Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

[Rover]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I'll say again though, if college hockey TV is such a money loser across the board, why do I see so many games on TV? Everybody can't be losing money on the broadcasts. College athletics does little if its not generating cash nor does TV cover events year in and year out that don't produce results for them.

Granted they're only going to cover the "name" schools but the overall point remains the same. If they get get better viewership for hockey vs whatever's in that time slot now, they'll show it. An event like Michigan - Michigan St on Michigan's football field will draw 100K fans to the event. I find it hard to believe everybody interested in the event already has tickets, and nobody else in the state will be watching.

Somebody had posted about a college hockey telecast getting decent ratings in the affected cities (Minny area for example) but not in the rest of the viewing area. That makes sense to me, and may make sense for advertisers. If a BU-BC contest is drawing higher ratings in the Boston area but lower ratings in outlying areas like Springfield or New Bedford than The Three Stoogers re-runs, thus averaging out to the same Nielsen rating overall, I might be inclined to pay more to advertise during the college hockey game due to the demographics its reaching.

 

[Db4gb]

Alternate viewpoint …….. not much changes

Alternate viewpoint …….. not much changes

As a Hockey East fan I do not have a dog in this fight about the Big 10. I am glad to see another team play hockey, however I do not think this will be the disaster you all think for the other conferences.

Personally, I think the chances of the Big 10 becoming a so-so league are just as likely. Two reasons why.

First is the advice of my father he pounded in my head from the age of 10 on. Usually the conventional wisdom is wrong. Buy stocks when everyone is selling, etc., and I think that is valid advice to use here. The BTHC will still have to schedule a lot of OOC games, traditional rivalries will most likely continue. In that sense not a lot changes.

Second think like a 16-18 year old for a bit. Do you want to go to school where hockey is just a minor sport and all the attention is on football and basketball? Or, would you rather go to a school where hockey is THE sport and where there is a lot of attention to that? This alone will insure a lot of very talented kids go to other places.

Third, the really talented kids will go to where the really talented kids get developed and those teams are well known in hockey circles, I doubt that will change much.

My alternate view of the future is the BTHC forms in a few years. Minnesota, MSU and Michigan dominate; everyone else in the BTHC is a decent program, but not great team. In 10 years with the start of the season the forecast on who gets to the final four. It will be the same names we know now. Maine, BC, BU, UNH, Michigan, MSU, Minny, UND, DU, CC, along with the ones in an up cycle.

In other words, not much will change except a few more games on TV, perhaps.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

So after the B10HC comes into existence is the next thing to fear coming into existence the Big East Hockey conference

Going by the basketball league...

You have:
UConn
Providence
Notre Dame

With quasi-legit possibilities (however slim) in:
Pittsburgh
Villanova
Syracuse

And pipe dream possibilities in:
Marquette
DePaul
Rutgers
Seton Hall
West Virginia
Georgetown

Ladies and gentlemen... put on your tin foil hats. It's conspiracy time!

 

[Clifton]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

And pipe dream possibilities in:
Marquette
DePaul
Rutgers
Seton Hall
West Virginia
Georgetown

West Virginia better get moving. Red Berenson can't wait around forever and Michigan is going to want someone with experience!

 

[dggoddard]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

The BTN currently televises live softball, soccer, volleyball and women's basketball among other sports that draw negligible ratings. They're burning money, but they're doing it for a reason.

Lets face it, the reason is simple. The BTN & ESPN televise women's basketball and other women's sports as a thinly veiled way to keep the women's libbers and PC crowd off their backs. They make so much off the football & men's hoops that they can afford to do this.

Minnesota's potential issues with the BTHC have NOTHING to do with the FCS-North contract which produces virtually no revenue compared to the BTN contract. It has to do with the potential fallout from fans, politicians and residents over potentially screwing over four other Minnesota colleges and surrounding communities.

