Big Ten 2015-2016

[pgb-ohio]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

I think part of the problem is that it's new, everyone in the conference kind of sucks, and there's still a lot of bitterness about the BTCH in general.

I get this and mostly agree. For that reason, maybe New Red Wings Arena + Growth Over Time is actually a viable strategy. We can hope.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

Still, I know for sure that MN usually had a downturn in sales/turnout for the first round, and sincerely believed that was the case with other comparable schools. Competition from hoops, spring break, etc. Are you really suggesting that the first round was well attended in EL & AA?

Since the CCHA always had some kind of on campus games, Michigan has been putting first round games at home in the season ticket package. At least for as long as I've been getting tickets- 1990. If they were not used (as three were in the pack) you could get a refund or donate the value. So because of that, the the home tournament games were sold out really well.

And given what we see on Thursday, I really would like to see that down to a 2 night weekend. The new Joe isn't going to help.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

One thing to add- in terms of the tournament. The Big 10 needs to do a better job working with the host city to promote the tournament.

I constantly wanted the CCHA to do more here in Detroit, but at least they went out and engaged businesses who then got tickets out. They could have done more to promote Detroit as a host and a destination (yes, there is stuff to see and do, especially when you should only need to cover a Saturday 10-5pm or so).

The Big 10 should be doing more to promote St. Paul and Detroit as the hosts, and do a better job advertising locally. Nobody knows this is going on, so nobody goes. Let alone comes to town to watch.

The Big 10 seems more interested in the BTN instead of the schools and the immediate fans. Which sucks.

 

[SteveO]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

I know there are some strong rumors and the results are anyone's guess but a few comments.
ASU is a really big school, but the academics are not on par with the B1G, honestly. It's just a huge party school. So i'm not sure it fits in from that perspective.

ASU undergrad actually ranks higher than Rutgers, and their grad school programs (Education, Business, Fine Arts, etc.) all basically rank from top 10 to top 30 in the nation. They have the strong academic reputation in both the undergrad and grad programs that the Big Ten requires. Although you are right it is somewhat a party school...but what major college or university isn't today (with the exception of the "dry campus" I teach at )?

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

ASU as a school is far more like all of the B1G schools than ANY other school that plays hockey. And just as important, the athletic department is far more like B1G schools than any other school- with the possible exception of ND, BC, UConn and the MAC schools. And with the long historic connection to the B1G- it makes WAY more sense for them to be put with the B1G than the NCHC or the WCHA.

Maybe for the conferences. But I bet the schools (MN, MI, etc) want what their athletic department wants...and the athletic department wants what the hockey programs want. I don't think a 'like minded institution' carries much weight with Red or Lucia when the puck is dropped. In fact in an interview from January, Lucia says he'd prefer to go to 8 and that schools would be included 'in the footprint'. Again the conferences will make this decision...but I see no evidence that that's the feeling of the individual schools involved.

Hockey will not put the BTN on any more TVs. You're delusional if you actually think that. The gophers are barely pulling in 30-70k viewers.

The post actually said:

I think it attracts like no eye balls.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

Maybe for the conferences. But I bet the schools (MN, MI, etc) want what their athletic department wants...and the athletic department wants what the hockey programs want. I don't think a 'like minded institution' carries much weight with Red or Lucia when the puck is dropped. In fact in an interview from January, Lucia says he'd prefer to go to 8 and that schools would be included 'in the footprint'. Again the conferences will make this decision...but I see no evidence that that's the feeling of the individual schools involved.



The post actually said:

D'oh

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

Well, actually, you said:

The B1G gets some TV sets in AZ (and possibly other places in the SW)...maybe moves BTN to another tier.

Maybe it gets a few eyeballs, but virtually none that don't already have an expensive sports package. The BTN is not moving to a different tier because of hockey.

 

[Spartanforlife4]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

I just don't see the point in adding only one team. Going to seven means one team is always on a bye and then you would have to go to a strange post season format including:

1) Keep it the same, last place team doesn't make it (I would be fine with this).
2) Change it to campus sites first round, top seed gets a bye. 2 thru 7 play best of three.
3) Final Five format. Top three get byes, 4 thru 7 play best of three.
4) Other; including keeping the tournament format, playing three games Day 1 with only the top seed getting a bye, etc.

There has to be a second team there. Honestly, I wouldn't mind adding ASU and the MAC schools. Creates an all-D1 conference with ten teams.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

I just don't see the point in adding only one team. Going to seven means one team is always on a bye and then you would have to go to a strange post season format including:

1) Keep it the same, last place team doesn't make it (I would be fine with this).
2) Change it to campus sites first round, top seed gets a bye. 2 thru 7 play best of three.
3) Final Five format. Top three get byes, 4 thru 7 play best of three.
4) Other; including keeping the tournament format, playing three games Day 1 with only the top seed getting a bye, etc.

