Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

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

  • #16
    Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

    I think the changes might kill the parity. Look at what the billions in Big 10 network dollars did. It took a bunch of great schools and turned them into the AHA-midwest. College hockey west of Pennsylvania used to have great parity. Now we have a conference that is collectively batting about .333 when they don't play the AHA.
    That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

      Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
      Look at what the billions in Big 10 network dollars did.
      Billions?
      Minnesota Golden Gopher Hockey

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

        Originally posted by Critical Thinker View Post
        If the B1G did get to play by different rules to attract better players, and then won more games, wouldn't that give more parity to college hockey?
        Made me LOL. Nicely crafted and well executed.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

          Originally posted by D2D View Post
          Billions?
          Listen, when you're out here in hockey pauperville, even a couple mil look like billions.
          That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

            Originally posted by D2D View Post
            I'm still having a difficult time believing this. Are there any reputable news organizations reporting this?
            Originally posted by alfablue
            Still bitter, eh? Gotta get over it someday. He left, and UMICH was right.
            Originally posted by Nick Papagiorgio
            I think Notre Dame should wear sparkly silver helmets to match all their runner-up trophies.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

              Originally posted by D2D View Post
              As I understand it the Power 5 hockey programs are the six Big 10 schools:
              1. Michigan
              2. Michigan State
              3. Minnesota
              4. Ohio State
              5. Penn State
              6. Wisconsin

              Plus the two Atlantic Coast Conference schools that play hockey:
              7. Boston College
              8. Notre Dame

              I wonder if the changes will also apply to the five schools that have women's hockey programs?
              3. Minnesota
              4. Ohio State
              5. Penn State
              6. Wisconsin
              7. Boston College
              I also wonder whether it needs to apply to all sports. For example, could the P5 conferences offer stipends to revenue generating sports like football and basketball, but not, say, water polo?

              Offering a benefit to a men's hockey player but not to a women's hockey player and offering a benefit to a football player (which has no women's version) but not other sports smell like a Title IX violations to me. And for the P5 schools to have a "gentlemen's agreement" not to offer extra benefits to hockey players smells like a combination in restraint of trade to me.
              Last edited by CLS; 11-10-2014, 08:48 AM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

                Originally posted by CLS View Post
                I also wonder whether it needs to apply to all sports. For example, could the P5 conferences offer stipends to revenue generating sports like football and basketball, but not, say, water polo?

                Offering a benefit to a men's hockey player but not to a women's hockey player and offering a benefit to a football player (which has no women's version) but not other sports smell like a Title IX violations to me. And for the P5 schools to have a "gentlemen's agreement" not to offer extra benefits to hockey players smells like a combination in restraint of trade to me.
                I highly doubt it, probably just Football. Thus my comment. I also believe IF they ever actually start doing this it won't end well.
                Originally posted by alfablue
                Still bitter, eh? Gotta get over it someday. He left, and UMICH was right.
                Originally posted by Nick Papagiorgio
                I think Notre Dame should wear sparkly silver helmets to match all their runner-up trophies.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Fighting Sioux 23 View Post
                  Agreed.

                  Keep in mind that basically we're talking solely about the Power 5 (and other schools that can afford to pay the stipend) getting a recruiting edge. How many kids is a school like Ferris State going to normally draw away from a program like Michigan to begin with? My guess is the kid who would normally pick Ferris over Michigan isn't going to change his mind because he can get an extra $5k/year (or whatever the number turns out to be) to go to Ann Arbor. I think this is especially true when you factor in that many kids that play hockey at that level are from families that aren't really struggling too much (and yes, this is a very broad generalization).

                  The real difference could be if a school like Ferris State pays the stipend where say a school like Lake Superior State does not. The way I see it, this could make a difference if you have two schools (or a group of schools) that battle over the same recruits, and some of this group have the stipend where others don't. Even then, I'm not entirely sold that it will make a big impact in college hockey.
                  The real difference is a kid that the Ann Arbor college was offering a half scholarship that Ferris or Western or St Cloud could offer a full. Now the Ann Arbors can offer a half plus a stipend.
                  "The use of common sense and logic will not be tolerated and may result in fine and/or suspension."- Western Professional Hockey League By-laws. 1999-2000.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by CLS View Post
                    I also wonder whether it needs to apply to all sports. For example, could the P5 conferences offer stipends to revenue generating sports like football and basketball, but not, say, water polo?

