firsthand president Ono is for it and with the Illich family on board it will happen and they may help fund a women's arena.
    But the story is wrong on one point, as I've stated before Yost can have an addition build on its southern side into the existing parking lot and made to match Yost's exterior and accommodate the women that way.

    Leave a comment:


  • FiveHoleFrenzy
    replied
    Don't care much one way or the other, but if meatchicken could get a women's program and be a thorn in the side of slOwSU then I'd be ok with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Windchill22
    replied
    Came across this this morning.

    https://www.woodtv.com/news/michigan/michigan-takes-step-to-become-1st-major-school-in-state-to-launch-a-womens-varsity-hockey-program/

    Looks like there's some traction. While I'm all for this, I fear what it will eventually mean for the WCHA.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    I wonder if any of the incoming PAC schools have any hockey plans? They do have club teams and Oregon's main benefactor, Nike's CEO could fund a arena out of his pocket change.

    Leave a comment:


  • Russell Jaslow
    replied
    Originally posted by timothy a View Post
    if mi starts one, they can join cha.
    lol.

    Leave a comment:


  • PSUfan
    replied
    Originally posted by robertearle View Post

    B1G men's Lacrosse has only six teams right now, including Johns Hopkins.
    Indeed -- I think they could form a Big10 women's hockey league with one affiliate member similar to men's lacrosse. I'm not sure they would, but they could. Johns Hopkins joining the Big10 for men's lacrosse enabled there to be a Big10 conference for men's lacrosse.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    Originally posted by PSUfan View Post

    "Enough teams" is six. There are currently four Big Ten schools with women's hockey (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio State & Penn State.) They need two more teams to make up a Big Ten conference for women's hockey
    Michigan State could have done it years ago but didn't want to spend the money, it all went to football and basketball like most Big Ten schools do. They could have put them in the old arena which has since been converted for their band's use and recently completed a large renovation & upgrade to Munn but made no provision to include women.
    Yost at Michigan is extremely cramped and to be realistic they would have to extend Yost into the south parking lot to house the women. It's so iconic to them I can't imagine them building a new arena.

    Leave a comment:


  • robertearle
    replied
    Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post

    I'm pretty certain the rules don't allow a conference to form using an affiliate member as an affiliate could eventually leave leaving the conference with 5 members which would be against the rules. I can only imagine the nightmare if they had to dissolve a conference after witnessing it before in men's hockey.
    As a PSU fan you should know Notre Dame wasn't enough for the Big Ten men's to form but it was when Penn State started hockey giving the Big Ten a legitimate 6 Big Ten teams.
    B1G men's Lacrosse has only six teams right now, including Johns Hopkins.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X