There has to be a second team there. Honestly, I wouldn't mind adding ASU and the MAC schools. Creates an all-D1 conference with ten teams.

There is at least two teams.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

Maybe for the conferences. But I bet the schools (MN, MI, etc) want what their athletic department wants...and the athletic department wants what the hockey programs want. I don't think a 'like minded institution' carries much weight with Red or Lucia when the puck is dropped. In fact in an interview from January, Lucia says he'd prefer to go to 8 and that schools would be included 'in the footprint'. Again the conferences will make this decision...but I see no evidence that that's the feeling of the individual schools involved.

Not sure why you think the what the coaches think matters. It's what the AD's think.

ASU means a good backing with lots of money, a good base of alumni and fans, etc. And I don't think it's about the hockey playing AD's, but all of them.

It's also that ASU would be a major odd one out- and the #1 financial driver in any other conference.

This may be about a hockey team, but ASU could easily dominate based on their size and money in terms of conference discussions. Besides, when going to an ASU hockey game, as good as North Dakota, UNO, Denver et al are- with a serious lack of history at ASU, none of those mean a thing. Heck, even OSU means something to ASU.

I'm sure tDon wants 8 real B1G schools, and I agree with him. But this is about the immediate future and ASU.

 

[Spartanforlife4]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

In all this expansion talk, there are actually games tonight!

I've got
OSU 3
MSU 1

PSU 4
UM 5

UW 1
Minny 3

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

Well, actually, you said:


Maybe it gets a few eyeballs, but virtually none that don't already have an expensive sports package. The BTN is not moving to a different tier because of hockey.

I can say with all confidence that those games will get no eyeballs. But its the way it played out in NYC. Everyone in NYC said, we don't care if you add Rutgers or not...we're not watching. Pundits said it didn't matter as BTN would be added across the board. And it was. I don't understand the cable business ins and outs in say Tempe nearly well enough to say that adding ASU to the B1G will or will not make a difference. I just have to believe that if the B1G adds ASU it sees something there that I don't.

Not sure why you think the what the coaches think matters. It's what the AD's think.

ASU means a good backing with lots of money, a good base of alumni and fans, etc. And I don't think it's about the hockey playing AD's, but all of them.

It's also that ASU would be a major odd one out- and the #1 financial driver in any other conference.

This may be about a hockey team, but ASU could easily dominate based on their size and money in terms of conference discussions. Besides, when going to an ASU hockey game, as good as North Dakota, UNO, Denver et al are- with a serious lack of history at ASU, none of those mean a thing. Heck, even OSU means something to ASU.

I'm sure tDon wants 8 real B1G schools, and I agree with him. But this is about the immediate future and ASU.

That's why I try to be crystal clear so posters don't jump down my throat. So I say the conferences will decide (and not the coaches) when the conferences will decide. And this will not be MI's or MN's ADs. This will be the handful of conference powerbrokers (i.e., Alvarez) and the B1G leaders (Delany will probably be involved).

I get why ASU would want to join the B1G for hockey purposes. I don't see anything B1G hockey fans get out of it. I have no doubt existing hockey fans would rather see a school that can win, that has tradition, and that has something of a rivalry with somebody. I don't think there's one Minnesotan that would be excited to see Miami join...but from a hockey standpoint, that would be better than adding a total unknown like ASU. Others may disagree...and IMHO.

 

[pgb-ohio]

Agreed that the focus should turn to tonight's games. But quickly:

Since the CCHA always had some kind of on campus games, Michigan has been putting first round games at home in the season ticket package. At least for as long as I've been getting tickets- 1990. If they were not used (as three were in the pack) you could get a refund or donate the value. So because of that, the the home tournament games were sold out really well.

Smaller Venue + More Demand + Included in Season Ticket = Better Results? Yup, I can see that. Especially the season ticket component. But I still say that sending the conference first round back to campus would be a negative both here and in Madison -- at the very least.

And given what we see on Thursday, I really would like to see that down to a 2 night weekend. The new Joe isn't going to help.

Regarding the new Joe, you would know better than I. But in my admittedly limited experience with Downtown Detroit, the area from Greektown on up through Ford Field/Comerica/Fox Theater seems much more appealing the Joe's current location. And that's not even mentioning that the arena itself will be much nicer. Won't those things help, at least a little?

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

ASU undergrad actually ranks higher than Rutgers, and their grad school programs (Education, Business, Fine Arts, etc.) all basically rank from top 10 to top 30 in the nation. They have the strong academic reputation in both the undergrad and grad programs that the Big Ten requires. Although you are right it is somewhat a party school...but what major college or university isn't today (with the exception of the "dry campus" I teach at )?

You're missing the part where even with it as a reality, no one is really sure that Rutgers is a Big Ten school. Those standards did king of go out the window when we started accepting non-AAU schools. (Literally) stupid Cornhuskers...

