Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

[Puck Swami]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

Swami,

I'd love to hear your thoughts on the idea of a Big Ten Cup - reducing the WCHA/CCHA schedules to 20-24 games, and for the Big Ten schools to use those new OOC games for a Cup competition. I know you've spoken positively about the idea of reducing conference season length before, so I'm curious how this sits with you...

I love this idea. It allows the big 10 to play each other more which they want, it keeps the WCHA and CCHA intact, and fosters more OOC games, which I love. The WCHA is enough of a meatgrinder already.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

The question is not will the BTHC ruin hockey, it's the will the TEAMS that would have to leave their current conferences to make a BTHC ruin hockey. And that answer is yes.

The big two in the WCHA are MN/WI. UND is the 3rd of the big three, ineligible for the BTHC. Even with a scheduling agreement between the big 3, the other 7 (soon to be 9) teams in the WCHA will have fits, because yes, they count on those draws to not only make money, but to recruit (you can be part of a team that faces these teams, get looks from the NHL, or whatever).

Same with the CCHA and OSU/MI/MSU.

Even when these 5 teams are horrid, most of them have the storied history and the somewhat national recognition to draw audience. You combine them all into one conference? Others will suffer.

Eastern comparisons don't really pertain to this argument either, if only for the close proximity of all the eastern teams. Out east, if you lose one team, heck you travel 30 minutes, you find 2-3 more teams to latch on to.

In the WCHA, I think the closest two schools (correct me if I'm wrong) are either MN-SCSU (90 minutes) or DU-CC (90 minutes). After that? You're looking at 2 hours+, up to (whatever UAA is). Someone mentioned it once, and I thought it was a 5-6 hour average between WCHA schools.

The point being, that it's harder to overcome that distance in the west, and the BTHC would help strengthen that difference, because if you are a casual SCSU fan (honestly, just chose them because they are closest) and you might be able to get MN on the schedule? Or WI on the schedule? You may not go to games.

If you're new to college hockey, or are wondering about it, and you don't play MN or WI? Well, why not? And then, why bother?

Those are the reasons the BTHC will ruin hockey.

 

[UMICHhockeyRULZ]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

First off we probably will never see if a Big Ten conference ever comes into fruition.

Currently, the Big Ten has five teams playing college hockey and quite frankly I would venture to guess they need at least two or more schools not playing the game before they ever start up a fake Big Ten conference.

IMO, the Big Ten needs all 11 schools playing the game of ice hockey before any other conferences turn to mid-major overnight. It will never happen in my lifetime. There is no denying it would be great for college hockey if the Big Ten did add more teams to the mix but I am not going to get all worked up over a conference that is still a paper tiger.

This is absolutely what will happen.

If you think schools like Miami, Denver, and Notre Dame are going to have trouble competing, how about the schools like Northern, Tech, and Ferris that barely have enough money to compete now, but still keep respectable records and make a run for the NCAA's occasionally? Would a story like Bemidji State be possible with a BTHC? There is a better chance of Sarah Palin getting into MENSA than underdog schools competing in such a conference. You will be looking at 5-10 teams contracting in 5-10 years, guaranteed.

Thank you, two people who listen to reason....

However, the Big Ten Cup idea is intriguing but maybe eliminating a tournament might be called for.

 

[UMICHhockeyRULZ]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

The question is not will the BTHC ruin hockey, it's the will the TEAMS that would have to leave their current conferences to make a BTHC ruin hockey. And that answer is yes.

The big two in the WCHA are MN/WI. UND is the 3rd of the big three, ineligible for the BTHC. Even with a scheduling agreement between the big 3, the other 7 (soon to be 9) teams in the WCHA will have fits, because yes, they count on those draws to not only make money, but to recruit (you can be part of a team that faces these teams, get looks from the NHL, or whatever).

Same with the CCHA and OSU/MI/MSU.

Even when these 5 teams are horrid, most of them have the storied history and the somewhat national recognition to draw audience. You combine them all into one conference? Others will suffer.

