Big Ten > NCHC

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Well, given that the seven B1G teams lost six players to early departure before this season, while the 8 NCHC teams lost 12 players to early departure before this season, yet the NCHC has 6 of it's teams in the top 16 of the pwr, and all 8 in the top 20 of the pwr, it doesn't look like it's having too terrible of an effect on the NCHC this year. But then again, we're not the ones making excuses about early departures.

As the fan of a team who went into the NCAA tourney as a #1 seed only to lose in the first round to the #4 seed, I wouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't assume a Yale/Union/Providence won't knock you out early.

And I'm not making excuses, just stating facts. The Big 4 of the B1G are NHL factories, and blow away the NCHC in that regard.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Well, given that the seven B1G teams lost six players to early departure before this season, while the 8 NCHC teams lost 12 players to early departure before this season, yet the NCHC has 6 of it's teams in the top 16 of the pwr, and all 8 in the top 20 of the pwr, it doesn't look like it's having too terrible of an effect on the NCHC this year. But then again, we're not the ones making excuses about early departures.

Btw, as a fan of the old WCHA, having 6 teams in the PWR Top 16 this early in the season doesn't mean 6 teams will make the NCAA tourney, esp when 2 of then are rated #15 and #16. For one, those 6 teams have to play each other and the other 2 NCHC teams and most likely at least one, if not 2, of those 6 teams will not make it into the Top 13-14 or whatever they need to be to make the tourney. And getting 5-6 teams into the tourney is nice, but that won't guarantee one of them will win a Natl Title.

If the tourney started today, both the B1G and NCHC would get 4 teams in with the odds being SCSU vs Notre Dame in the final.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Btw, as a fan of the old WCHA, having 6 teams in the PWR Top 16 this early in the season doesn't mean 6 teams will make the NCAA tourney, esp when 2 of then are rated #15 and #16. For one, those 6 teams have to play each other and the other 2 NCHC teams and most likely at least one, if not 2, of those 6 teams will not make it into the Top 13-14 or whatever they need to be to make the tourney. And getting 5-6 teams into the tourney is nice, but that won't guarantee one of them will win a Natl Title.

If the tourney started today, both the B1G and NCHC would get 4 teams in with the odds being SCSU vs Notre Dame in the final.

We've already done 6. We're aiming for 7.

I hope you're right about Notre Dame. I always think it's a shame when a conference regular season champion can't even make the tourney.

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Well Stratus, tiny little schools HAVE TO have good relations with their town/community, because what they do/the benefits of what they do, only in limited ways, benefits anything or anyone beyond the town or community they are located in, and rarely does anyone outside of that community care about their sports teams, either.

In contrast, the B1G schools WHO PLAY HOCKEY, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan St & Ohio St are not tiny little niche schools who need to kiss the butts of the town/city they are located in. Why? Because the community I said that they represent was entire states and the community they serve goes well beyond even their entire states. Their states are their primary focus, but indirectly their impact goes well beyond the states they represent. The B1G schools do BILLIONS of dollars of research every year that benefits not just their local communities, and not only their state, and not only the country as a whole, but the whole world. If you ranked conferences according to their research dollars, the 2nd best conference would only pull in HALF as much as the B1G pulls in. And these schools train and educate so many doctors and lawyers and businessmen and teachers, etc., that their entire states benefit as well as many communities outside of their states, and their alumni bases are so large that they are spread out all over the country.

And I'd bet that YOU PERSONALLY have benefitted in a very significant way by the contributions of at least one, if not several of the B1G schools that you seem to despise. Btw, 3 of the 4 schools you listed as examples are not land grant schools and JH and ND are not part of the B1G outside of playing in the B1G in just one sport.

The amount of false statements in your posts, and the amount of backtracking is truly comical.

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Well, yes, things are improving for the 8 teams in the NCHC recently, which is reflected in the # of early signings of NCHC players recently, but I'm looking at a wider scope and longer term trends.

"Sure the NCHC is better NOW, but back 20 years ago is what is really important."

And also, trying to include Notre Dame, if you did, and PSU is not really fair in light of the point I am trying to make. PSU only suffered 3 early losses during that time frame, so that would be 36 early departures for the 5 B1G teams with long histories of hockey from 2012-13 season to now. That's 7.2 per team compared to 46 for the 8 NCHC teams which is 5.75 per team.