 

[Skeeterman]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I believe the BTCH is a Communist movement. This will mean the return of the famous "Domino Theory". If the BTHC is communist, soon the other conferences will become Communist, too. Do we really want Hockey to be associated with Communism? The original Commies came from Mars, the "Red" planet.

I'm here to help

I am the voice of reason

 

[ScottM]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Lets face it, the reason is simple. The BTN & ESPN televise women's basketball and other women's sports as a thinly veiled way to keep the women's libbers and PC crowd off their backs. They make so much off the football & men's hoops that they can afford to do this.

It amazes me that ESPN will broadcast WNBA games and try to keep their cameras panned to the lower rows of seating to avoid showing how empty the arenas really are. Provided men's sports like football and bouncyball pay the bills for ESPN and BTN, other sports can continue to be loss-leaders.

 

[4four4]

Re: Alternate viewpoint …….. not much changes

Re: Alternate viewpoint …….. not much changes

In other words, not much will change except a few more games on TV, perhaps.

Good point. It has been years (I believe 93ish) since a brand new school who has ever won a college hockey D1 national championship. Like you said not much change. Now we wait to see what happens.

 

[CHFAN222]

Re: Alternate viewpoint …….. not much changes

Re: Alternate viewpoint …….. not much changes

Good point. It has been years (I believe 93ish) since a brand new school who has ever won a college hockey D1 national championship. Like you said not much change. Now we wait to see what happens.

That will change in the not so distant future. At least one of the HE schools that has not won a national title yet will win one in the next 5 years.

Notre Dame and Miami will be in it and have a shot.

 

[4four4]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/coll...+(Sports+-+Top+Stories)&utm_content=LocalHost

"I fully expect the Big Ten to initiate a hockey conference..." Bruce McLeod

McLeod is actually being proactive which shows leadership while the CCHA schools need to ask their commish the same question.

I would say that 3 BT teams in the tournament would be a virtual lock with the BTHC, and 4 would not surprise me at all IF they're really able to pack their NC schedules with weak teams at home.

Absolutely the Big Ten will have three to four teams every year making the tourney.

Ratings for hockey suck. Pro hockey ratings are pathetic and college hockey ratings are even worse.

Granted the ratings are still poor but the NHL is finally getting better ratings. In fact so much so that the idiots will get greedy and lockout will happen again. IMO, the NHL still doesn't get it.

I thought it was about student athletes?

It is always about the students. They come first.

I'm no expert, about as far from it as you can get, but those in the know tell me the BTN gets those rights and FSN picks up the rest.

People from FSN come into my store so I will see what they have to say.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Granted they're only going to cover the "name" schools but the overall point remains the same.

I'm not even sure that this is true. I live in Madison and watched several Quinnipiac games last year as well as a few other smaller eastern schools. I wish there was more of that on and while we're at it, I wish that hockey was played throughout the week as every other game that is on is the same night as the Badgers play.

 

[Jupiter]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

He also seems quite ignorant on exactly how ****ty the ratings are for college hockey outside of Minnesota and Michigan. WHo is it that has that in their signature? Priceless?

I used to have a sig with the # of viewers for the NCAA regionals on ESPN vs. the WSOP final table. Poker had 2.1 million viewers and college hockey averaged ~80,000. Sports Business Daily printed the top sports programs from FF weekend. The lowest rating on their list was a .3 rating for NBC's coverage of the Paralympics from Vancouver. That means that the championship game drew fewer than 300,000 viewers. Would anyone be surprised if it drew less than half that?

Ratings for hockey suck. Pro hockey ratings are pathetic and college hockey ratings are even worse.

In the past, Minnesota has drawn decent ratings for the FF. But so has Michigan and Boston teams.... The 2002 Championship was was seen by 899,000 households for a total of 2.3 million viewers. If this past years viewership was under 300,000 people even with a Boston team playing, that is pretty sad.