Eastern comparisons don't really pertain to this argument either, if only for the close proximity of all the eastern teams. Out east, if you lose one team, heck you travel 30 minutes, you find 2-3 more teams to latch on to.

In the WCHA, I think the closest two schools (correct me if I'm wrong) are either MN-SCSU (90 minutes) or DU-CC (90 minutes). After that? You're looking at 2 hours+, up to (whatever UAA is). Someone mentioned it once, and I thought it was a 5-6 hour average between WCHA schools.

The point being, that it's harder to overcome that distance in the west, and the BTHC would help strengthen that difference, because if you are a casual SCSU fan (honestly, just chose them because they are closest) and you might be able to get MN on the schedule? Or WI on the schedule? You may not go to games.

If you're new to college hockey, or are wondering about it, and you don't play MN or WI? Well, why not? And then, why bother?

Those are the reasons the BTHC will ruin hockey.

I've found a legion of support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Puck Swami]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

That sounds a little paranoid to me. You don't think players are going to want to play for the great Gwoz or ignore the tradition of UND? I'm having a hard time buying into the idea that traditional powerhouse programs like UND and Denver turning into Mid Majors.

I am paranoid, because this is a really fragile, 58-team ecosystem of college haves, have-somes and have-nots that actually get to play each other. Some good players will still come to Denver, but the truly elite ones won't. UND, CC and Denver are major powers largely because they've always played in the best league and they get players who want to test themselves against the best players from other WCHA schools like Wisconsin and Minnesota. Our schools raised the money to upgrade facilities and TV because over time, Minnesota and Wisconsin are the circled games of the year, and their presence in the WCHA schedule eah year enables schools like ours to televise games. If Denver is only playing schools like Bemidji and Michgan Tech in league play, FSN sure as hell won't be televising us anymore, and when that happens, we lose out on the top kids.

The WCHA runs on money provided by fanbases of the two mealticket schools - Minnesota primarily, and to a lesser but important extent, Wisconsin. When those two leave, the WCHA as a league will be essentially broke overnight, because the Final Five runs on Minnesota fans' wallets. The WCHA tourney is now going to draw 7,000 people instead of 18,000, and it will lose money.

Additionally, when UM and UW leave, they won't be coming to Denver anymore even for non league games, becuase they can play more home non-league games against lesser schools that won't require a return appearance. For example, DU hasn't been able to get Michigan or Michigan State to come play at DU since 1981, when both schools were WCHA members. Michigan and MSU would rather stay home and make hundreds of thousands playing home non-league games.

As bad as it will be for DU, it will be even worse for the SCSUs, UMDs and MSUMs of the world, whose primary rivalries revolve around the Gophers. Taking those schools out of the Gophers' orbit will devastate Minnesota hockey as a culture.

I know I sound homerish on this topic. I do love college hockey and want to see it grow, but I have 30 years of emotional investment in the Denver progam, and would hate to see the hard work that has been put in here relegated to mid-major status in the hockey world.

 

[4four4]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

I am paranoid, because this is a really fragile, 58-team ecosystem of college haves, have-somes and have-nots that actually get to play each other. Some good players will still come to Denver, but the truly elite ones won't. UND, CC and Denver are major powers largely because they've always played in the best league and they get players who want to test themselves against the best players from other WCHA schools like Wisconsin and Minnesota. Our schools raised the money to upgrade facilities and TV because over time, Minnesota and Wisconsin are the circled games of the year, and their presence in the WCHA schedule eah year enables schools like ours to televise games. If Denver is only playing schools like Bemidji and Michgan Tech in league play, FSN sure as hell won't be televising us anymore, and when that happens, we lose out on the top kids.

The WCHA runs on money provided by fanbases of the two mealticket schools - Minnesota primarily, and to a lesser but important extent, Wisconsin. When those two leave, the WCHA as a league will be essentially broke overnight, because the Final Five runs on Minnesota fans' wallets. The WCHA tourney is now going to draw 7,000 people instead of 18,000, and it will lose money.