7.2 > 5.75

"PSU has only been around since the formation of the B1G and was in fact the reason for its formation. To include them wouldn't be fair, because it undermines my already debunked argument. If you will look at the data I have cherry-picked, you will see that I can select specific teams from the B1G, while including ALL of the teams from the NCHC, and manipulate the numbers to make me right"

But the gap is closing, and may have reversed by now? But if that is true, then I predict it will effect how well teams from the NCHC do in the future when their better recruits start leaving earlier and earlier and it disrupts things for those programs.

"Even if I am wrong, eventually I will be right, despite having no hypothesis for why that will be the case. Let's see how the NCHC teams like North Dakota, Denver and St. Cloud do in the future once their players start leaving early."

Because there is also a difference between some Jr leaving a team with little hope of doing anything his Sr year who goes on to do little to nothing in the NHL and a Frosh leaving a team with high hopes simply because he is so **** good and has NHL stardom awaiting him.

How many B1G players have left after their freshman year to go pro? Dylan Larkin is the only one I can think of.

How do you quantify such a thing? Well, not sure, to be honest. But how about the Big 4 of the B1G producing twice as many 300 pt scorers in the NHL compared to the top 4 teams from the NCHC?? Granted some of those players didn't leave early, but a lot of them did.

"Back to my point about how it's ok for the B1G schools to be bad at hockey. I pulled some more cherry-picked data out of my butt, and it shows me that the B1G is better than the NCHC schools at producing 300 point scorers in the NHL. Which is the main purpose of B1G schools, as I said in my first post."

The B1G will bounce back, as it seems is happening this year, with 3 teams very likely to make the NCAA tourney, and maybe 4?

Yeah, but how many 300 point scorers in the NHL will they produce this year? That's all that really matters.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

The amount of false statements in your posts, and the amount of backtracking is truly comical.

What false statements are you talking about Tipsy?

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

How many B1G players have left after their freshman year to go pro? Dylan Larkin is the only one I can think of.

I found FOUR of them, 3 plucked early from Michigan's roster
Dylan Larkin, who has 30 pts this year in the NHL, ranking him 47th in the NHL right now.
Jacob Trouba, who has 12 pts this year in the NHL, 117 so far for his career.
Kyle Conner, who has 26 pts this year in the NHL, ranking him 67th in the NHL right now.

Not a big surprise Michigan has struggled some recently.

And Jack Dougherty from Wisconsin.

 

[icehawk]

Well, given that the seven B1G teams lost six players to early departure before this season, while the 8 NCHC teams lost 12 players to early departure before this season, yet the NCHC has 6 of it's teams in the top 16 of the pwr, and all 8 in the top 20 of the pwr, it doesn't look like it's having too terrible of an effect on the NCHC this year. But then again, we're not the ones making excuses about early departures.

Nice box

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

What false statements are you talking about Tipsy?

B1G schools primary mission is not to win National Titles, or make Frozen Fours, it is to improve the quality of living in the states they represent.

This is BS.

A lot of one and dones and two and dones and three and dones on B1G men's hockey rosters.

This is BS.

Just look up how many players B1G programs have sent and send to the NHL compared to NCHC programs, and there is really no comparison.

You have been thoroughly debunked on this.

Now the B1G schools, at the time of the formation of the B1G conf, had FAR MORE successful histories than the NCHC schools had, up to the time of the formation of the NCHC.

This is BS.

But the formation of these 2 new conferences came at a time when the NHL poaching of B1G rosters was at a sort of peak, or at least the negative effect of the poaching was at a peak, while the NCHC programs were not similarly affected, at least not yet.

This is totally BS.

But if programs like UMD and Omaha and now SCSU continue to thrive, NHL teams will start targeting their players and in a few years those programs could suffer through similar down periods as MSU, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan all have in the last decade, decade and a half.

If you think that scouts pay attention to players because they go to certain schools, you are an idiot. Players are drafted before they play college hockey. If you want to match up how many NHL players the NCHC schools have produced vs. how many the B1G have produced since the formation of their conferences, the NCHC would win.

Well Stratus, tiny little schools HAVE TO have good relations with their town/community, because what they do/the benefits of what they do, only in limited ways, benefits anything or anyone beyond the town or community they are located in, and rarely does anyone outside of that community care about their sports teams, either.

