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 Hockey Conference
- Thread starter UNH09
- Start date
- Status
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
1) The non-Ivy ECAC teams have a lot of spots open as well, and they manage just fine in this environment.
2) The rump WCHA and CCHA may not keep the same schedules in place if there's a BTHC split, so as to afford their member schools more opportunity to slide in games with the newly freed BTHC non-con slots.
3) As others have said, people will actually want to play the Big Tenners. They will have no shortage of buyers.
Can someone explain to me how 6 big ten teams are going to schedule 14 or 16 non conference games if all of the current league's play the same amount of conference games as they play now?That is of course assuming non of the conferences split up if/when a BTHC is formed.
1) The non-Ivy ECAC teams have a lot of spots open as well, and they manage just fine in this environment.
2) The rump WCHA and CCHA may not keep the same schedules in place if there's a BTHC split, so as to afford their member schools more opportunity to slide in games with the newly freed BTHC non-con slots.
3) As others have said, people will actually want to play the Big Tenners. They will have no shortage of buyers.
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
The Big Ten schools will have no problems filling a non-conference schedule regardless of whether they enter into a scheduling alliance, regardless of whether any conferences reduce their conference games, and regardless of whether other conferences split up. They will have no problem for the simple reason that everyone will want to schedule them. No chance teams like North Dakota, St Cloud, Mankato, Duluth say to Minnesota and Wisconsin "sorry, no room on our schedules for you." If anything, it will be the other way around.Can someone explain to me how 6 big ten teams are going to schedule 14 or 16 non conference games if all of the current league's play the same amount of conference games as they play now?
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
Repeat after me:
College hockey plays too many conference games.
College hockey plays too many conference games.
College hockey plays too many conference games.
Having all the conferences play shorter schedules in general, and more non-conference games would be a good thing.
"Extra" revenue is relative, of course. Extra compared to what? And ratings matter to some degree, but the BTN is essentially talking about taking nothing (re-runs) and replacing it with something (live hockey programming). Something is more than nothing, and even if the ratings are low, they'll see a net increase in revenue.
There would be questions that need to be resolved, of course. I'd imagine that each of the schools that individually sponsor hockey would want some sort of direct compensation since they're the ones generating the content. The Big Ten as a whole could benefit from the overall added exposure for the network, but there would need to be some negotiation on the details. That said, no other hockey teams have this kind of a platform to make use of.
joecct said:
Repeat after me:
College hockey plays too many conference games.
College hockey plays too many conference games.
College hockey plays too many conference games.
Having all the conferences play shorter schedules in general, and more non-conference games would be a good thing.
"Extra" revenue is relative, of course. Extra compared to what? And ratings matter to some degree, but the BTN is essentially talking about taking nothing (re-runs) and replacing it with something (live hockey programming). Something is more than nothing, and even if the ratings are low, they'll see a net increase in revenue.
There would be questions that need to be resolved, of course. I'd imagine that each of the schools that individually sponsor hockey would want some sort of direct compensation since they're the ones generating the content. The Big Ten as a whole could benefit from the overall added exposure for the network, but there would need to be some negotiation on the details. That said, no other hockey teams have this kind of a platform to make use of.
aparch
Acetaminamerican
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
The CCHA's programming on Fox Sports Detroit is mainly comprised of Big Ten teams. Hell, of the 10 games aired (with known teams listed), EIGHT were hosted by Michigan or Michigan State. Minnesota has Fox Sports North air most every game.
Someone's making money on these television deals, with primarily BigTen teams being the showcased product. Obviously the BigTen Network wants to tap into that pie.
The CCHA's programming on Fox Sports Detroit is mainly comprised of Big Ten teams. Hell, of the 10 games aired (with known teams listed), EIGHT were hosted by Michigan or Michigan State. Minnesota has Fox Sports North air most every game.
Someone's making money on these television deals, with primarily BigTen teams being the showcased product. Obviously the BigTen Network wants to tap into that pie.
ExileOnDaytonStreet
Drunkard
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
Not if Jason Biggs gets it first (decade old cultural references FTW!!!)
Not if Jason Biggs gets it first (decade old cultural references FTW!!!)
ExileOnDaytonStreet
Drunkard
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
The other side of that coin is that something is also more expensive to produce than nothing. You're probably right that it would still increase revenue, but I have my doubts that it will be a significant increase. I'll compare it to the rumors that College Hockey Inc. has supposedly contacted a LOT of schools about maybe adding a varsity program: I'll believe it when I see it.
