Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

[Ralph Baer]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

The more I think about this, the more I think this could lead to the end of the NCAA (long term). If Im the B1G I add NC, Kansas, and I dont stop I add Alabama and so on, UCLA etc... I become college sports, I control TV, and I dont need the NCAA. I add the other schools that help me grow TV and marketing. Yesterday was the tip of the iceberg

What this means to hockey who knows, but I see this as the long term scenario

But they are going to have a hard time getting to that point before the world ends next month.

 

[SCSU Euro]

Stats like this are misleading because the growth is partially attributable to girls playing the sport. Likely there were next to zero girls playing in 1990 and likely 3000-4000 today, so the net growth of boys playing is significantly lower.

Ummm.... and you think girls starting to play hockey doesn't count and wont help grow the sport?!?

 

[SCSU Euro]

I'm not too worried. 1 Player averaging point/game in juniors? Yawn. They might be able to duplicate DU's current senior class that has a whopping 1 win in the NCAA Tournament.

I'll take "Things SCSU and DU's senior classes have in common" for $400 Alex

 

[Hammy]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

Isn't this what just happened in college hockey?

College hockey is sport where you pretty much have to find dancing partners in order to survive. There aren't enough teams in college hockey to not see massive shifts if one conference changes. Football is a little different given its size/scope.

The problem with this analysis is that the same ego that wants to continue to be an upper tier team causes each of these programs to believe they will continue to be an upper tier team, and one of the other upper tier teams joining them will be the new league doormat.

I do agree that there is always the ego that will skew reality for some football programs into thinking they are better than they are (see Notre Dame football over the last two decade... prior to this year that is). But the final say in these situations (presidents and regents) at these schools have more to consider than just sports when considering the health of their university and its overall reputation.

 

[dggoddard]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

Ummm.... and you think girls starting to play hockey doesn't count and wont help grow the sport?!?

I think that girls playing hockey is great. The problem is that participation in hockey is down despite


1) Massive US population growth [100,000,000 people] in the past 30 years

2) Growth in non-traditional areas is not outpacing declines in the cold weather states

3) Massive cost increases to play organized hockey today

4) USHL, NAHL & USDPT growth & success has not led to increased youth participation

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

I think that girls playing hockey is great. The problem is that participation in hockey is down despite


1) Massive US population growth [100,000,000 people] in the past 30 years

2) Growth in non-traditional areas is not outpacing declines in the cold weather states

3) Massive cost increases to play organized hockey today

4) USHL, NAHL & USDPT growth & success has not led to increased youth participation

Except there haven't been declines in traditional hockey markets and participation has grown in the US all together.

<a href="http://usahockey.com/uploadedFiles/USAHockey/Menu_Membership/Menu_Membership_Statistics/11-12%20Final%20Reports.pdf">USA Hockey Numbers</a>

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

USA HOCKEY BOY'S REGISTRATIONS PER STATE
<TABLE BORDER="0">
<TR><TD>STATE</TD><TD>2010-11</TD><TD>2009-10</TD><TD>2008-09</TD><TD>2007-08</TD><TD>2006-07</TD><TD>2005-06</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>MINN</TD><TD>41148</TD><TD>40986</TD><TD>40670</TD><TD>40103</TD><TD>39541</TD><TD>38632</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>MASS</TD><TD>31786</TD><TD>33444</TD><TD>32740</TD><TD>33533</TD><TD>35314</TD><TD>36878</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>NY</TD><TD>28152</TD><TD>26523</TD><TD>27396</TD><TD>26915</TD><TD>26206</TD><TD>25724</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>MICH</TD><TD>24451</TD><TD>24071</TD><TD>25046</TD><TD>26265</TD><TD>27983</TD><TD>30103</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>PA</TD><TD>14567</TD><TD>13189</TD><TD>14414</TD><TD>11897</TD><TD>11756</TD><TD>12435</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>ILL</TD><TD>15330</TD><TD>13068</TD><TD>11918</TD><TD>12460</TD><TD>12426</TD><TD>12885</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>NJ</TD><TD>9215</TD><TD>8547</TD><TD>6533</TD><TD>9007</TD><TD>9238</TD><TD>8936</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>WISC</TD><TD>12642</TD><TD>12244</TD><TD>12335</TD><TD>12746</TD><TD>13230</TD><TD>13130</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>CONN</TD><TD>9146</TD><TD>8776</TD><TD>8661</TD><TD>8675</TD><TD>8932</TD><TD>9048</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>TOTALS</TD><TD>186437</TD><TD>180848</TD><TD>179713</TD><TD>181601</TD><TD>184626</TD><TD>187771</TD></TR>
</Table>