In contrast, the B1G schools WHO PLAY HOCKEY, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan St & Ohio St are not tiny little niche schools who need to kiss the butts of the town/city they are located in. Why? Because the community I said that they represent was entire states and the community they serve goes well beyond even their entire states. Their states are their primary focus, but indirectly their impact goes well beyond the states they represent. The B1G schools do BILLIONS of dollars of research every year that benefits not just their local communities, and not only their state, and not only the country as a whole, but the whole world. If you ranked conferences according to their research dollars, the 2nd best conference would only pull in HALF as much as the B1G pulls in. And these schools train and educate so many doctors and lawyers and businessmen and teachers, etc., that their entire states benefit as well as many communities outside of their states, and their alumni bases are so large that they are spread out all over the country.

And I'd bet that YOU PERSONALLY have benefitted in a very significant way by the contributions of at least one, if not several of the B1G schools that you seem to despise. Btw, 3 of the 4 schools you listed as examples are not land grant schools and JH and ND are not part of the B1G outside of playing in the B1G in just one sport.

This is just a transparent snow-job that has nothing at all to do with the topic at hand and is full of irrelevant crap. This is a hockey forum. Not a forum about research dollars. But whatever makes you feel better about the BTHC being a joke.

But outside of UND and DU, the rest of the NCHC hasn't done much of anything outside of having 1 or 2 decent seasons. Not enough to gain the kind of attention from the NHL that the Big 4 of the B1G have gotten. That was 2/3rds of the B1G conference before this year, and 80% of the B1G teams that existed 10 years ago. On the converse, 75% of the NCHC would struggle to find more than a handful of great NHLers among their alumni.

1 or 2 decent seasons in the past 10 years? Since the B1G formed? Why do you keep trying to bring up how great the B1G schools were in the 90s and 00s? It has nothing to do with what is going on now.

And I never said the NCHC schools don't have early departures, and in fact I specifically stated that schools like SCSU and NOU, because of recent success have recently or will start to suffer the same thing that B1G schools have historically had to go through if those schools win a Title or two.

SCSU has had early departures since the mid 90s. Just because you don't pay attention to them doesn't mean they didn't happen. Most importantly, THAT IS THE TRADE OFF. You recruit a stud player, you probably aren't going to keep him for 4 years. Coaches should know that when they recruit those players. That isn't an excuse for having a bad team. It doesn't seem to have hindered North Dakota or Denver. There are plenty of highly touted Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan recruits that did stay all 4 years and weren't any better when they left than when they got there.

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

And also, trying to include Notre Dame, if you did, and PSU is not really fair in light of the point I am trying to make. PSU only suffered 3 early losses during that time frame, so that would be 36 early departures for the 5 B1G teams with long histories of hockey from 2012-13 season to now. That's 7.2 per team compared to 46 for the 8 NCHC teams which is 5.75 per team.

I have already pointed out your garbage cherry-picking of data in here.

But the gap is closing, and may have reversed by now? But if that is true, then I predict it will effect how well teams from the NCHC do in the future when their better recruits start leaving earlier and earlier and it disrupts things for those programs.

The best teams in the NCHC have had their players leaving early SINCE BEFORE THE NCHC was formed. If you think Michigan and Minnesota have had more early departures over the past decade than Denver and North Dakota, you are smoking crack. Compare the top teams to the top teams. The middle teams to the middle teams. The bottom teams to the bottom teams. Has Ohio State and Michigan State had more early departures than St. Cloud and Miami? Hell no.

I think the creation of the B1G was a good thing for Mich, MSU and OSU(as the CCHA was one of the lamest conferences), and obviously PSU, and down the line it could be for Notre Dame as well. And having 3 competitive Western Conferences is better for college hockey in general.

I am sure Michigan State is delighted to be the whipping boy of the B1G. Ohio State has made the tournament once. Let's not pretend they are now a powerhouse.

The B1G will bounce back, as it seems is happening this year, with 3 teams very likely to make the NCAA tourney, and maybe 4?

I am going to predict that on December 8th, two of Ohio State, Minnesota and Penn State will no longer be in the top 14 of the pairwise.

???

Not over the period of time you mentioned. At least not on a per team basis.

This was proven to be BS.

And since this current season hasn't concluded yet, we have no idea what effect last year's early departures will have on this year's teams comes NCAA tourney time.

So excluding the last year, looking at the time frame you mentioned, the 5 relevant B1G teams lost 4 freshmen compared to only 2 for the 8 NCHC teams and those 5 B1G teams lost 3 Sophs with the 8 NCHC teams losing 9 sophs. So to quantify this, I added up the # of years of eligibility lost and it's 18 years for the 5 B1G teams, and 24 for the 8 NCHC teams, or 3.6 years per B1G team and only 3 years per NCHC team.

