What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Big 10 HC Rules

Re: Big 10 HC Rules

mnstate0fhockey said:
Congratulations for being the 1 millionth idiot to talk about current conference standings as if it's the way things will always be.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about conference standings? Just pointing out that PSU isn't doing anything to change expectations that they will be a conference punching bag next season .. the other B1G teams have got to be licking their chops. Should be 4 wins for every team except OSU.
 
Re: Big 10 HC Rules

Rtn2GoldCountry said:
The value of a diploma from a B1G university also factor into the decisions of some young men.
Click to expand...

<img src="http://www.bucknutcollectibles.com/media/10/a207918127724d17988e9f_m.jpg">

They come in roll form for two reasons: Easier to hand out at graduation and reminds graduates of the street value of their degree when looking for a job.
;)
Ryan J
 
Re: Big 10 HC Rules

dggoddard said:
Here comes the 1,000,001st...

Its not the way things will always be, but its certainly not trending in expected direction.

Most people assumed that the B1G would automatically put three to five teams in the tourney every single year.

What's changed? CHL poaching players that the B1G teams traditionally had the pick of the litter.
Click to expand...

They probably will put 3 in every year (Mich, Gophers, Sconny) with 4 and maybe 5 not out of the question down the road. I love how you all come out of the woodwork when PSU loses a game to a team you all think they should beat. They are still basically a club team, what do you expect. When they get a year or 2 of good recruiting under them they will be fine, I'm sure future recruits would rather play for a B1G school like PSU than some crappy low level NCHC team.
 
Re: Big 10 HC Rules

SanTropez said:
They probably will put 3 in every year (Mich, Gophers, Sconny) with 4 and maybe 5 not out of the question down the road.
Click to expand...

I really didn't wanna get involved but you do realize the three teams you mentioned haven't all been in the tournament in the same year since '08 right? And when they fail to this year, that'll be 5 years in a row. I am not in any way saying that the Big Ten will be terrible, I don't feel that's the case at all, but to just pencil in those three doesn't seem to be too strong of an argument.
 
Re: Big 10 HC Rules

SCSU Euro said:
I really didn't wanna get involved but you do realize the three teams you mentioned haven't all been in the tournament in the same year since '08 right? And when they fail to this year, that'll be 5 years in a row. I am not in any way saying that the Big Ten will be terrible, I don't feel that's the case at all, but to just pencil in those three doesn't seem to be too strong of an argument.
Click to expand...

ebbs and flows...
 
Re: Big 10 HC Rules

streaker said:
You can't say that with a straight face now, although in theory it used to be correct. For the record, for instance, Michigan has traveled to Boston and New Hampshire within the past few years (yes, the deals were reciprocated.) They will go to Houghton next season. They will go to RIT. They owe Union, Bentley and Northeastern a return gig....yet it is unclear if it will happen.

What fans of lesser reknowned schools have to understand is, the schedule put together by Michigan, again, for instance, was hamstrung by the limited nonconference dates- taken up by the commitment to the GLI and, at one time, the CHS. Money talks when you have reached the peak of the mountain a few times and you can dictate the terms of NC agreements to your own benefit. Not so much when Berenson took over in '84, though and their NC travel was more extensive.

Your "rule" wasn't just B1G teams, either. Look at some of the other hitters and check out their NC schedules in the past.
Click to expand...

Any presumed connection between how Big10 schools scheduled their n/c games in the PAST, and how they WILL operate in the future is out the door. Once they have segregated themselves into their so-called super conference, do you REALLY think Michigan is going to make the bus trip to Big Rapids? No way...they'll say Ferris, you play 3 games here over the next 2 years, and we'll give you 1 'home' game...but we want it played in Van Andel Arena in Grand Rapids...and by the way, we want 70% of the gate, and the TV rights.

Sure, the big hitters may get reciprocity (BC, BU, NDak), but most everybody else will get the big freeze. There's just too much $ at stake.
 
Re: Big 10 HC Rules

Freddie said:
Any presumed connection between how Big10 schools scheduled their n/c games in the PAST, and how they WILL operate in the future is out the door. Once they have segregated themselves into their so-called super conference, do you REALLY think Michigan is going to make the bus trip to Big Rapids? No way...they'll say Ferris, you play 3 games here over the next 2 years, and we'll give you 1 'home' game...but we want it played in Van Andel Arena in Grand Rapids...and by the way, we want 70% of the gate, and the TV rights.