The other side of that coin is that something is also more expensive to produce than nothing. You're probably right that it would still increase revenue, but I have my doubts that it will be a significant increase. I'll compare it to the rumors that College Hockey Inc. has supposedly contacted a LOT of schools about maybe adding a varsity program: I'll believe it when I see it.
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
Again - these games are already being produced, for the most part. At UW, they already do in-house production just for the Scoreboard. There's also the WPT replays, etc. Part of the investment in the BTN is that all of the equipment to do this is in house already, the costs of doing so aren't that high.
And for expansion - what's hard to believe that College Hockey Inc has contacted schools about adding hockey? Contacting them is the easy part...
Again - these games are already being produced, for the most part. At UW, they already do in-house production just for the Scoreboard. There's also the WPT replays, etc. Part of the investment in the BTN is that all of the equipment to do this is in house already, the costs of doing so aren't that high.
And for expansion - what's hard to believe that College Hockey Inc has contacted schools about adding hockey? Contacting them is the easy part...
ExileOnDaytonStreet
Drunkard
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
Point being: if there were plenty of money to be made for Wisconsin games on TV, we'd probably be seeing more of it already. Things are obviously more favorable in Minneapolis and Ann Arbor, but overall it remains an unproven commodity.
Well, I think you know where I was going. I'll believe that [insert school here] is adding a team when I see it.
Perhaps part of my sketpticism comes from looking at UW's current TV situation- which might be the worst of the existing Big Ten TV deals outside of Ohio State's. We can't even get FS-Wisconsin to do more than pick up opposing teams' feeds (even for home games against Minnesota, if FSW picks it up, they're usually using the Gopher feed). WPT replays at night are nice, but one would imagine that those aren't exactly blockbuster deals.
Point being: if there were plenty of money to be made for Wisconsin games on TV, we'd probably be seeing more of it already. Things are obviously more favorable in Minneapolis and Ann Arbor, but overall it remains an unproven commodity.
Right.
Well, I think you know where I was going. I'll believe that [insert school here] is adding a team when I see it.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
They can point a camera at the wall and show paint drying, too. That doesn't mean it's more profitable or will get better ratings than reruns.
They can point a camera at the wall and show paint drying, too. That doesn't mean it's more profitable or will get better ratings than reruns.
scsutommyboy
Frozen four or Bust!!
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
I agree with you. I just think it is funny that most people on here are screaming bloody murder about all this when non of us know what is going to happen. Even if the BTHC does form it doesn't have to mean the end of college hockey and the WCHA is now a mid major.
I agree with you. I just think it is funny that most people on here are screaming bloody murder about all this when non of us know what is going to happen. Even if the BTHC does form it doesn't have to mean the end of college hockey and the WCHA is now a mid major.
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
Here's what you're missing - more money than what?
FSN-WI thinks they can get more money from the Bucks than from Badger Hockey. Ok, I can understand that.
The BTN's choice is very different - can I get more money from a rerun of Big Ten Icons? Or from a live Badger hockey game?
The BTN's costs are also much different - FSN has to pay some sort of rights fee, has to pay to produce the games, etc. BTN has a lower production cost and pays nothing for the rights, since the rights holder also owns the TV network. The BTN invested in TV production equipment in many of the BT arenas. The stuff is there, it's not hard to do.
I brought up WPT not because of ratings or revenue, but because the mere existence of those telecasts means someone is producing the games.
Here's what you're missing - more money than what?
FSN-WI thinks they can get more money from the Bucks than from Badger Hockey. Ok, I can understand that.
The BTN's choice is very different - can I get more money from a rerun of Big Ten Icons? Or from a live Badger hockey game?
The BTN's costs are also much different - FSN has to pay some sort of rights fee, has to pay to produce the games, etc. BTN has a lower production cost and pays nothing for the rights, since the rights holder also owns the TV network. The BTN invested in TV production equipment in many of the BT arenas. The stuff is there, it's not hard to do.
I brought up WPT not because of ratings or revenue, but because the mere existence of those telecasts means someone is producing the games.
scsutommyboy
Frozen four or Bust!!
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
It has nothing to do with not wanting to play them. How do the the Big Ten teams fill 14 to 16 games when other teams only have 6 open games and most prime weekends are taken with conference games? The NCAA has rules about when you start the season. during the season teams have a certaina moutn of time off. Any given team only has 4 or 5 open weekends they can play non conference games. They will never fill a entire schedule with that many non conference games unless the other leagues reduce their schedule....