Additionally, when UM and UW leave, they won't be coming to Denver anymore even for non league games, becuase they can play more home non-league games against lesser schools that won't require a return appearance. For example, DU hasn't been able to get Michigan or Michigan State to come play at DU since 1981, when both schools were WCHA members. Michigan and MSU would rather stay home and make hundreds of thousands playing home non-league games.

As bad as it will be for DU, it will be even worse for the SCSUs, UMDs and MSUMs of the world, whose primary rivalries revolve around the Gophers. Taking those schools out of the Gophers' orbit will devastate Minnesota hockey as a culture.

I know I sound homerish on this topic. I do love college hockey and want to see it grow, but I have 30 years of emotional investment in the Denver progam, and would hate to see the hard work that has been put in here relegated to mid-major status in the hockey world.

Well said.

Now please answer me the following two questions.

1.) Why don't the current schools playing hockey recruit non-playing schools?

2.) Would it be good or bad if Penn State and another Big Ten school be good for college hockey?

 

[Larch]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

I've found a legion of support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It isn't that people on here don't support or agree with your thinking or "aren't listening to reasoning". The majority want nothing to do with a true BTHC. I personally hate the idea, but you seem to be burying your head in the sand. If you want to avoid a true BTHC, you can't just stomp your feet on a message board and say "No it will never happen because it's bad for college hockey.", for some reason you think the people who will make these decisions actually care what happen to the Ferris' and Mankato's of the world. You're going to have to actually communicate your dislike of the idea to the people with the power to make those decisions. You also better get some friends to let their dislike of the idea known too, the richer the better.

As I alluded to earlier, this subject continues to come up and was even discussed at length this summer without any of us knowing. Sadly, I think the BTHC is closer than we think, even if it is still 10+ years away. Now would be the time to start one of those grass-roots effort things.

 

[Puck Swami]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

Well said.

Now please answer me the following two questions.

1.) Why don't the current schools playing hockey recruit non-playing schools?

2.) Would it be good or bad if Penn State and another Big Ten school be good for college hockey?

1) They should do more recruiting of schools. Perhaps one of the functions of the newly-formed College Hockey, Inc. should be recruiting other schools to look at hockey as a revenue-producing business case. It will be hard with Title IX of course, but eventually, ADs are going to want sports that can generate some money when properly built. The business case for a hockey at a big school is that a $20-50 million investment in on-campus hockey program can be paid off in 10-15 years or so (or less in a retrofit). Right now, however, it's a tough sell. Lacrosse is likely a cheaper option that can generate revenue for schools looking to add a contact sport.

2) I am all for adding more Big 10, SEC, PAC-10 or other BCS schools to college hockey so that we could someday get to 70-100 teams and create a more national game, with a less fragile center of gravity. I just don't want to see the WCHA relegated to a mid major league in that scenario. What college hockey doesn't need are more schools that aren't willing to really fund the programs to be truly competitive (Wayne State, Findlay, etc.).

 

[4four4]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

1) They should do more recruiting of schools. Perhaps one of the functions of the newly-formed College Hockey, Inc. should be recruiting other schools to look at hockey as a revenue-producing business case. It will be hard with Title IX of course, but eventually, ADs are going to want sports that can generate some money when properly built. The business case for a hockey at a big school is that a $20-50 million investment in on-campus hockey program can be paid off in 10-15 years or so (or less in a retrofit). Right now, however, it's a tough sell. Lacrosse is likely a cheaper option that can generate revenue for schools looking to add a contact sport.

2) I am all for adding more Big 10, SEC, PAC-10 or other BCS schools to college hockey so that we could someday get to 70-100 teams and create a more national game, with a less fragile center of gravity. I just don't want to see the WCHA relegated to a mid major league in that scenario. What college hockey doesn't need are more schools that aren't willing to really fund the programs to be truly competitive (Wayne State, Findlay, etc.).

I firmly believe if the bigger schools or more Big Ten schools start up a hockey program many others will follow suit. My guees is it would be a domino effect.

 

[Puck Swami]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

I firmly believe if the bigger schools or more Big Ten schools start up a hockey program many others will follow suit. My guees is it would be a domino effect.

You bet. That's why a UCLA or a Tennessee starting up a program would be huge.