Sure, the big hitters may get reciprocity (BC, BU, NDak), but most everybody else will get the big freeze. There's just too much $ at stake.
Click to expand...
This isn't college football where Michigan can pay a punching bag $500,000 to show up. Even schools like Ferris State probably net $50 thousand per home game. No AD is going to let their coach schedule nonconference away games without a payout or a reciprocal game.

And Michigan, DU, CC, Miami and everyone except Minnesota or Wisconsin don't have enough revenue per home game to justify paying more than a couple of dollars to opponents.

Every team out west/midwest is going to be scrambling to find nonconference opponents.
 
Last edited:
SanTropez said:
They probably will put 3 in every year (Mich, Gophers, Sconny) with 4 and maybe 5 not out of the question down the road. I love how you all come out of the woodwork when PSU loses a game to a team you all think they should beat. They are still basically a club team, what do you expect. When they get a year or 2 of good recruiting under them they will be fine, I'm sure future recruits would rather play for a B1G school like PSU than some crappy low level NCHC team.
Click to expand...

Won't it be tough for a 4th or 5th place team to make the NCAA's? They probably would be below .500 in conference and I don't know if a unbeaten non conference schedule would get a team like that in.
 
Re: Big 10 HC Rules

Biddco said:
Won't it be tough for a 4th or 5th place team to make the NCAA's? They probably would be below .500 in conference and I don't know if a unbeaten non conference schedule would get a team like that in.
Click to expand...

I'm curious how often (if ever) a team has run their non-conference schedule only to fall below .500 in conference play. Those two stats just don't seem to go together very well.

It will be extremely difficult for bottom half teams in any conference to make the NCAA Tournament (minus winning conference tournament). I'd also be curious to see just how many have done so since 2003 (when the tourney switched to 16 teams). My guess is a handful or less.

I would break down future conference births in the NCAA Tournament as follows:
Hockey East: 4-5
B1G: 2-3
NCHC: 3-4
ECAC: 2-3
WCHA: 2-3
Atlantic: 1
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
I'm curious how often (if ever) a team has run their non-conference schedule only to fall below .500 in conference play. Those two stats just don't seem to go together very well.

It will be extremely difficult for bottom half teams in any conference to make the NCAA Tournament (minus winning conference tournament). I'd also be curious to see just how many have done so since 2003 (when the tourney switched to 16 teams). My guess is a handful or less.

I would break down future conference births in the NCAA Tournament as follows:
Hockey East: 4-5
B1G: 2-3
NCHC: 3-4
ECAC: 2-3
WCHA: 2-3
Atlantic: 1
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if the big ten teams start to complain with the pairwise. Especially if they believe their teams with sub .500 records are better than many of the teams in the NCAA.
 
Re: Big 10 HC Rules

4four4 said:
I wouldn't be surprised if the big ten teams start to complain with the pairwise. Especially if they believe their teams with sub .500 records are better than many of the teams in the NCAA.
Click to expand...

I really don't think it would matter. There has been a whopping 1 team that has ever made the tournament as an at large that had an overall losing record? Ironically it was a B1G team (Wisconsin in '08) and then the Hockey Rules Committee got together and made sure it wouldn't happen again. I don't think that counts as good precedent for the other conferences caving in to the B1G's demands. I think there may be just the opposite effect.
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
I really don't think it would matter. There has been a whopping 1 team that has ever made the tournament as an at large that had an overall losing record? Ironically it was a B1G team (Wisconsin in '08) and then the Hockey Rules Committee got together and made sure it wouldn't happen again. I don't think that counts as good precedent for the other conferences caving in to the B1G's demands. I think there may be just the opposite effect.
Click to expand...
Possibly. Maybe we should look at the old CHA conference for some possible direction what might happen.
 
Re: Big 10 HC Rules

4four4 said:
I wouldn't be surprised if the big ten teams start to complain with the pairwise. Especially if they believe their teams with sub .500 records are better than many of the teams in the NCAA.
Click to expand...
Not going to be possible. We've been told no Big Ten team will ever be bad enough to have even a .500 record, let alone a sub .500 record. Their dominance in non-conference games will make this issue a moot point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top