 

[dggoddard]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

<table>
<tr><td>State</td><td>2010-11</td><td>2009-10</td><td>2008-09</td><td>2007-08</td><td>2006-07</td><td>2005-06</td></tr>

<tr><td>MN</td><td>41148</td><td>40986</td><td>40670</td><td>40103</td><td>39541</td><td>38632</td></tr>
</table>

So if I concede that

1). More girls, women & adults are playing organizedhockey since 2005.

2). The population in Minnesota has grown since 2005 [5.1 million to 5.4 million]

It stands to reason that boys hockey participation is down in Minnesota. And clearly the numbers are worse in Massachusetts.

And the point of all this is that despite a record number Americans playing in the NHL, growth of hockey in non-traditional areas, women & adult participation gains and youth registration gains...hockey on the whole is declining and the long term prognosis is not good right now.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

So if I concede that

1). More girls, women & adults are playing hockey since 2005.

2). The population in Minnesota has grown since 2005 [5.1 million to 5.4 million]

It stands to reason that boys hockey participation is down in Minnesota. And clearly the numbers are worse in Massachusetts.

No, boys registrations in Minnesota have gone up. As they have in most traditional hockey markets. Will post the complete table momentarily. The girls numbers are listed independently. For instance, last year, Minnesota had 54,951 males and 12,697 females registered with USA Hockey. And keep in mind, in Minnesota, high school hockey players don't register with USA Hockey, so they aren't counted in the registrations. And there are more boy's varsity programs in the state than girl's varsity programs.

 

[dggoddard]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

No, boys registrations in Minnesota have gone up. As they have in most traditional hockey markets. Will post the complete table momentarily. And keep in mind, in Minnesota, high school hockey players don't register with USA Hockey, so they aren't counted in the registrations.

I want to see hockey grow.

USA Hockey is doing a great job. I love the Minnesota high school hockey model/program. The USHL & USNDTP are fantastic.

But we have to accept the fact that the 1980's Olympics & Gretzky Mania was probably the high water mark for hockey in the USA in a lot of ways.

There used to be tens of thousands of unregistered kids playing pond hockey in USA. Mostly they've disappeared

The NHL deserves credit for expanding the game in the Sunbelt and internationally with the Olympics.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

I want to see hockey grow.

USA Hockey is doing a great job. I love the Minnesota high school hockey model/program. The USHL & USNDTP are fantastic.

But we have to accept the fact that the 1980's Olympics & Gretzky Mania was probably the high water mark for hockey in the USA in a lot of ways.

There used to be tens of thousands of unregistered kids playing pond hockey in USA. Mostly they've disappeared

The NHL deserves credit for expanding the game in the Sunbelt and internationally with the Olympics.

You're dead wrong. USA Hockey registrations are far beyond where they were in 1980. Both in terms of the number of kids playing and the quality of players being produced.

 

[dggoddard]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

You're dead wrong. USA Hockey registrations are far beyond where they were in 1980. Both in terms of the number of kids playing and the quality of players being produced.

No one is arguing about the quality of the players, the coaching or the elite programs.

The problem with your data is that you are relying on USA hockey registrations when we all know that countless players aren't registered today, and perhaps hundreds of thousands weren't registered in the past.

How many unregistered players were there in the 1980's? I don't have a clue. Maybe a 100,000 or maybe a million or more.

I was in high school in 1980 and it seemed like everybody of high school age at least played pickup hockey or street hockey. It would be interesting to know the number of hockey sticks sold in 1980 vs. today. I'm guessing the number of sticks sold would of been staggeringly higher in 1980. They were wooden, far cheaper & broke more often but every garage in America seemed to have a half dozen sticks.