Just an example how looking at it too simplistically doesn't tell you the whole story.


Remember, I'm not including Notre Dame or PSU in this analysis.

If you aren't including Penn State in your analysis, you shouldn't include them in your number of B1G teams that you think are going to make the NCAA tourney.

As the fan of a team who went into the NCAA tourney as a #1 seed only to lose in the first round to the #4 seed, I wouldn't count your chickens before they hatch. Don't assume a Yale/Union/Providence won't knock you out early.

And I'm not making excuses, just stating facts. The Big 4 of the B1G are NHL factories, and blow away the NCHC in that regard.

Again. Total BS. The top 4 B1G teams do not blow away the NCHC teams in the number of NHL players produced.

Btw, as a fan of the old WCHA, having 6 teams in the PWR Top 16 this early in the season doesn't mean 6 teams will make the NCAA tourney, esp when 2 of then are rated #15 and #16. For one, those 6 teams have to play each other and the other 2 NCHC teams and most likely at least one, if not 2, of those 6 teams will not make it into the Top 13-14 or whatever they need to be to make the tourney. And getting 5-6 teams into the tourney is nice, but that won't guarantee one of them will win a Natl Title.

If the tourney started today, both the B1G and NCHC would get 4 teams in with the odds being SCSU vs Notre Dame in the final.

If the tourney started today, the NCHC would get 5 teams in and Denver already beat Notre Dame, so I don't know why you are penciling Notre Dame into your likely title game.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Back to my point about how it's ok for the B1G schools to be bad at hockey. I pulled some more cherry-picked data out of my butt, and it shows me that the B1G is better than the NCHC schools at producing 300 point scorers in the NHL. Which is the main purpose of B1G schools, as I said in my first post.

B1G schools have RARELY been bad at hockey, and when they are, far more often than not it is because they are being good at producing top notch NHL players.

And I only used 300 pt scorers because it seemed like a somewhat legit measuring stick. The big 4 of the B1G have also produced twice as many 500 pt scorers as the top 4 NCHC teams as well. And twice as many 700 pt scorers as well.

And when it wasn't NHL players they were producing, it was Olympic Men's Hockey players.

Wisconsin produced 34 compared to UND's 27?

MSU and Michigan produced 19 and 12 and OSU produced 3. Can the 8 teams of the NCHC combined match those 4 teams 68 Men's hockey Olympians??

Oh, did I forget to mention the SEVENTY THREE that Minny produced? lol



So feeding the NHL and taking on a brand new member hurt those 5 teams performances for a couple of years??? It happens. But having as many teams, as of right now, as the NCHC, qualified to make the NCAA tourney may be a sign that the B1G has bounced back.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Big 4 of the B1G vs all 8 of the NCHC.

NCAA appearances?

B1G's b4 = 126
NCHCs 8 = 123

NCAA wins?

B1G's b4 = 176
NCHCs 8 = 138

Frozen Fours?

B1G's b4 = 68
NCHCs 8 = 57

Title Game Apps?

B1G's b4 = 35
NCHCs 8 = 29

Natl Titles?

B1G's b4 = 23
NCHCs 8 = 19


That's 4 vs 8. Figured I'd give your conference a chance, using all 8 teams, yet they still couldn't match the big 4 of the B1G.


Only 3 of the 8 NCHC teams have winning NCAA tourney records, UND, DU and UMD. The B1G with only 6 teams before this year had 4 with winning NCAA tourney records.


PSU has only been to the tourney once and already have a win. WMU has made 6 trips and still haven't won a single game.

OSU has only a .222 winning %, and 1 trip to the Frozen Four, but your mighty SCSU can barely beat that with just a .278 win % and only 1 trip to the FF.

And new member Notre Dame with its .471 win % and 3 trips to the Frozen Four match Miami's and UNO's 3 FFs and .381 and .400 win percentages.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

One thing I will agree with is that the B1G hockey programs are like factories. Like Bethlehem Steel, they were great a century ago and can be found in large, hulking, vacant structures.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

And yes Tippsy, this may be a hockey forum, but that doesn't change the FACT that B1G institutions do not consider hockey or even football to be a top priority.

You claim its BS???


OMG, are you that naïve?


