Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

[Almington]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

No "Prof" ... you don't get it. How stupid would someone be to suggest that a team would give up home games to go play road games so they could get home games? That's how stupid Almington thinks I am and apparently how stupid you think I am. Which in reality; just shows how stupid you and Almington are. Thanks for playing.

I don't think you are stupid. I just think that you don't understand, not that you are incapable of understanding. I am beginning to question if you want to understand (or would even admit if you did).

My point is just that going to play an AK school in NC games has zero to do with how many HOME games a team could schedule if they want, just that it increases the TOTAL games a team can schedule.

You did a remarkable job of twisting that into an attack on the scheduling practice of the B10 schools.

 

[RITProf]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

No "Prof" ... you don't get it. How stupid would someone be to suggest that a team would give up home games to go play road games so they could get home games? That's how stupid Almington thinks I am and apparently how stupid you think I am. Which in reality; just shows how stupid you and Almington are. Thanks for playing.

OK, I'll try one last time.

I start with a normal 34-game season, some of which are road games (N of which are home games). If I take two of those road games and go to Alaska, I can add two home games. The result is 36 games with N+2 home games.

Option 2 is I start with a normal 34-game season and decide I want two more home games. So instead of traveling somewhere (doesn't matter where), I schedule two more home games and two fewer road games. The result is 34 games with N+2 home games.

Either way I get the same number of home games (N+2). Going to Alaska gets me two more games ... in Alaska. That's why those games are considered exempt from the maximum allowed. For those wanting 36 games, the trip to Alaska can make that happen, but for those only wanting two more home games, they don't need to go to Alaska to do it.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Says who? Give me a break. I doubt any WCHA will vote to have the final five in Grand Forks. We are more likely to see the games held Pepsi Center before the Ralp.

It really is all about $$. North Dakota could sell out the Ralph at $200/package. That's $2.3 million. If the X is getting less than 11k (my random number that i said it would take to move the tournament from the X), that's about $1.75m at $160/package (current prices...basically). In a 10 team WCHA, that is an extra $50k/school by having it at the Ralph. On top of that, I'm sure REA would cut the conference a sweet deal on rental/concessions/parking. You could be looking at generating over $2.5 million at the Ralph. Given that, the schools would be looking at generating $50-75k more at the Ralph than at the X.

Pepsi Center is really not a very good alternative. Milwaukee would probably make more sense. IF Denver and CC made the Final Five, you could look at maybe 7-9k in attendance. If one or both miss, you're looking at 3-5k...maybe less.

While the X is a somewhat more central location, it really isn't all that different than the Ralph when you take out Minnesota and Wisconsin.

If it came down to it, I would be willing to bet that the WCHA teams would pick Grand Forks over the X if the X was failing to bring in the dough. $$ talks.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I don't think you are stupid. I just think that you don't understand, not that you are incapable of understanding. I am beginning to question if you want to understand (or would even admit if you did).

Oh I fully understand your irrelevant point. No school is going to give up home games to play road games in order to get the same number of home games back. That's what YOU thought I was talking about. Why you interpreted the Exemption Rule with that spurious garbage is a complete mystery which I don't care to understand. So yeah ... there's that.

My point is just that going to play an AK school in NC games has zero to do with how many HOME games a team could schedule if they want, just that it increases the TOTAL games a team can schedule.

See above.

You did a remarkable job of twisting that into an attack on the scheduling practice of the B10 schools.

No twisting was necessary. Therefore it's unremarkable.

It is remarkable however to think that Wisconsin (which is arguably the richest Athletic Department amongst D1 hockey schools) would be so arrogant (yep ... the word is highly overused here but nonetheless entirely appropriate in this instance) to completely disregard the common interest and consider scheduling every single one of it's non-conference games in it's own barn just because it can. So yeah ... I remarked.

Even more remarkable would be the programs that might so easily bow to such hegemony and visit the Kohl Center. Should my program at any time in the future actually deign to show up at that arena the UAA AD will hear loudly from me all the moral reasons against doing so (though I doubt my railing will necessarily effect their choice). And no doubt plenty of others will be so happy to get the BADgers on their schedule that they'll gladly bend over to their Big 10 overlords and get buggered. The status quo refrain of "that's how it is" is unsatisfactory.

Eff Wisconsin and Minnesota if they won't travel to other schools. If other schools don't reciprocate by refusing to travel there in return ... they're fools.

Your second quote appears to be hypocrisy to me. Hockey isn't "something more" to you at least in this instance.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

The lesser programs bow to us because they need money. It's as simple as that. Without the financial enticements offered to them by the likes of Minnesota, they would be even deeper in the red. Should they ever become self sufficient, you would see this sort of scheduling quickly come to an end.

