Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

[Slap Shot]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

fwiw, the BTHC concept supposedly wasn't even a topic of discussion at the most recent BT conference.

 

[Chuck Schwartz]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

fwiw, the BTHC concept supposedly wasn't even a topic of discussion at the most recent BT conference.

The earliest it's going to happen is in 2014. I think there will be more meetings before then.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I didn't see your study, but I am watching the downward trends in attendance. Right now, depsite a DU team that was ranked #1 for much of last year and is ranked #10 right now, our average attendance is down from the sellouts (6,000+) of 5 years ago, to around 5500 paid, and with around 4,000 actually in the building on average (1,500 no shows). It seems to me that the only sellouts we generally get now are CC (rivalry game), UND (helped by 1,000 UND fans living in Denver, and Minnesota (helped by many Gopher fans living here). Homecoming games (this year it was BC) are usually sellouts or near it. Wisconsin is usually a near sellout or near it. Then you have the other WCHA teams which are usally draw around 500-1000 less fans than the aforementioned schools. There's a 10% gap attendance now, before the Big Ten even forms.

After the Big 10 forms, dropping another 10-20% is not out of the question. This is a transient, pro sports town, and all college programs in Colorado struggle if you aren't playing name brand teams.

I'm all too fully aware of the fickle nature of college hockey fans. My primary reason for seeking out this interaction with you is to in some way show you the folly of the whole BHHC idea. Let's say I stipulate your assumptions are correct. A BHHC does nothing to solve that. It is a half-cocked idea that would pile on the harm to lots of non-BHHC schools. It would kill some programs that the BTHC only injured. Your advocacy for it is outside the realm of what I've seen of your concerns for college hockey over the years. It is self-interested and provincial looking from over here.

To be honest, I'm as provincially minded as anyone with regard to realignment after the BTHC forms. My interest is to get UAA and UAF into the same conference. Beyond that I could care less. UAA has established no real rivalries with anyone in the WCHA and likely won't in any other conference. Those things are geographic and we only have one other school in the proximity. The WCHA and the CCHA kept UAA and UAF apart for specious reasons. The inevitable BTHC gives these two schools an opportunity to make it as it should be. Every other primary rivalry in college hockey fits within an existing conference ... except UAA and UAF.

Let's bury the BHHC concept eh? I'm sure it felt good when first calculated.

 

[moose97]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I'm all too fully aware of the fickle nature of college hockey fans. My primary reason for seeking out this interaction with you is to in some way show you the folly of the whole BHHC idea. Let's say I stipulate your assumptions are correct. A BHHC does nothing to solve that. It is a half-cocked idea that would pile on the harm to lots of non-BHHC schools. It would kill some programs that the BTHC only injured. Your advocacy for it is outside the realm of what I've seen of your concerns for college hockey over the years. It is self-interested and provincial looking from over here.

To be honest, I'm as provincially minded as anyone with regard to realignment after the BTHC forms. My interest is to get UAA and UAF into the same conference. Beyond that I could care less. UAA has established no real rivalries with anyone in the WCHA and likely won't in any other conference. Those things are geographic and we only have one other school in the proximity. The WCHA and the CCHA kept UAA and UAF apart for specious reasons. The inevitable BTHC gives these two schools an opportunity to make it as it should be. Every other primary rivalry in college hockey fits within an existing conference ... except UAA and UAF.

Let's bury the BHHC concept eh? I'm sure it felt good when first calculated.

As someone who follwows BSU and NMU (two non BTHC and non BHHC teams), I'm not too worried about the BTHC, but if both the BTHC and BHHC were to form, what am I left with? A "Left-Overs College Hockey Association" that looks like this:

Bemidji State
Northern Michigan
Michigan Tech
LSSU
Ferris State
Western Michigan
Alabama-Huntsville
Minnesota State
Bowling Green

Um, no offense to any of those programs, but no thanks... Seems like a death sentance for a few of those.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Actually, I think you've got it backwards. Small buildings are irrelevant, it's all about the number of games. Think this way (and let's just forget operating expenses for a moment):

BTHC Tourney - let's say that they have a 6 team tourney, and it draws 75,000 at the Xcel Energy Center (the WCHA FF draws 90,000, so the 75,000 may be ambitious). Ticket packages are ~ $20 a game for 6 games. That's $9 million in revenue. Split 6 ways is $1.5 mil per team.