The Research dollars B1G institutions bring in each year is in the HUNDRED BILLION dollar range!!! This research creates thousands of jobs, it saves lives, and has a monetary impact on the nation in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

And if sports are any kind of a priority to B1G institutions, they are football and men's basketball. Sure Hockey comes in 3rd at the big 4 schools in the B1G, and now at PSU, too. But that is only 5 of the 14 institutions in the B1G Conference.

Hockey barely pays for itself. It's not a high priority for The B1G as an entity. Those 5 institutions and maybe OSU, may consider hockey a higher priority than gymnastics or VB, etc., yet B1G hockey programs have done fine over the years being less than a top priority.




How does this relate to college hockey?? In several ways.

First one off the top of my head, this dynamic helped produce a B1G alum with enough money to fund the creation of a now NCAA tourney quality program.

B1G schools are bigger schools, with huge alumni bases, spread out all over the country, which helped enable the Conference or made them think it was a good idea to create their own TV network, which has and will continue to add huge financial amounts to those schools athletic departments, most of which will go towards sports like Football and Basketball, but those 2 sports often pay for all of the other sports, so if it helps B1G football and basketball, indirectly it helps B1G hockey, to varying degrees at different schools, which indirectly helps College hockey as a whole, in the long term.


The B1G is the only hockey conference that has or can expand without having to steal schools from other conferences. Did we steal Notre Dame from HE? lol Maybe, but Notre Dame was never really wanted or welcome in the HE, were they?



It was B1G schools that have driven College Hockey from the beginning, and it was a B1G school that Americanized American College Hockey far more than any other school in history and that's not even close to disputable. This was good for College Hockey, and has been good for the NHL and what is good for the NHL is indirectly good for college hockey. And the US doing well in Olympic hockey is also indirectly good for College hockey.


College Hockey is a niche sport and might always be, but with Title IX and the high cost of having a college hockey program, it's a niche sport that could have slowly faded away, and programs like St Cloud St and UMD, and WMU and UNO and Miami, OH were NEVER going to keep College Hockey moving forward, and if not for B1G programs making the old WCHA and the old CCHA legit conferences, most of those programs I just mentioned might not even exist today?

And even UND, DU and CC, without B1G programs to compete against all throughout the years, would not have done as well as they have.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

One thing I will agree with is that the B1G hockey programs are like factories. Like Bethlehem Steel, they were great a century ago and can be found in large, hulking, vacant structures.

A century ago??? lol

1996 Michigan won the Natl Title.
1997 A former Gopher coached UND to the Natl Title.
1998 Michigan won the Natl Title, Ohio St made the Frozen Four.
1999 Mich St made the Frozen Four.
2000 A former Gopher coached UND to the Natl Title.
2001 Both Michigan and Mich St made the Frozen Four, A former Gopher coached UND to the Frozen Four.
2002 Minnesota won the Natl Title, Michigan made the Frozen Four.
2003 Minnesota won the Natl Title, Michigan made the Frozen Four.
2005 Minnesota made it to the Frozen Four.
2006 Wisconsin won the Natl Title.
2007 Michigan St won the Natl Title.
2008 Notre Dame got to the Title Game, Michigan also made the Frozen Four.
2010 Wisconsin got to the Title game.
2011 Michigan got to the Title game.
2012 Minnesota got to the Frozen Four.
2014 Minnesota made it to the Title Game.

And I should go look up where the coaches for all of those B1G teams went to school? My guess is a lot of B1G alums.


Btw, that period, 1996 to 2014, no conference's existing members won more Natl Titles than the B1G did. B1G won 6, HE won 6, NCHC won 5.


So the NCHC had a nice season in 2015, and a little better in 2016, and a great season in 2017, and now they think they are the greatest thing since sliced bread??? lol


Well, they gave the B1G a very big head start, 20 more NCAA Appearances for the B1G, 49 more NCAA tourney wins for the B1G, 15 more Frozen Fours, 7 more Title game appearances and 4 more Natl Titles. Oh, and that HUGE headstart in the way of producing those 300 and 500 and 700 pt scorers in the NHL, too.

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Right said Fred should start a new thread called NCAA Hockey in the 20th century

 

[TalonsUpPuckDown]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

I think the creation of the B1G was a good thing for Mich, MSU and OSU(as the CCHA was one of the lamest conferences), and obviously PSU, and down the line it could be for Notre Dame as well. And having 3 competitive Western Conferences is better for college hockey in general.