My source for 2002 numbers:
http://www.uscho.com/news/college-hockey/id,4410/2002FFSetsNewTVRecords.html

 

[4four4]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

In the past, Minnesota has drawn decent ratings for the FF. But so has Michigan and Boston teams.... The 2002 Championship was was seen by 899,000 households for a total of 2.3 million viewers. If this past years viewership was under 300,000 people even with a Boston team playing, that is pretty sad.


My source for 2002 numbers:
http://www.uscho.com/news/college-hockey/id,4410/2002FFSetsNewTVRecords.html

The university of Minnesota owns the top two highest rated college hockey games of all time. In all honesty comparing Boston with as many schools in the Boston metro area to Minnesota might be tough.

 

[Priceless]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

In the past, Minnesota has drawn decent ratings for the FF. But so has Michigan and Boston teams.... The 2002 Championship was was seen by 899,000 households for a total of 2.3 million viewers. If this past years viewership was under 300,000 people even with a Boston team playing, that is pretty sad.


My source for 2002 numbers:
http://www.uscho.com/news/college-hockey/id,4410/2002FFSetsNewTVRecords.html

The Maine-Minnesota game has by far the highest ratings of any college hockey game. The next year New Hampshire-Minnesota drew fewer than 900,000 viewers. (Obviously, Maine is a ratings driver ) The most recent numbers are for the BC-Notre Dame game in 2008, which drew just under 1.1 million viewers. They translate that as a .4 rating.

The 2006 game between BC-Wisconsin had 1,226,820 viewers which was a .4 rating. According to the Sports Business Daily list, the game did .3 or below. A .3 rating would be in the 800-900,000 range. A .2 rating is in the 450-650,000 range.

Link

 

[Happy]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I thought it was about student athletes? Obviously for a few small programs "they're athletes are going pro in something other than sports." It's about Money so I think the Big Ten has their conference and leave the other 53 to play for an NC$$ championship. Just like football. The Big Ten can pit 5th and 6th place in the Totino's Frozen Pizza Bowl. 3rd and 4th in the welch's frozen concentrate bowl. 1st and second in the Klondike bar bowl. F@%k the Big Ten.

oh come on, it's not like some now-dead neo-nazi used his dirty $100,000,000 to build a library or anything to help learning in Grand Forks, is it?

 

[CHFAN222]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Going by the basketball league...

You have:
UConn
Providence
Notre Dame

With quasi-legit possibilities (however slim) in:
Pittsburgh
Villanova
Syracuse

And pipe dream possibilities in:
Marquette
DePaul
Rutgers
Seton Hall
West Virginia
Georgetown

Ladies and gentlemen... put on your tin foil hats. It's conspiracy time!

Seton Hall already plays its varsity basketball games at the Prudential Center and Club hockey games there so I'm sure they wouldn't mind varsity hockey there as well

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Seton Hall already plays its varsity basketball games at the Prudential Center and Club hockey games there so I'm sure they wouldn't mind varsity hockey there as well

Maybe they'd be able to outdraw the Devils...

 

[Frank the Tank]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Also, I don't want it lost that he's completely wrong on his first point. BTN does get first dibs. He's self-admittedly not plugged into college hockey yet seems to be an expert on the big ten's intentions with hockey.

I'm no expert, about as far from it as you can get, but those in the know tell me the BTN gets those rights and FSN picks up the rest.

He also seems quite ignorant on exactly how ****ty the ratings are for college hockey outside of Minnesota and Michigan. WHo is it that has that in their signature? Priceless?

Also, his second point is completely ridiculous. People are not going to pay $3 a game for even a small chunk of the season just to watch it on a computer screen. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

On an unrelated note: One of the big money makers for the WCHA is the tournament. It's only successful because of the extremely high density of hockey schools in the region surrounding the X. Cut the teams by 40%, force air travel/hotels/vacation on the fans, and it's a recipe for a relatively empty arena for a conference tournament.

Edit: SOrry for the scattered points. It's late and I'm tired.