 

[scsutommyboy]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

I am paranoid, because this is a really fragile, 58-team ecosystem of college haves, have-somes and have-nots that actually get to play each other. Some good players will still come to Denver, but the truly elite ones won't. UND, CC and Denver are major powers largely because they've always played in the best league and they get players who want to test themselves against the best players from other WCHA schools like Wisconsin and Minnesota. Our schools raised the money to upgrade facilities and TV because over time, Minnesota and Wisconsin are the circled games of the year, and their presence in the WCHA schedule eah year enables schools like ours to televise games. If Denver is only playing schools like Bemidji and Michgan Tech in league play, FSN sure as hell won't be televising us anymore, and when that happens, we lose out on the top kids.

The WCHA runs on money provided by fanbases of the two mealticket schools - Minnesota primarily, and to a lesser but important extent, Wisconsin. When those two leave, the WCHA as a league will be essentially broke overnight, because the Final Five runs on Minnesota fans' wallets. The WCHA tourney is now going to draw 7,000 people instead of 18,000, and it will lose money.

Additionally, when UM and UW leave, they won't be coming to Denver anymore even for non league games, becuase they can play more home non-league games against lesser schools that won't require a return appearance. For example, DU hasn't been able to get Michigan or Michigan State to come play at DU since 1981, when both schools were WCHA members. Michigan and MSU would rather stay home and make hundreds of thousands playing home non-league games.

As bad as it will be for DU, it will be even worse for the SCSUs, UMDs and MSUMs of the world, whose primary rivalries revolve around the Gophers. Taking those schools out of the Gophers' orbit will devastate Minnesota hockey as a culture.

I know I sound homerish on this topic. I do love college hockey and want to see it grow, but I have 30 years of emotional investment in the Denver progam, and would hate to see the hard work that has been put in here relegated to mid-major status in the hockey world.

The one Flaw in all of this is there are only so many spots on 5 big ten teams rosters. Real top of the line recruits are not going to go to Minnesota and play on the 3rd line or 4th line when they go to UND, SCSU or DU and be on the first line and play special teams. I also don't think SCSU's attendance would drop off much if the Gophers are not in the same conference. They don't come every year now and the program seems to draw fine. Wisconsin has not even come to the NHC that many times over the last 15 years because when SCSU got to play the Gophers every year Wisconsin was one of the teams they missed out on. I think if this ever happened and it won't happen any time soon, it would hurt DU and CC far more than the other Minnesota schools and UND because we already get huge crowds for games against those teams. Even though DU and CC are power houses they draw far less fans when they come to SCSU than UND, UMD and Mankato do.

Edit: Of course if more big ten teams join college hockey then drop off of talent would begin.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

For me personally, I still don't like the idea of a big ten cup or whatever you want to call it. It's just going to sap away our already meager OOC matchups. You wouldn't see matchups with Harvard, Maine, Air Force, New Hampshire, or very much of any of the teams outside the two conferences.

I've never seen the problem with the CHS. I've always liked it. But I've also enjoyed watching series against other conferences as well.

 

[jk]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

Swami may be right about all of it, and he probably is right when it comes to the high profile US kids. But the Winnipeggers are still going to UND, the Kodiaks are still going to UMD, Western Canadians are still playing for DU. Will the Cali kids still go to CC and DU? They might be the type to go for the big-name Big 10, but maybe geography matters.

Also, the reason nobody blows out the CHA schools anymore is the leveling of talent across college hockey. Every game is tough. As someone noted, the big schools can't get them all.

Of course, if this comes to pass, we might see the day when MN will have 20 NHL draftees on its team, which should make them unbeata ... oh wait ...

 

[4four4]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

For me personally, I still don't like the idea of a big ten cup or whatever you want to call it. It's just going to sap away our already meager OOC matchups. You wouldn't see matchups with Harvard, Maine, Air Force, New Hampshire, or very much of any of the teams outside the two conferences.

I've never seen the problem with the CHS. I've always liked it. But I've also enjoyed watching series against other conferences as well.

But the Big Ten in the past has had a tourney/cup.