A century ago??? lol

1996 Michigan won the Natl Title.
1997 A former Gopher coached UND to the Natl Title.
1998 Michigan won the Natl Title, Ohio St made the Frozen Four.
1999 Mich St made the Frozen Four.
2000 A former Gopher coached UND to the Natl Title.
2001 Both Michigan and Mich St made the Frozen Four, A former Gopher coached UND to the Frozen Four.
2002 Minnesota won the Natl Title, Michigan made the Frozen Four.
2003 Minnesota won the Natl Title, Michigan made the Frozen Four.
2005 Minnesota made it to the Frozen Four.
2006 Wisconsin won the Natl Title.
2007 Michigan St won the Natl Title.
2008 Notre Dame got to the Title Game, Michigan also made the Frozen Four.
2010 Wisconsin got to the Title game.
2011 Michigan got to the Title game.
2012 Minnesota got to the Frozen Four.
2014 Minnesota made it to the Title Game.

Though I'm a nWCHA guy with no dog in this hunt I feel the need to point out Freddy's reliance on results from that "lame" CCHA conference.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

And yes Tippsy, this may be a hockey forum, but that doesn't change the FACT that B1G institutions do not consider hockey or even football to be a top priority.

You claim its BS???


OMG, are you that naïve?


The Research dollars B1G institutions bring in each year is in the HUNDRED BILLION dollar range!!! This research creates thousands of jobs, it saves lives, and has a monetary impact on the nation in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

And if sports are any kind of a priority to B1G institutions, they are football and men's basketball. Sure Hockey comes in 3rd at the big 4 schools in the B1G, and now at PSU, too. But that is only 5 of the 14 institutions in the B1G Conference.

Hockey barely pays for itself. It's not a high priority for The B1G as an entity. Those 5 institutions and maybe OSU, may consider hockey a higher priority than gymnastics or VB, etc., yet B1G hockey programs have done fine over the years being less than a top priority.




How does this relate to college hockey?? In several ways.

First one off the top of my head, this dynamic helped produce a B1G alum with enough money to fund the creation of a now NCAA tourney quality program.

B1G schools are bigger schools, with huge alumni bases, spread out all over the country, which helped enable the Conference or made them think it was a good idea to create their own TV network, which has and will continue to add huge financial amounts to those schools athletic departments, most of which will go towards sports like Football and Basketball, but those 2 sports often pay for all of the other sports, so if it helps B1G football and basketball, indirectly it helps B1G hockey, to varying degrees at different schools, which indirectly helps College hockey as a whole, in the long term.


The B1G is the only hockey conference that has or can expand without having to steal schools from other conferences. Did we steal Notre Dame from HE? lol Maybe, but Notre Dame was never really wanted or welcome in the HE, were they?



It was B1G schools that have driven College Hockey from the beginning, and it was a B1G school that Americanized American College Hockey far more than any other school in history and that's not even close to disputable. This was good for College Hockey, and has been good for the NHL and what is good for the NHL is indirectly good for college hockey. And the US doing well in Olympic hockey is also indirectly good for College hockey.


College Hockey is a niche sport and might always be, but with Title IX and the high cost of having a college hockey program, it's a niche sport that could have slowly faded away, and programs like St Cloud St and UMD, and WMU and UNO and Miami, OH were NEVER going to keep College Hockey moving forward, and if not for B1G programs making the old WCHA and the old CCHA legit conferences, most of those programs I just mentioned might not even exist today?

And even UND, DU and CC, without B1G programs to compete against all throughout the years, would not have done as well as they have.

While you’re not wrong that research is the top priority, you’re off by a factor of nearly 100 on the research dollars. It’s about $7-10 billion a year in federal grants for all of the CIC. Combined.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Right said Fred should start a new thread called NCAA Hockey in the 20th century

Well, I am a bit of a history buff Tippsy, I will give you that. I have to be being a Gopher Football fan, lol.

But when it comes to hockey, I've been talking mostly 21st century. But history is history, it happened, it can't be changed.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

Re: Big Ten > NCHC

Though I'm a nWCHA guy with no dog in this hunt I feel the need to point out Freddy's reliance on results from that "lame" CCHA conference.

Well, I was an oWCHA guy, so my distaste for the ccha. But the only good thing about the ccha was the B1G schools involvement.

And its not like I wouldn't have preferred the oWCHA remain intact, but I'm one of those people who saw that things were going to change, so instead of whining and *****ing about it for years, I chose to accept that it was going to happen and there was absolutely nothing I could do about it, and have tried to see how it could be seen as a good thing.