Timothy A
Let's go RED!
Correct. I hate it
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 Women's Conference is Coming!
- Thread starter Hockeybuckeye
- Start date
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
Nope. AC hockey is bad.
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
Or better yet join AH and leave the WCHA with a tidy 8 teams.
I would be fine with that. Why mess with a good thing. The WCHA is the best conference in the country. Adding Michigan would not hurt that, other than there would be nine teams in the league instead of eight. For the playoffs, might have to just have a rule that the ninth place team does not get into the WCHA Tournament.
There's that, too. The AHA would probably be a better fit for Michigan in the beginning.
Hockeybuckeye
Well-known member
Not according to my sources. My family has connections to UM that go back 110 years!
That would be great. I'll guess we'll find out how creditable your sources are soon.
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
Traitor!!
Hockeyfan1979
New member
Why would anyone want more teams at the D1 level at this point? There are definitely 2 and close to 3 conferences of D1 teams who should be D2 or 3. It's ok to love women's hockey and acknowledge there isn't enough talent YET to support the current number of teams. If there were maybe 20 D1 teams competition would be better. Relegation is the way to go!
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
Worst take I've seen in my lifetime.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
I think at least this much of this post is worthy of some consideration before being ridiculed. I'd like to see the sport grow over time. The talent gap from the top to the bottom of D-I is still large. If there were more D-I opportunities, would more young women embark on the journey of playing the sport? Maybe, but it is an expensive sport to play, and it's one that isn't even accessible to much of the US. Heck, there may even be a community somewhere in Canada without an ice rink, although I've never heard of one.
If the poster is saying that the sport should grow along with the talent pool, I can definitely see that.
I think the thing is that the available talent pool isn’t necessarily the determining reason for adding a team. There’s probably enough talent to add 2 PW teams but does Walter want to spend the money and is there 2 suitable cities to be the homes? Those are equally relevant q’s. Who has a bag of money and a rink also seems to be the question in the NHL, less concern about talent.
In NCAA, there is vast disparity from top to bottom (maybe same issue with guys?) but teams may still be added for title ix compliance, or because you can get an outsized marketing boost from it, or in the case of some programs because it drives enrollment. A B1G school should be able to make a new team and attract above average players avoiding being perpetually terrible, so the talent issue isn’t valid to their decision.
That said there is 100% a need for a discussion about development of girls hockey. Right now the model in too many places is play with the boys until it’s no longer safe, then join an expensive travel club team or prep school. Little regard for actual bottom of the pyramid growth of girls hockey, or development of local leagues etc.
The sport will never be as good as it could be with this model. I don’t mind ncaa programs being added at all but attention is needed regarding actual girls hockey. All easier said than done of course.
In NCAA, there is vast disparity from top to bottom (maybe same issue with guys?) but teams may still be added for title ix compliance, or because you can get an outsized marketing boost from it, or in the case of some programs because it drives enrollment. A B1G school should be able to make a new team and attract above average players avoiding being perpetually terrible, so the talent issue isn’t valid to their decision.
That said there is 100% a need for a discussion about development of girls hockey. Right now the model in too many places is play with the boys until it’s no longer safe, then join an expensive travel club team or prep school. Little regard for actual bottom of the pyramid growth of girls hockey, or development of local leagues etc.
The sport will never be as good as it could be with this model. I don’t mind ncaa programs being added at all but attention is needed regarding actual girls hockey. All easier said than done of course.
I’m sure you increase the top tier talent indirectly by adding programs.Hockeybuckeye
Well-known member
In regards to getting more girls into hockey and properly developed many regions don't have rinks and high school teams. In Ohio there's not a lot of rinks, most are in or near the major cities with a few exceptions. I know the ones in central Ohio are heavily booked with men's leagues, sled hockey, club hockey, high school teams so girls get a tiny sliver of ice time. A former player for the Washington Capitals living here is considering moving to where his daughters can be more developed.
Buckeye, thanks for sharing how dire it is here. There’s lots to celebrate - like OBJ AAA U14 girls just won districts and are at their first ever nationals but also: people are moving away so their girl has a chance to play. So sad and frankly wrong in an NHL town. But Cbus is certainly not alone and neither is Ohio.
Totally agree. Not an easy answer. You need at least double the numbers at entry level to have numbers right by high school. So many opportunities available that presents options for activities other than hockey. The cost is out of hand for ice time and equipment. Plus you have skill coaches, camps, off-ice, etc. I think it is too overwhelming for a lot of families.
Hockeybuckeye
Well-known member
Michigan attempting to launch D-I women's hockey
University of Michigan regent Denise Ilitch told the AP she believes there's enough support for the Big Ten school to launch a Division I women's hockey program.
FireKnight
Let's go Tech!
It's the same pretty much everywhere for the girls. Even in places where they want to support growth, there simply isn't the ice time. Heck, I've talked to a Patty K. winner who lives in Canada who would tell stories of traveling several hours in the middle of the night through Canadian winter just to find a place with an hour of ice time. The NCAA honestly doesn't care about women's hockey because it loses money everywhere except for maybe Madison and St. Paul. Heck, my team has 3 NCAA championships in the past 11 years and they can't even give away tickets to the home games.
If the NCAA was serious about promoting women's sports, they could tell the 100+ schools that have their own arenas that they must offer ice time to girls hockey and that they host promote a girls' summer camp if they host a boys' summer camp.
Hockeybuckeye
Well-known member
We do well at out home games but we only seat around 650 but the support of the students is lacking at times. They get in free and to entice them they'll have a promo offering something cool for the first 100 through the doors but many grab it and leave.