Your sources supposedly in the know are wrong re: BTN rights. Those TV rights are with the CCHA and WCHA - please see the quotes from the BTN's president and the complications regarding hockey rights:

http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/other/index.ssf/2008/06/more_with_big_ten_network_pres.html

IF the Big Ten sponsors hockey as a sport, though, then those TV rights automatically vest in the Big Ten conference. That's why whether a BTHC exists or not has such a large impact on the TV situation.

Are ratings bad for college hockey outside of Minnesota and Michigan? Sure. However, if showing hockey gives the BTN the ability to raise its subscriber fee amounts in only Minnesota and Michigan, then it will more than pay for itself. Note that the BTN's subscriber fees are done on a market-by-market basis depending upon demand - the average within the Big Ten footprint is about $.70 per month per subscriber, but it's higher in places like Columbus and Madison (and Lincoln starting next year) compared to a "weaker" Big Ten market like Philadelphia. (When I say subscriber fees, that means that amount is paid by every single person that has cable in that market, whether they watch the BTN or not.) All it takes for the BTHC to be a money-maker is to be able to raise the subscriber fees in Michigan and Minnesota by a few cents per month, which is actually a fairly reasonable proposition. Any financial benefit in Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania or the other Big Ten states would be gravy.

As for the online streaming criticism, have you even looked at the BTN online streaming site? People are already paying money to watch volleyball, women's basketball, softball and baseball on the BTN online site, and the popularity of hockey compared to those sports is much greater. If the market is there for less popular sports, then the market is going to be there for hockey. With online hockey broadcasts, the production costs are actually fairly low because you can get by with one camera. It would not take that many online PPV buyers to make money on each game.

Once again, I'm not an expert on college hockey itself, but I can provide a lot of insight about how the Big Ten and BTN work. You can check who has referred to my blog throughout the Big Ten expansion discussions (i.e. ESPN, major newspapers in Big Ten markets and Texas, etc.) - I'm not speaking in a vacuum here.

 

[moose97]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

As for the online streaming criticism, have you even looked at the BTN online streaming site? People are already paying money to watch volleyball, women's basketball, softball and baseball on the BTN online site, and the popularity of hockey compared to those sports is much greater. If the market is there for less popular sports, then the market is going to be there for hockey. With online hockey broadcasts, the production costs are actually fairly low because you can get by with one camera. It would not take that many online PPV buyers to make money on each game.

I think the thing you're missing is that people in Minnesota, who are used to watching 95% of the current games live on basic cable, aren't going to watch games PPV on the internet. The folks in East Lansing, Ann Arbor, Columbus and Happy Valley may, but that's just because they aren't used to getting their games televised as it is. That's whyvolleyball, women's bball, softball and baseball fans are thrilled with online broadcasts - they haven't had TV of their sport, so online streaming is a step up. In Minnesota, it will be a huge step backwards. Heck, Bemidji State will surpass the U of Minn for the best TV contract if that's the Gophs go all streaming (or even half), and it won't even be close. How long before Minnesotan hockey fans decide to just watch 1) the Wild, 2) the Beavers, 4) another local college team or 4) their local high school team?

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I think the thing you're missing is that people in Minnesota, who are used to watching 95% of the current games live on basic cable, aren't going to watch games PPV on the internet. The folks in East Lansing, Ann Arbor, Columbus and Happy Valley may, but that's just because they aren't used to getting their games televised as it is. That's whyvolleyball, women's bball, softball and baseball fans are thrilled with online broadcasts - they haven't had TV of their sport, so online streaming is a step up. In Minnesota, it will be a huge step backwards. Heck, Bemidji State will surpass the U of Minn for the best TV contract if that's the Gophs go all streaming (or even half), and it won't even be close. How long before Minnesotan hockey fans decide to just watch 1) the Wild, 2) the Beavers, 4) another local college team or 4) their local high school team?

Yeah, would have to think that for at least the local Minnesota area, they would have to at least broadcast the games on TV. Gopher fans that are further away, say like in Florida would still likely tolerate going online to view the games.