 

[Red Cows]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Well, you can officially remove The University of Nebraska from any Big 10 hockey talk for the foreseeable future, perhaps ever:

http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/osborne_no_plans_for_hockey.html

 

[Biddco]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Ex6s-Ny6YVI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[moose97]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Well, you can officially remove The University of Nebraska from any Big 10 hockey talk for the foreseeable future, perhaps ever:

http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/osborne_no_plans_for_hockey.html

Um, no. Tom Osborne is 74 years old and isn't going to be AD forever. Plus the new basketball arena is going to be set up for ice/hockey.

And to edit my statement, that new arena will make Nebraska the only B1G school with a D-I ready hockey rink (under their control) at the ready, no? All other schools both would have to renovate, build new or lease something local like Northwestern with the Sears Center...

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

f it came down to it, I would be willing to bet that the WCHA teams would pick Grand Forks over the X if the X was failing to bring in the dough. $$ talks.

It may yet happen. But I can imagine most in the WCHA would not like it as it would signal a change in the conference...and I would bet it results in being a blow for other schools hoping to recruit Minnesotans.

Eff Wisconsin and Minnesota if they won't travel to other schools. If other schools don't reciprocate by refusing to travel there in return ... they're fools.

That's one of the big side effects of the BTHC...don't expect Minnesota or Wisconsin to be coming to your town (and your is used very loosely).

 

[state of hockey]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Will this get Illinois off their duffs and start up hockey? Who knows. I hope so, I would really like an eight team conference at some point.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

It may yet happen. But I can imagine most in the WCHA would not like it as it would signal a change in the conference...and I would bet it results in being a blow for other schools hoping to recruit Minnesotans.

I completely agree that most wouldn't necessarily like it. North Dakota doesn't like letting Minnesota play the night game every Final Five, but they vote for it all the time. It is what is in the best interests of the conference.

I'm not really sure how having the Final Five in Grand Forks or a diminished Final Five at the X would be too much of a different for recruiting in Minnesota. Most schools have extensive connections and pipelines to a variety of places in Minnesota as it is. That isn't going to change.

An interesting thing that at least I hadn't seen brought up yet is the TV availability of the Final Five when Minnesota and Wisconsin leave. Would Fox Sports Rocky Mountain cover it? Would FSSN (Fighting Sioux Sports Network) cover it? I would doubt that Fox Sports North would cover it, but they might as I'm sure the Big Ten Network is going to want to cover the Big Ten Tournament.

 

[Mike Rane]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Minnesota should play all of its NC games at home. Why the hell would they want to go to 95% of the other arenas anyways?

They might be willing to go to BC, BU, UNH, or UND for a NC series. But that's about it.

So in a 34-game schedule, Big Ten schools will play 24 home games, and 10 road games. Not a very balanced equation. Does the NCAA have any rules about the home to away games ratio?

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Um, no. Tom Osborne is 74 years old and isn't going to be AD forever. Plus the new basketball arena is going to be set up for ice/hockey.

And to edit my statement, that new arena will make Nebraska the only B1G school with a D-I ready hockey rink (under their control) at the ready, no? All other schools both would have to renovate, build new or lease something local like Northwestern with the Sears Center...

Of course Osborne won't be there forever but in these times the lack of funding will get worse before it gets better and his points were all valid such as having to deal with Title IX. They didn't say it specifically but I bet there are people lobbying harder for other sports to be added before hockey.

 

[Red Cows]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Um, no. Tom Osborne is 74 years old and isn't going to be AD forever. Plus the new basketball arena is going to be set up for ice/hockey.

And to edit my statement, that new arena will make Nebraska the only B1G school with a D-I ready hockey rink (under their control) at the ready, no? All other schools both would have to renovate, build new or lease something local like Northwestern with the Sears Center...

I'm all ears as to how Nebraska gets around all the issues with it that Osborne raised in his interview, then.

I don't think that money, in and of itself, would be the problem. But, when you throw Title 9 compliance issues on top of the money availability issue, which, in and of itself makes money even more of an issue, I don't see how this happens unless someone comes along and endows hockey, maybe.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

So in a 34-game schedule, Big Ten schools will play 24 home games, and 10 road games. Not a very balanced equation. Does the NCAA have any rules about the home to away games ratio?

Doubtful. Schools in the bowl subdivision routinely stack their schedules with home non conference dates, so 2/3 of their schedule is played at home - which is roughly the ratio we're looking at with 24 of 34 being at home.

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

So in a 34-game schedule, Big Ten schools will play 24 home games, and 10 road games. Not a very balanced equation. Does the NCAA have any rules about the home to away games ratio?