 

[duper]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

The Big Ten has been on the downhill slide as a conference ever since the U of C left in the forties.

 

[MichFan]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

I see zero immediate impact on college hockey from Maryland and Rutgers joining. I doubt that either is adding hockey any time soon.

The only question in my mind is, what's the Big Ten's next move? 16-team conferences are coming.

Delaney wants the northeast? Well, what markets does he have already? With Penn State, he gets Philly. With Rutgers, he gets a piece of NYC and more of Philly. With Maryland, he gets Baltimore and DC. That leaves...Boston.

So does he go for BC next? Now THAT would have a huge effect on college hockey.

Sad to see what a TV network is doing to college sports...

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

Sad to see what a TV network is doing to college sports...

You could also lay the blame on the conference championship game in football, which is part of the problem with how the SEC and ACC spoiled a lot of good things that were happening elsewhere.

 

[Happy]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

No one is arguing about the quality of the players, the coaching or the elite programs.

The problem with your data is that you are relying on USA hockey registrations when we all know that countless players aren't registered today, and perhaps hundreds of thousands weren't registered in the past.

How many unregistered players were there in the 1980's? I don't have a clue. Maybe a 100,000 or maybe a million or more.

I was in high school in 1980 and it seemed like everybody of high school age at least played pickup hockey or street hockey. It would be interesting to know the number of hockey sticks sold in 1980 vs. today. I'm guessing the number of sticks sold would of been staggeringly higher in 1980. They were wooden, far cheaper & broke more often but every garage in America seemed to have a half dozen sticks.

I guess Denver needs to go back to only recruiting from Canada, then.

 

[kingdobbs]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

You could also lay the blame on the conference championship game in football, which is part of the problem with how the SEC and ACC spoiled a lot of good things that were happening elsewhere.

Ultimately, the drive to have a championship game is a symptom of the same disease.

 

[4four4]

I see zero immediate impact on college hockey from Maryland and Rutgers joining. I doubt that either is adding hockey any time soon.

The only question in my mind is, what's the Big Ten's next move? 16-team conferences are coming.

Delaney wants the northeast? Well, what markets does he have already? With Penn State, he gets Philly. With Rutgers, he gets a piece of NYC and more of Philly. With Maryland, he gets Baltimore and DC. That leaves...Boston.

So does he go for BC next? Now THAT would have a huge effect on college hockey.

Sad to see what a TV network is doing to college sports...

That is what I was thinking . Maybe Jim asks BC and then he gives the whiners on south bend one final chance .

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

I'm willing to bet the down economy has something to do with somewhat lower participation in hockey. Plus a lot of the spots are just being taken by girls. There aren't many girls' teams and in cases where they don't have a team, they just play with the boys. I do not see that as a bad thing.

And if BC joined the Big Ten I would have a coronary. Incredible for BC athletics as a whole but it would destroy BC hockey as we know it. I would not love it.

 

[MichFan]

Re: Maryland and Rutgers to the B1G

And if BC joined the Big Ten I would have a coronary. Incredible for BC athletics as a whole but it would destroy BC hockey as we know it. I would not love it.

Fortunately, I doubt that it would actually happen. I don't pretend to know Massachusetts well, but is BC going to get the Big Ten Network on basic cable in Boston or the rest of the state? It's not the "big state school" with a broad following among non-alumni, is it?

But then, who CAN get you on to basic cable in Boston? I don't see a better candidate, so you can't rule it out.

Back before the Big Ten went to 12, I used to think that BC might be used as a lure to make Notre Dame feel comfortable in the Big Ten, i.e. a peer Catholic school. But now I don't see Notre Dame coming on board under any circumstances; they're home in the ACC now. Even if the Big Ten picks off 1 ACC school (Virginia seems likely), holding one spot for Notre Dame, and the SEC picks off 2, I don't see the ACC collapsing completely. And even if the ACC collapsed and Notre Dame felt obligated to move to a conference to survive, Notre Dame would probably join the Big 12 instead just to spite the Big 10. Notre Dame's alumni's feelings against the Big 10 run too strong.