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 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.
    It was sad to see the CCHA go in men's hockey, we had a fun thing going with the in state rivals of Bowling Green & Miami.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    Originally posted by PSUfan View Post
    But if Michigan does add a team they could consider adding an "affiliate" member for women's hockey to get them to six.
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Timothy A
    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. But if Michigan does add a team they could consider adding an "affiliate" member for women's hockey to get them to six. Notre Dame is an affiliate member for men's hockey and Johns Hopkins is an affiliate member for men's & women's lacrosse.
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • PSUfan
    replied
    Originally posted by Timothy A View Post

    I thought it was written in their bylaws that once there was enough teams to form a conference for women's hockey, all the teams had comply and form it.
    "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. But if Michigan does add a team they could consider adding an "affiliate" member for women's hockey to get them to six. Notre Dame is an affiliate member for men's hockey and Johns Hopkins is an affiliate member for men's & women's lacrosse.

    Leave a comment:


  • Timothy A
    replied
    Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post
    I have a hypothetical question. Say Michigan does eventually get a woman's program, which conference should they play in?
    In the WCHA they would be in the most competitive conference and compete with 3 fellow Big Ten schools or should the try to get in a weaker conference that they could potentially dominate and be an annual contender for the conference automatic seed in the tournament? As a Buckeye I know Michigan can be sneaky and underhanded at times and since there's no big money in women's college hockey they might well go the route to go where they can win games?
    I thought it was written in their bylaws that once there was enough teams to form a conference for women's hockey, all the teams had comply and form it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bonzo
    replied
    Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post
    I have a hypothetical question. Say Michigan does eventually get a woman's program, which conference should they play in?
    In the WCHA they would be in the most competitive conference and compete with 3 fellow Big Ten schools or should the try to get in a weaker conference that they could potentially dominate and be an annual contender for the conference automatic seed in the tournament? As a Buckeye I know Michigan can be sneaky and underhanded at times and since there's no big money in women's college hockey they might well go the route to go where they can win games?
    I have been to football games on every B10 campus, and in all my years of following the B10 I can inequivalently say Michigan fans are the most arrogant in the conference. With that being said, no way would they settle for a conference that doesn't include their B10 brethren.

    Their mindset is that they would come into the WCHA and dominate the conference. They would of course be wrong, but it doesn't mean they won't try.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    I have a hypothetical question. Say Michigan does eventually get a woman's program, which conference should they play in?
    In the WCHA they would be in the most competitive conference and compete with 3 fellow Big Ten schools or should the try to get in a weaker conference that they could potentially dominate and be an annual contender for the conference automatic seed in the tournament? As a Buckeye I know Michigan can be sneaky and underhanded at times and since there's no big money in women's college hockey they might well go the route to go where they can win games?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    For those who watched the broadcast of the Ohio State - Minnesota game Saturday the commentators we're talking about the amount of talent there is in Michigan of women player and one said the University of Michigan may be getting a women's program soon. I'm assuming he has some inside information.

    Leave a comment:


  • MichVandal
    replied
    Originally posted by LongGame View Post
    And while we are talking about Yost, lets be honest and admit they ruined the place when they gutted it and filled it with aluminum bleachers. I get all the blah-blah-blah historic stuff and it is right on campus, but Michigan needs a new, hockey-only 6000 seat building.
    Need, no, not at all. The fans here love Yost. Would be nice, sure- it would be fun to have a modern, less crowded, real seat arena to see our hockey team. Heck, if someone could re-engineer Crisler, that would be pretty awesome. But that ship sailed with the most recent remodel there, and until the athletic campus build pays off, a new hockey facility is going to have to wait. I really don't want another "Ross X" building here.

    My only real flaw with the building is the visitors locker set up- which bugs me that they use temporary walls to make it good enough.

    For a new arena to happen, you need to really change the minds of all of the donors to pay for it. And by that, I don't just mean hockey ones. Hockey is a pretty distant third in status here in Ann Arbor, and that's a reality hockey fans just have to accept.

    Leave a comment:


  • FiveHoleFrenzy
    replied
    Originally posted by Hockeybuckeye View Post

    I'm not a fan of bleachers either, at my age they kill my back so I suffer at Ohio State's women's games but my biggest complaint at Yost is the size of the assigned seating. I came to a game once and two fat guys seats were opposite me and I couldn't even see my seat because they both spilled over completely into my space!
    Speaking of two fat guys, have you ever had Two Fat Guys BBQ sauce? For those who like spicey, I recommend the Lava Hot Sauce...