Mega Conf. Tourney - 12 home best of 3 series (let's take a scenerio where teams with 3000 seat rinks all host and a worst case, all series are only 2 games). Again, at $20 a ticket, that's $1.4 million. Now throw in 6 more home series in the second round (again, let's play devil's advocate and use a number like 3000 seats per game at $20 per seat). That's another $720,000. Now tack on that Final 6 tourney at the Xcel Energy Center, which again, would likely draw 90,000 (and maybe more since there is a greater fan base to draw from), and you're at $10,8000,000. Add all that up, and you're at $12,920,000 to divide between the 24 teams, or $538,333 per school.

Now, yes, that's a third of the BTHC revenue, but who here thinks that only 3000 will be at each of those first two round series? Or that they all just go 2 games each? All you really need to signifantly improve the bottom line is for Wisconsin, North Dakota, Minnesota, or UNO, etc. to host one (or even two) series and the numbers go up quite a bit (heck, 3 games at $20 a piece at UND over a 3000 seat barn adds another $600,000 to the pot)...


And again, I think you've got it backwards. From the beginning, I've felt this way (that the Big 10 was going to barrel in and force a BTHC come hell or high water), but the more I hear, the more I think that the "hockey people" are being heard, an some sort of inclusion in the current set-up is more likely.

Fair enough on the first points. I won't try equations to disprove your numbers. One thing though is the exclusive TV rights to those games on a national network. None of this would be happening if they didn't think that the TV will be worth something.

Your last paragraph I don't agree with. They may be talking nice right now and "hearing" all sides, but when push comes to shove, I'm betting that they push (and SHOVE!). Maybe I'm too jaded, but the Big Ten will do what's best for the Big Ten. I realize that one could argue that keeping more programs around is what's good for the Big Ten, I just don't believe that Delaney & Co. will see it that way.

Just a hunch. I reserve the right to be wrong.

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

The earliest it's going to happen is in 2014. I think there will be more meetings before then.

Good to know there's a fly on the wall.

 

[4four4]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I didn't see your study, but I am watching the downward trends in attendance. Right now, depsite a DU team that was ranked #1 for much of last year and is ranked #10 right now, our average attendance is down from the sellouts (6,000+) of 5 years ago, to around 5500 paid, and with around 4,000 actually in the building on average (1,500 no shows). It seems to me that the only sellouts we generally get now are CC (rivalry game), UND (helped by 1,000 UND fans living in Denver, and Minnesota (helped by many Gopher fans living here). Homecoming games (this year it was BC) are usually sellouts or near it. Wisconsin is usually a near sellout or near it. Then you have the other WCHA teams which are usally draw around 500-1000 less fans than the aforementioned schools. There's a 10% gap attendance now, before the Big Ten even forms.

After the Big 10 forms, dropping another 10-20% is not out of the question. This is a transient, pro sports town, and all college programs in Colorado struggle if you aren't playing name brand teams.

Interesting. Since, we are playing the what if game. Would CSU and CU adding hockey offset the loss of a Minnesota or Wisconsin?

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I feel the same way as a UW hockey fan. I honestly don't care about Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State & Penn State. That said, the AD's at these schools clearly don't care about what their hockey fans think. They care what the football & basketball fans who flock to see those opponents think. Getting another few thousand fans into the buildings for those opponents is the goal. Add in the added TV revenue & it's a clear win for the athletic departments as a whole. Lets face it, we'll still schedule UND and DU every year. The buildings will still be packed for those games by the traditional hockey fans.