 

[UMICHhockeyRULZ]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

For me personally, I still don't like the idea of a big ten cup or whatever you want to call it. It's just going to sap away our already meager OOC matchups. You wouldn't see matchups with Harvard, Maine, Air Force, New Hampshire, or very much of any of the teams outside the two conferences.

I've never seen the problem with the CHS. I've always liked it. But I've also enjoyed watching series against other conferences as well.

They already play each other anyway, just need to rephrase what it is called.

 

[blockski]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

They already play each other anyway, just need to rephrase what it is called.

Um, Ohio State would like to disagree with you there.

And as much as I like the Showcase, it could be so much more. You've got marquee programs meeting with little to no students in the stands (thanks to the holiday) and no buzz for games that should have some more buzz.

It's a missed opportunity.

 

[UMICHhockeyRULZ]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

Um, Ohio State would like to disagree with you there.

And as much as I like the Showcase, it could be so much more. You've got marquee programs meeting with little to no students in the stands (thanks to the holiday) and no buzz for games that should have some more buzz.

It's a missed opportunity.

Touche.

I convienently forgot about ohio state, please forgive me even though I do try to forget about that cess pool of a university.

Also, your point about the limited number of students is accurate. A friend who went to minny was all excited one year when he was coming to Yost to see/hear the famed atmosphere. He left very dissappointed.

I don't think minnesota has as large of a Holiday issue as most of their students are in-state.

 

[moose97]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

Touche.

I convienently forgot about ohio state, please forgive me even though I do try to forget about that cess pool of a university.

You know, it was interesting to be covering the Subway Classic this year, as I usually take quite an interest in the Showcase, but couldn't have cared less this year. There were a couple reasons for this:

1) The quality of teams in Grand Forks. When you have three of the top six teams in the country, and the Showcase has only one top 15 team, that's not a good sign. Plus, the level of play was simpley outstanding at the Ralph.

2) The storyline - is BSU as good as they think, Frozen Four rematch, etc.

3) Lack of TV coverage for the Showcase

And, it gave me an interesting perspective of the OSU angle. Bemidji State had never played the Buckeyes before, and I can't say I've given them much thought before. I can certainly see their perspective on being the "other" Big 10 hockey team and feeling slighted year after year in the Showcase set-up...

Also, your point about the limited number of students is accurate. A friend who went to minny was all excited one year when he was coming to Yost to see/hear the famed atmosphere. He left very dissappointed.

I don't think minnesota has as large of a Holiday issue as most of their students are in-state.

I think this is a huge misconception. I went to a school with a large number of in-state (local) students (NMU), and it was dead on weekends and holidays over a long weekend. I actually think you'd be in a better situation if you had a school where it's harder to get home, so that kids only leave for the big ones - Christams and Spring Break (as an aside, I briefly considered Alaska-Fairbanks, and my folks told me that I would only come home for Christmas and the end of the school year). Local kids - kids from as close as an hour or so away - go home every weekend or two, and are certainly gone for Thanksgiving...

 

[blockski]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

Well, keep in mind that the idea behind the showcase wasn't so much a reunion of Big Ten schools, but a reunion of schools that all used to play in the WCHA. Ohio State was never part of the WCHA. I can't recall for Munn, but Michigan has WCHA banners in the rafters at Yost.

Moose, I think you make the point that the Showcase is a missed opportunity. It's tied to a holiday weekend for no particularly good reason. It's not like the Lions or Cowboys playing on Thanksgiving - it's a reason to not attend the games rather than a reason you can't miss them.

Depending on how a Big Ten Cup would be structured (for example - would you double-count a game between Wisconsin and Minnesota in both BT and WCHA competitions?), I think you'd have a far better chance to really build up those rivalries.

I think it could be more like an extended version of the Beanpot, really.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Big Ten conference discussed, rejected

Depending on how a Big Ten Cup would be structured (for example - would you double-count a game between Wisconsin and Minnesota in both BT and WCHA competitions?),

I would imagine so. Or you could assign points to individual games, so you could weigh them (a la the way that the Wisconsin-Minnesota Border Battle points are allocated).