    Two Fat Guys

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    Originally posted by LongGame View Post
    And while we are talking about Yost, lets be honest and admit they ruined the place when they gutted it and filled it with aluminum bleachers. I get all the blah-blah-blah historic stuff and it is right on campus, but Michigan needs a new, hockey-only 6000 seat building.
    I'm not a fan of bleachers either, at my age they kill my back so I suffer at Ohio State's women's games but my biggest complaint at Yost is the size of the assigned seating. I came to a game once and two fat guys seats were opposite me and I couldn't even see my seat because they both spilled over completely into my space!

    Leave a comment:


  • Hockeybuckeye
    replied
    Some here express opinions on how universities should spend their money and what priorities should be when it comes to sports and I'm fine with that but I'd like to look at it from another angle.
    I think we can all agree that Title IX has done wonderful things for women's sports and we wouldn't be where we are today without it on both high school and collegiate levels. Now of course this doesn't in any way mean Michigan HAS to start a women's hockey program but I feel all schools should feel compelled (here's the moral angle) to follow the INTENT and goal of Title IX and start a new women's sport when it's financially and feasible to do so. Is Michigan in that position now to start women's hockey? Who knows, but the fact that it's being discussed mean's they're at least finally ready to give it a look see and that's a good thing!

    Leave a comment:


  • LongGame
    replied
    And while we are talking about Yost, lets be honest and admit they ruined the place when they gutted it and filled it with aluminum bleachers. I get all the blah-blah-blah historic stuff and it is right on campus, but Michigan needs a new, hockey-only 6000 seat building.

    Leave a comment:


  • pgb-ohio
    replied
    Originally posted by wiscolorado View Post

    UM could do that, and I'm sure we would all be very pleased by it as hockey fans. But it surely would still cost a lot of money, and it brings us back to Eeyore's point (which I agree with) that theres no moral imperative for them to take on such a project, and that they presumably have good reasons for having pursued other opportunities instead in recent years. It's really not up to any of us to decide how the University of Michigan can best use their money.
    I actually agree with your version. The University of Michigan has every right to do their own cost benefit analysis. If Women's D-1 Hockey doesn't make the cut, that's their call.

    At the same time, there's nothing wrong with people in the Women's Hockey Community rooting for the sport to succeed at Michigan, or any other candidate university.

    My goodness. This is a niche forum, for a niche sport. It's our space. Do we really have to re-justify the value of our sport every time we want to have conversation among ourselves? If so, how redundant. How insulting. How sad.

    Now in your version, you indicate that those of us posting here could reasonably be pleased if a new D-1 program is launched. Doesn't it also stand to reason that we could reasonably express disappointment in response to a negative decision? Seems to me such opinions go with the territory in elite level sports.

    Again, I'm not talking about taking away any school's right to decide. At the end of the day, the decision as to whether to open the wallet or keep it closed does belong to each individual school.

    Leave a comment:


  • pgb-ohio
    replied
    Originally posted by MichVandal View Post

    I'm not that sure about that statement. There are still 4 lockers on ice level- the men's team is up on the 2nd level, and none of these lockers were impacted by any of the seating changes after 1996- when that end of Yost was redone. And up until recently, all of the visitor lockers were among those lockers. So, IMHO, it's feasible to remodel two of them that are next to each other into one larger one. I know there are 4 of them down there- used for other game renting of the rink (pgb may remember using those lockers back in 2010 when we had the posters game). The big deal would be to make it larger than the visitors locker on the other end of the rink.

    And the ice time that are used for non UM hockey would be thinned out considerably with a women's team.

    Office space would not be a big deal- there were two other team offices among the hockey offices until the athletic campus was redone a few years ago.

    The one thing that might be a problem is sharing the workout space- but if the women's team is game, the facilities about a mile south of there are light years more modern anyway.
    You're correct; I was referencing the 2010. Our group was well taken care of. And it was definitely a privilege to skate in the historic arena. Glad you were part of fine event.

    Beyond that, your problem-solving approach is much appreciated. So much better than angry stonewalling.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X