Uh... will we? Take a look at the Little Sisters Of The Poor that we typically schedule for non-conference games for our basketball and football teams. I know that we've had decent non-conference opponents in hockey (mostly just Michigan and MSU, but also BC and UNH), but I don't think that's the way that Barry wants to run things. If Barry can pay less money to Quinnipiac, UAH, Union, etc. to come to the Kohl Center and not have to schedule an away trip in return, he's going to do it. Barry's method of making as much money as he can off of home games at the expense of quality opponents is, I believe, going to become the practice for hockey as well. Even with enough space for 14 non-conference games, I have faith in Barry finding a way to squeeze in a D-III team in before he invites DU and UND.

I dunno, that's pretty good.

It's more than you can say for UAA.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Interesting. Since, we are playing the what if game. Would CSU and CU adding hockey offset the loss of a Minnesota or Wisconsin?

No. That would turn DU and CC into mid-majors and kill them within five years.

Then again, so could a stiff breeze.

 

[Puck Swami]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Interesting. Since, we are playing the what if game. Would CSU and CU adding hockey offset the loss of a Minnesota or Wisconsin?

Some DU fans would welcome CU and CSU as competitors, but I would not be one of them. DU owns the college hockey niche in Denver and CC owns it in the Springs. Both are small private schools who do not enjoy the statewide popularity of state schools such as CU or CSU. I am afraid that those schools would have larger hockey fan bases than DU and CC within 5 years, and within 10 years, would have a recruiting edge as well, as they are both larger schools with larger sports resources. They would also be able to offer in-state tuition breaks to Colorado players, which DU and CC cannot do, so it would enable them to split scholarships more easily. I also think they would get TV preference here, due to the larger size of the fan base. Colorado is not Minnesota in terms of hockey culture and it's not like big school Minnesota helping UMD, SCSU, MSUM and BSU to grow the game. In Colorado, we'd be ceding our niche to bigger schools who will help themselves at our expense.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

The top guys all know that playing time isn't a big issue - they are all going to play.

This is probably true - in today's hockey world. But that's because the elite players are spread out amongst lots of teams. The only hockey teams that have 4 equal lines have 4 equally bad lines. I assume that hockey talent roughly follows a bell curve. The tails of the curve are pretty "flat," which means that there tends to be a much bigger difference between the best player and the 2nd best player than there is between the 12th and 13th best player, and even more than the difference between the 100th and 101st best. On any given college hockey team, the 13th best forward in college would be a superstar; on the all-star team, he's a healthy scratch - and the 12 guys who are ahead of him on the depth chart are quite likely to be WAY above him, based on the bell curve. I believe that the 13th best forward in college hockey is there primarily as a job interview for the pros, and there's no way that guy would be willing to ride the pine rather than play.

Playing time for the top prospects WOULD be an issue if they all decided to cluster on the rosters of the "Big 4" BTHC teams - which is why it won't happen, certainly not to the degree that you fear.

 

[bueller]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

The Final 6 in St. Paul would certainly sell out every year.

I'm not convinced UM and MSU would be willing to give up the home-ice advantage they have at the Joe that easily. I think it would be more likely to rotate among several large midwestern cities such as Detroit, Chicago, Minneapolis-St.Paul, Columbus, etc.

 

[4four4]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Some DU fans would welcome CU and CSU as competitors, but I would not be one of them. DU owns the college hockey niche in Denver and CC owns it in the Springs. Both are small private schools who do not enjoy the statewide popularity of state schools such as CU or CSU. I am afraid that those schools would have larger hockey fan bases than DU and CC within 5 years, and within 10 years, would have a recruiting edge as well, as they are both larger schools with larger sports resources. They would also be able to offer in-state tuition breaks to Colorado players, which DU and CC cannot do, so it would enable them to split scholarships more easily. I also think they would get TV preference here, due to the larger size of the fan base. Colorado is not Minnesota in terms of hockey culture and it's not like big school Minnesota helping UMD, SCSU, MSUM and BSU to grow the game. In Colorado, we'd be ceding our niche to bigger schools who will help themselves at our expense.

I see your point.

Would the game of hockey grow at a faster rate if CSU and CU joined the icebox? Or would it not matter?

 

[scsutommyboy]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Playing time for the top prospects WOULD be an issue if they all decided to cluster on the rosters of the "Big 4" BTHC teams - which is why it won't happen, certainly not to the degree that you fear.

thank you, exactly my point.....