 

[Spartanforlife4]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

You're missing the part where even with it as a reality, no one is really sure that Rutgers is a Big Ten school. Those standards did king of go out the window when we started accepting non-AAU schools. (Literally) stupid Cornhuskers...

UNL was in the AAU when the Big Ten invited them. They were voted out months later, with help from fellow Big Ten members Michigan and your very own Badgers.

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

Do not besmirch Jockstock! This place needs more levity and not in a sad clown SCSU sort of way.

 

[SteveO]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

You're missing the part where even with it as a reality, no one is really sure that Rutgers is a Big Ten school. Those standards did king of go out the window when we started accepting non-AAU schools. (Literally) stupid Cornhuskers...

"no one"!? Big Ten's AAU standard has not changed. UNL joined the AAU 107 years ago. Unfortunately it ranked at the bottom of the AAU's members for more than a decade based on the AAU ranking system which ranks all research universities. That ranking system consists of four criteria: research expenditures, National Academy members, faculty awards (from a specified list) and citations. They were actually invited and accepted into the Big Ten months BEFORE the AAU dismissed UNL in April 2011. I recall the chancellor at UNL stating that they would never have been invited to the Big Ten if they weren't AAU to begin with despite being voted against by Mich. and Wis.

However, it's important to note that research institutions in the AAU do not have the same ranking percentage weights that typically determine the overall academic standing of colleges and universities throughout the nation. Criteria are weighted based on the number of tenure-track faculty, graduation and retention rates, alumni support, student selectivity, etc. Based on those criteria, even a number of non-AAU institutions ranked higher than over 15 of the 63 AAU institutions, including UNL during their AAU membership period.

Notre Dame's lack of AAU membership didn't stop the Big Ten from trying to grab them a number of times, because of all the other strengths Notre Dame brings to the table. ND has a sterling reputation in undergrad education and since 2010 has made a significant push to become a leading research and graduate university. Notre Dame would probably love to be an AAU member to solidify its status but becoming a member is by invitation ONLY. They have not been invited yet, but could be in the very near future. I see no problem with ASU being accepted as a sport affiliate member in men's ice hockey based upon its academic reputation, despite being non-AAU. AAU Members

 

[scoreboard]

"no one"!? Big Ten's AAU standard has not changed. UNL joined the AAU 107 years ago. Unfortunately it ranked at the bottom of the AAU's members for more than a decade based on the AAU ranking system which ranks all research universities. That ranking system consists of four criteria: research expenditures, National Academy members, faculty awards (from a specified list) and citations. They were actually invited and accepted into the Big Ten months BEFORE the AAU dismissed UNL in April 2011. I recall the chancellor at UNL stating that they would never have been invited to the Big Ten if they weren't AAU to begin with despite being voted against by Mich. and Wis.

However, it's important to note that research institutions in the AAU do not have the same ranking percentage weights that typically determine the overall academic standing of colleges and universities throughout the nation. Criteria are weighted based on the number of tenure-track faculty, graduation and retention rates, alumni support, student selectivity, etc. Based on those criteria, even a number of non-AAU institutions ranked higher than over 15 of the 63 AAU institutions, including UNL during their AAU membership period.

Notre Dame's lack of AAU membership didn't stop the Big Ten from trying to grab them a number of times, because of all the other strengths Notre Dame brings to the table. ND has a sterling reputation in undergrad education and since 2010 has made a significant push to become a leading research and graduate university. Notre Dame would probably love to be an AAU member to solidify its status but becoming a member is by invitation ONLY. They have not been invited yet, but could be in the very near future. I see no problem with ASU being accepted as a sport affiliate member in men's ice hockey based upon its academic reputation, despite being non-AAU.

Excellent post. The AAU is sort of like a club. Many fine schools are not members. It is basically a research standard that is applied to join. Most students are not part of the equation. Iowa accepts approximately 80% of its applicants. Elite? I've heard some of the student athletes from member schools speak on TV.

 

[SteveO]

Re: Big Ten 2015-2016

Excellent post. The AAU is sort of like a club. Many fine schools are not members. It is basically a research standard that is applied to join. Most students are not part of the equation. Iowa accepts approximately 80% of the applicants. Elite? I've heard some of the student athletes from member schools speak on TV.

Simply stated, the AAU is an elite group of research driven schools. The most important criteria are investment $$$ in research, how many tenure-track faculty are members in the Academy of Arts and Sciences and how much peer reviewed research they consistently publish. As a faculty member myself, I can tell you the faculty in AAU member schools are more than compelled to work their butts off if they want to keep their job.

 

[scoreboard]

Simply stated, the AAU is an elite group of research driven schools. The most important criteria are investment $$$ in research, how many tenure-track faculty are members in the Academy of Arts and Sciences and how much peer reviewed research they consistently publish. As a faculty member myself, I can tell you the faculty in AAU member schools are more than compelled to work their butts off if they want to keep their job.

Elitist attitude absolutely.... I applauded your post and you came back defensively. Hope you listen better when dealing with your students....