Here in Buckeyeland our local newspaper, the Columbus Dispatch reported today a 20 game conference schedule with all teams playing each other 4 times - two home, two away. Here's the link. http://www.dispatch.com/live/conten...osu-would-join-big-ten-in-hockey.html?sid=101
Coach Osiecki reported liking the idea of a Big Ten Conference. D*mn, and I really liked the guy up to this point!

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

I'm all ears as to how Nebraska gets around all the issues with it that Osborne raised in his interview, then.

I don't think that money, in and of itself, would be the problem. But, when you throw Title 9 compliance issues on top of the money availability issue, which, in and of itself makes money even more of an issue, I don't see how this happens unless someone comes along and endows hockey, maybe.

Right now they would need someone to come along and donate a big chunk of money to make it happen. What will be interesting to see is when the BTHC starts, if it brings in some serious money. If that is the case, Nebraska I'm sure will be more than interested. Along with that, it is important (speaking only for Nebraska) that a women's BTHC forms. That way, you can create both a men's and women's hockey team, which SHOULD comply with Title IX. When Penn State joins, only 4 schools play women's hockey (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio State and Penn State). If either of the Michigan schools join, then Nebraska could be the 6th and start a Women's BTHC. Also a possibility is that another school jumps on ship like Illinois or Indiana.

 

[moose97]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Of course Osborne won't be there forever but in these times the lack of funding will get worse before it gets better and his points were all valid such as having to deal with Title IX. They didn't say it specifically but I bet there are people lobbying harder for other sports to be added before hockey.

I'm all ears as to how Nebraska gets around all the issues with it that Osborne raised in his interview, then.

I don't think that money, in and of itself, would be the problem. But, when you throw Title 9 compliance issues on top of the money availability issue, which, in and of itself makes money even more of an issue, I don't see how this happens unless someone comes along and endows hockey, maybe.

I didn't say it was easy, but to dismiss it out of hand because Osborne says it won't happen is short-sighted. Folks are speculating about Illinois and Indiana and those schools have twice the problems of Nebraska since they have facility issues. All I'm saying is that, either Osborne could change his mind, or a new AD could come in and start-up hockey and it would be less of a cost than for just about any other B1G school because of the new arena.

 

[GB Puck Fan]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

LOL. Oh ... I didn't know you were talking about a team that plays ALL it's NC games at home. Gee. I wonder how many teams do that?

And is that what you're claiming Wisconsin plans to do? Play ALL of it's non-conference games at home? Are they so mighty? Lovely.

See my post about 6/8 pages back...

One of my concerns about the BTHC is that Wisconsin (and others) will do just that. Look at what they do for football now, and to some extent, basketball.

Unless Wisconsin football decides to schedule someone of such significance - i.e. a Pac 10 team that can demand a home and home series - Wisconsin simply doesn't do it. 4 of the 5 non-conference games are at Camp Randall against whoever they can get to come in. They expect to have a full house, beat them and get the wins they need to be bowl eligible, even if they go 3-5 in the Big Ten.

In hoops, the UW men played at one Florida tourney, at UNLV and at Marquette. The other 7 non-con games were at home. Of the three road games, Marquette is an in-state "equal" rival that can demand a home and home. (UWGB has an 8 in Madison/2 in GB deal, for example). And I can't explain Las Vegas, other than it's Vegas.

Translate it to hockey. They've got to play 10 BTHC road games. I agree with other posters that they would keep road non-con games to a minimum. I can see a two-year deal home/home set with NoDak. And maybe Denver because of Gwoz connection. But Tech, Bemidji, Mankato, St. Cloud for sure -and maybe even Duluth - I don't think see the Badgers come to town. If those teams want to say they play Wisconsin, come to the Kohl Center. If not, I'd bet that LSSU, Ferris, Western and Huntsville - not to mention some eastern teams - would be glad to come to Madison and get a check.

Arrogance? Maybe. Certainly it is maximizing one of the three revenue sports without raising ticket prices. Just increase the number of games. And with two sets of season tickets (yes, there's overlap with Fri/Sat, but not totally) it's not as cumbersome.

And I bet Minnesota, Michigan and Michigan State can do the same thing.

So, besides loss of traditional rivals, I do think this is how the BTHC hurts college hockey. And sure, you can say "fine, we won't play there." But when the check Bucky or Goldy writes is dangled in front of your athletic department bean counter, good luck.

And I do think that's sad (and I'm not saying I agree with it), but its not outside the realm of possibility.

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference Pt II - The Exodus

Ohio State and Michigan may be the big rivals in football but certainly not hockey. Michigan - Michigan State is the rivalry in this sport so that won't affect them. Ohio State and Miami were getting a pretty good in-state rivalry going. Even if we still play them as a non conference match-up it just won't seem quite the same. Much more satisfying when you knock off a conference opponent.