                    Offering a benefit to a men's hockey player but not to a women's hockey player and offering a benefit to a football player (which has no women's version) but not other sports smell like a Title IX violations to me. And for the P5 schools to have a "gentlemen's agreement" not to offer extra benefits to hockey players smells like a combination in restraint of trade to me.
                    When looking at the Big Ten and "gentlemen's" agreements, just check how Don Lucia and Mike Eaves feel about recruiting.
                    "The use of common sense and logic will not be tolerated and may result in fine and/or suspension."- Western Professional Hockey League By-laws. 1999-2000.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

                      I'm not sure that any plan designed to force schools to spend more money on college sports is necessarily positive. Smaller programs will ultimately follow along, although maybe not to the same extent as the larger schools, but that's always been the case.

                      But if there is a positive for college hockey that results from this move by the Power 5, it's this. College hockey has always complained that it faces an uphill recruiting battle with Canadian Junior leagues for two reasons. First, the built in bias that apparently exists in NHL front offices in favor of Canadian junior leagues over college, a bias that seems to be slowly disappearing. But second, the money Canadian junior league teams offer, or allegedly offer, recruits.

                      The money the Power 5 proposes to offer may not equate with what some Canadian junior teams allegedly offer, but at least the gap will be narrowed.
                      That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

                        Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                        I'm not sure that any plan designed to force schools to spend more money on college sports is necessarily positive. Smaller programs will ultimately follow along, although maybe not to the same extent as the larger schools, but that's always been the case.

                        But if there is a positive for college hockey that results from this move by the Power 5, it's this. College hockey has always complained that it faces an uphill recruiting battle with Canadian Junior leagues for two reasons. First, the built in bias that apparently exists in NHL front offices in favor of Canadian junior leagues over college, a bias that seems to be slowly disappearing. But second, the money Canadian junior league teams offer, or allegedly offer, recruits.

                        The money the Power 5 proposes to offer may not equate with what some Canadian junior teams allegedly offer, but at least the gap will be narrowed.
                        Interesting analysis and something that I did not consider. It makes sense now as to why the CHL topped up its packages this past winter. At first I thought it was to head off or placate unionization but now I'm sure the big power conference moves had something to do with it..

                        http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ohl-ups...223242217.html


                        As to the general impact on over-all membership, I think this will have a detrimental effect on smaller schools. I know the program I am a fan of is struggling just to maintain the current status quo and there is no way the school will be able to afford an increase in costs, especially one that involves the payment of monthly stipends to its athletes. Naturally this will further separate the halves and halve nots and I do wonder if the end result will be the reformation of a D-II hockey league.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

                          Power 5 conferences have formally approved the "enhanced" scholarship proposal. B.C. was the lone dissenting vote. Question now is will the various hockey programs in Hockey East allow a school like B.C. to offer monthly stipends and can anything be done about the Big10?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

                            Those schools in the MAC (BGSU, WMU, Miami) will also be partaking in cost of attendance: http://www.mac-sports.com/news/2015/...118153038.aspx
                            Co-Founder/Editor of BGSUHockey.com

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

                              I understand( not from anyone important) that costs for small schools have already started up and that they expect them to continue to rise. I can't see a way that costs do not escalate significantly over time. I think the bigger schools are fine with it. It's not a good thing for hockey if you ask me though.

                              Some of the small school may be able to cope, but it will be a challenge and basically they will end up getting lower quality recruits. Schools with larger endowments shouldn't have a problem regardless of size.
                              MTU: Three time NCAA champions.

                              It never get's easier, you just go faster. -Greg Lemond

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Will 'Power 5' changes kill college hockey's parity?

                                Boston College was the lone vote against the various autonomy proposals because it realizes that even a relatively well-off private school like BC isn't going to be able to keep up with the enormous state universities now that they've decided to (officially) become minor leagues for pro football and basketball at taxpayer expense. This doesn't bode well for any other sports. Just take a look at what's been happening at the so-called big schools in the past few years. Non-revenue and "lesser" sports have increasingly been cut back or eliminated in order to feed the increasingly ravenous appetite of the football monster. Hockey expansion in the B1G? Forget about it.

                                We can bid farewell to college sports as we have known it.
                                "Through the years, we ever will acclaim........"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X