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 Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
- Thread starter MGoBlueHockey
- Start date
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
No, that was Woody Allen.
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
That was 4 years ago already?!?!?! Crap I am getting old.
That was 4 years ago already?!?!?! Crap I am getting old.
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
That's the deal. Money. Big national brands. Fan base demographics.
That's why NCHC/WCHA teams to BTHC would never happen. The avid pro hockey/B1G fan in Philly, Chicago or NYC who might just get turned on to college hockey has no interest in Denver or UND.
That's the deal. Money. Big national brands. Fan base demographics.
That's why NCHC/WCHA teams to BTHC would never happen. The avid pro hockey/B1G fan in Philly, Chicago or NYC who might just get turned on to college hockey has no interest in Denver or UND.
Hockeybuckeye
Well-known member
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
There is one thing that I've been wondering about that hasn't come up and that's if all these "super conferences" come into being would they have the ability to defy the NCAA if they felt the need?
There is one thing that I've been wondering about that hasn't come up and that's if all these "super conferences" come into being would they have the ability to defy the NCAA if they felt the need?
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
My guess is that they wouldn't defy the NCAA as the NCAA plays an important role in terms of regulations, organization, day to day management, etc. Rather I suspect the super conferences would just take more control of the key tourney decisions and cash.
My guess is that they wouldn't defy the NCAA as the NCAA plays an important role in terms of regulations, organization, day to day management, etc. Rather I suspect the super conferences would just take more control of the key tourney decisions and cash.
Hockeybuckeye
Well-known member
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
My thoughts on this were how much would or could such a super conference stand up to the NCAA defending one of it's members if the NCAA went insane on punishments breaking it's own bylaws doing it say using what they did to Penn State as an example?
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
OK, I've read thru all 5 pages of this thread, and there is still one question that nobody has offered an answer to; what possible reason would BIG have for wanting to add affiliate members to their hockey conference?
OK, I've read thru all 5 pages of this thread, and there is still one question that nobody has offered an answer to; what possible reason would BIG have for wanting to add affiliate members to their hockey conference?
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
None! They have a conference, but I'd think they'd want Notre Dame as an affiliate if they could get them.
I have to disagree. The big ten will not invite anybody unless they bring all their sports to the conference.
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
Kind of meant that as the point. This is only for Lacrosse anyways, right?
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
With that said, my feeling is that the conference is better off in the long run holding out for full members. So I'm hoping 4four4 is correct. But in the short run, a couple of affiliate members would increase the number of schools to eight. A quick fix, if you will.
Since there is a plausible motive, it makes sense to have the conversation...
Well, there's at least one "possible reason." Six teams is really too small for a conference. Is six viable? Yes. Is it ideal? Far from it.
With that said, my feeling is that the conference is better off in the long run holding out for full members. So I'm hoping 4four4 is correct. But in the short run, a couple of affiliate members would increase the number of schools to eight. A quick fix, if you will.
Since there is a plausible motive, it makes sense to have the conversation...
MinnesotaNorthStar
Minding the gap
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
The way I'm reading it is that the only reason they're considering Johns Hopkins is to form a lacrosse conference. I would guess that if they had enough for one, they wouldn't. Since they have enough for hockey, they won't add affiliate members.
The way I'm reading it is that the only reason they're considering Johns Hopkins is to form a lacrosse conference. I would guess that if they had enough for one, they wouldn't. Since they have enough for hockey, they won't add affiliate members.
Almington
Blood Boiling with Rage and Hate
Personally, 7 teams would be ideal: 24 conference games and 10 NC games. Enough NC games to feed existing rivalries and a perfectly balanced conference schedule. 6 would be my next choice. After that you need to get to 12 and have a schedule similar to the ECAC where everyone plays everyone else (4 against a rival) for 24 conference games.
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
As said, the B1G won't add any teams to hockey esp Notre Dame. No team really benefits the B1G in terms of hockey (again, schools like DU and UND are small market schools with no national rep). The relationship with Notre Dame is way too complex. Why in the world would the B1G invite Notre Dame to join the BTHC when its a non starter in all other sports? The only thing Notre Dame means to the B1G is football and its looking like that ship has sailed.
As said, the B1G won't add any teams to hockey esp Notre Dame. No team really benefits the B1G in terms of hockey (again, schools like DU and UND are small market schools with no national rep). The relationship with Notre Dame is way too complex. Why in the world would the B1G invite Notre Dame to join the BTHC when its a non starter in all other sports? The only thing Notre Dame means to the B1G is football and its looking like that ship has sailed.
SCSU Euro
Well-known member
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
Starting to feel like Kevin Bacon?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDAmPIq29ro
Starting to feel like Kevin Bacon?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDAmPIq29ro
Dirty
#BanBiddy
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
I like how you always link to Youtube videos because you don't know how to embed them. It amuses me.
I like how you always link to Youtube videos because you don't know how to embed them. It amuses me.
SCSU Euro
Well-known member
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
I like how your fantasy team sucks every year. You wanna tell me how to embed it? 'Cause if it takes more than 8 seconds to learn, I don't care.
I like how your fantasy team sucks every year. You wanna tell me how to embed it? 'Cause if it takes more than 8 seconds to learn, I don't care.
Dirty
#BanBiddy
Re: Big Ten- Adding affiliate members for hockey isn't off the table
Below video click Share --> Click Embed --> Copy all that kooky code ---> Paste all that kooky code. Voila, you are done Radio Boy.
Below video click Share --> Click Embed --> Copy all that kooky code ---> Paste all that kooky code. Voila, you are done Radio Boy.