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I'm not convinced UM and MSU would be willing to give up the home-ice advantage they have at the Joe that easily. I think it would be more likely to rotate among several large midwestern cities such as Detroit, Chicago, Minneapolis-St.Paul, Columbus, etc.

I was waiting for someone to comment on those assumptions; first that the finals would automatically be held in St. Paul and second that it would automatically sell out. If it were in St. Paul and the Final 6 consisted of BGSU, NMU, Miami, Notre Dame, Ferris State, and Western Michigan, the attendance would be hurt quite a bit as compared to the WCHA Final Five which is almost always guaranteed to have multiple schools from Minnesota in it in any given year. Needless to say, the same could be said if the finals were in Detroit and all the final 6 were from Minnesota and Colorado.

 

[dggoddard]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I'm not convinced UM and MSU would be willing to give up the home-ice advantage they have at the Joe that easily. I think it would be more likely to rotate among several large midwestern cities such as Detroit, Chicago, Minneapolis-St.Paul, Columbus, etc.

The CCHA Tournament generates virtually no profit for the league members. The WCHA playoffs generate over $100,000 per team.

Follow the money. Held at Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul, Minn., the Red Baron™ WCHA Final Five has drawn in excess of 1.36 million fans since it's inception in 1987-88 – including a record 88,900 in 2007 , the third highest total ever of 86,855 in 2008, and 82,065 in 2009.

This video of the 2009 CCHA Tournament does a nice job of showing all the empty seats.
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-yaVAUZjNe0?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-yaVAUZjNe0?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[kire_mailliw]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

The main benefit of the BTHC happens to be potential new schools joining the icebox. Otherwise, why start up a team without a potential conference to play in?

agreed, I am against the bthc but I would like to see Iowa and Illinois get DI teams--This will happen at some point if the bthc forms

 

[NMU8405]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

The CCHA Tournament generates virtually no profit for the league members. The WCHA playoffs generate over $100,000 per team.

Follow the money. Held at Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul, Minn., the Red Baron™ WCHA Final Five has drawn in excess of 1.36 million fans since it's inception in 1987-88 – including a record 88,900 in 2007 , the third highest total ever of 86,855 in 2008, and 82,065 in 2009.

This video of the 2009 CCHA Tournament does a nice job of showing all the empty seats.
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-yaVAUZjNe0?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-yaVAUZjNe0?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

Its always going to be touch and go with the Joe and the CCHA. If Michigan and Michigan State arent there, its not going to sell. Ferris, NMU, Lake State, all D-2 schools dont have the pull or interest downstate, and even Western. The Ohio schools would do even worse. Miami does bring its share of fans. I cant imagine what numbers Bowling Green would attract, it would probably be more than Alaska though.

The early game between NMU and Notre Dame was empty, 4pm start on a Friday isnt going to draw, and once again...two schools that dont have a connection with Detroit or the fans there. The Michigan vs Alaska game had around 10,000 by my estimate. The championship game between Notre Dame and Michigan that year was pretty close to sold out. The clips at the end of the game where ND is celebrating, Michigan was losing by a large margin and all the Walmart Wolverines had emptied out by then.

 

[Puck Swami]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Would the game of hockey grow at a faster rate if CSU and CU joined the icebox? Or would it not matter?

It would grow the game somewhat, but Colorado already had its big youth hockey growth infusion when the Avalanche came to town the mid 1990s. Denver has 7 Coloradoans on it's roster now and have had as many as 9-10 in recent years as a product of that interest level. High school hockey is played by about 30 schools in Colorado, but prospects who are really serious about the D-I level or being a pro player basically forego high school hockey here for AAA Midget hockey and then all leave Colorado for a prep school, Junior hockey, or the USNTDP. CU and CSU would alread have decent spectator bases built in, but I am not sure that they would drive a huge amount of kids to play.

 

[joecct]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Yesterday INCH Tweeted (1:06 PM ET) that the BTH(C) would have 2 three team divisions:
3M's: Minnesota, Michigan, Michigan State
POW: Penn State, the Ohio State, Wisconsin