It has nothing to do with not wanting to play them. How do the the Big Ten teams fill 14 to 16 games when other teams only have 6 open games and most prime weekends are taken with conference games? The NCAA has rules about when you start the season. during the season teams have a certaina moutn of time off. Any given team only has 4 or 5 open weekends they can play non conference games. They will never fill a entire schedule with that many non conference games unless the other leagues reduce their schedule....
moose97
Well-known member
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
Again, look at the CHA - specifically look at BSU and Niagara over the last ~ 10 years. It can work...
Again, look at the CHA - specifically look at BSU and Niagara over the last ~ 10 years. It can work...
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
$20 MM/yr is about accurate for the total payout to each Integer school inclusive of both their BTN return and their money from other deals (ESPN for football, various payers for basketball).
No, the $9 to $10 MM has been confirmed via FOIA requests after some healthy skepticism about the $20 MM that Integer shills in the media were throwing around unsourced.
$20 MM/yr is about accurate for the total payout to each Integer school inclusive of both their BTN return and their money from other deals (ESPN for football, various payers for basketball).
scsutommyboy
Frozen four or Bust!!
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
That's easy... the Integer teams fill those slots by numbering six teams to the 14 to 16 of the other teams.
That's easy... the Integer teams fill those slots by numbering six teams to the 14 to 16 of the other teams.
moose97
Well-known member
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
You're seriously going to compare UMinn to BSU for drawing teams to their building? You said that no one could fill out a schedule needing 14 OOC games a year, and I showed that it is quite possible. Besides, SCSU, NoDak, UMD and MSUM have played at BSU fairly regularly, with the Gophs even coming once... You really think Minnesota would do worse in drawing teams to their barn?
not if you wnat people to travel to your barn.........
You're seriously going to compare UMinn to BSU for drawing teams to their building? You said that no one could fill out a schedule needing 14 OOC games a year, and I showed that it is quite possible. Besides, SCSU, NoDak, UMD and MSUM have played at BSU fairly regularly, with the Gophs even coming once... You really think Minnesota would do worse in drawing teams to their barn?
ExileOnDaytonStreet
Drunkard
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
Your point noting the (likely) low production costs is well taken. It also gains steam if the BTN has stuff in place, and requires less of a traveling road crew to produce the games. If those production costs remain low enough and if they are able to get more advertising revenue through hockey (two notable ifs in my book, especially the latter), then yes the answer is simple.
But low production costs are still production costs. It is still more expensive than a rerun, which literally costs nothing and still gets some ad revenue. It's the same principle behind why ESPN keeps showing replays of WSOP tournaments instead of other live sporting events, even ones that might get more ratings. They get good enough ratings (and thus: ad revenue) for poker to justify its dirt cheap production cost.
Your point noting the (likely) low production costs is well taken. It also gains steam if the BTN has stuff in place, and requires less of a traveling road crew to produce the games. If those production costs remain low enough and if they are able to get more advertising revenue through hockey (two notable ifs in my book, especially the latter), then yes the answer is simple.
But low production costs are still production costs. It is still more expensive than a rerun, which literally costs nothing and still gets some ad revenue. It's the same principle behind why ESPN keeps showing replays of WSOP tournaments instead of other live sporting events, even ones that might get more ratings. They get good enough ratings (and thus: ad revenue) for poker to justify its dirt cheap production cost.
Last edited:
Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference
Yes - as far as production costs go, a road trip within the Big Ten is not really a road trip.
The other thing to remember is that the Big Ten Network has an institutional commitment to show olympic sports programming, too - they're producing live events that don't have high revenue potential. They're not ESPN, they're not selling out to the highest and best programming, as they still have an obligation to the rest of the Big Ten's mission. Hence, I don't see the Poker phenomenon as a real threat to the BTN producing live events.
(Furthermore, since the Poker craze slowed down a bit, I think ratings have fallen off quite a bit...)
Yes - as far as production costs go, a road trip within the Big Ten is not really a road trip.
The other thing to remember is that the Big Ten Network has an institutional commitment to show olympic sports programming, too - they're producing live events that don't have high revenue potential. They're not ESPN, they're not selling out to the highest and best programming, as they still have an obligation to the rest of the Big Ten's mission. Hence, I don't see the Poker phenomenon as a real threat to the BTN producing live events.
(Furthermore, since the Poker craze slowed down a bit, I think ratings have fallen off quite a bit...)
- Status