hockeyworld33
New member
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
Any news on Holy Cross? All D-1 sports but women's hockey! D-3?
Any news on Holy Cross? All D-1 sports but women's hockey! D-3?
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.
More about expansion for women's hockey
- Thread starter OneTimer
- Start date
HockeyEast33
New member
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
They are in a difficult situation. They have a plan for the upgrade/expansion of the fieldhouse (the rink is attached), but the rink improvement is the last thing in the plan and the timing for implementation is years, not months. Their current rink does not meet Hockey East standards (specifically seating capacity) so they are a non-starter there for now. With Merrimack coming on board in Hockey East in a few years, the league will likely add another school to get back to an even number (usually a goal, except for the NESCAC). UMass and UMass-Lowell would get first crack at this additional spot because their men's teams are already in Hockey East. UMass would be the more likely school to join and they have an existing and successful club team that already recruits in New England with an on-campus rink.
If HC can't get into Hockey East, then it becomes much harder. The ECAC has an even number of teams and is unlikely to add another (all the Men's teams have a women's team already). The AHA (where the men play) has no women's equivalent. HC and Sacred Heart could potentially join the CHA to get them to 8 teams (if they are interested), but that is tough travel for both the other CHA teams and for HC and a LOT of expense for all involved.
HC could join with Sacred Heart, Franklin Pierce, St. Anselms, and St. Michaels to form a D1/D2 league - they play them all anyway. There has been some talk about this over the years, but it has never come to fruition. Tough to see a path to anything more than what they already are.
They are in a difficult situation. They have a plan for the upgrade/expansion of the fieldhouse (the rink is attached), but the rink improvement is the last thing in the plan and the timing for implementation is years, not months. Their current rink does not meet Hockey East standards (specifically seating capacity) so they are a non-starter there for now. With Merrimack coming on board in Hockey East in a few years, the league will likely add another school to get back to an even number (usually a goal, except for the NESCAC). UMass and UMass-Lowell would get first crack at this additional spot because their men's teams are already in Hockey East. UMass would be the more likely school to join and they have an existing and successful club team that already recruits in New England with an on-campus rink.
If HC can't get into Hockey East, then it becomes much harder. The ECAC has an even number of teams and is unlikely to add another (all the Men's teams have a women's team already). The AHA (where the men play) has no women's equivalent. HC and Sacred Heart could potentially join the CHA to get them to 8 teams (if they are interested), but that is tough travel for both the other CHA teams and for HC and a LOT of expense for all involved.
HC could join with Sacred Heart, Franklin Pierce, St. Anselms, and St. Michaels to form a D1/D2 league - they play them all anyway. There has been some talk about this over the years, but it has never come to fruition. Tough to see a path to anything more than what they already are.
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
The travel situation for HC in the CHA would be considerably less onerous than for the men in the AHA. I don't see an issue there. The CHA would almost certainly accept them if they demonstrated the desire to compete at the Division I level. But like Sacred Heart, they seem happy with a current situation that most teams would find intolerable. It's bizarre.
Powers &8^]
The travel situation for HC in the CHA would be considerably less onerous than for the men in the AHA. I don't see an issue there. The CHA would almost certainly accept them if they demonstrated the desire to compete at the Division I level. But like Sacred Heart, they seem happy with a current situation that most teams would find intolerable. It's bizarre.
Powers &8^]
Hux
Alfond to Ridder & rinks in between
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
UMASS-Lowell is moving up to D1 in all sports starting this fall. They are adding men's and women's lacrosse, and while there was no mention of women's hockey, with an arena and men's program in place one has to wonder how long it will take to add a women's team.
UMASS-Lowell is moving up to D1 in all sports starting this fall. They are adding men's and women's lacrosse, and while there was no mention of women's hockey, with an arena and men's program in place one has to wonder how long it will take to add a women's team.
HockeyEast33
New member
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
Doubt it will be anytime soon. Both U Mass Amherst and U Mass Lowell have the issue of budget cuts and restrictions. They are already in Title IX compliance and the chance of adding a non-revenue producing sport is pretty low. Especially one as expensive as ice hockey (lacrosse is a pretty cheap sport to add).
Doubt it will be anytime soon. Both U Mass Amherst and U Mass Lowell have the issue of budget cuts and restrictions. They are already in Title IX compliance and the chance of adding a non-revenue producing sport is pretty low. Especially one as expensive as ice hockey (lacrosse is a pretty cheap sport to add).
UCONN FAN
New member
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
I agree with Hux...With a large majority of the cost all ready in place (the rink) it does seem like a logical fit. Like Michigan, Denver, Notre Dame etc. it is embarrassing that Massachusetts does not have a DI women's program in any of their state schools while they have 2 DI programs on the men's side. BTW in Massachusetts what women's college sport is a revenue generating sport? For that matter what men's college sport generates revenue?
I agree with Hux...With a large majority of the cost all ready in place (the rink) it does seem like a logical fit. Like Michigan, Denver, Notre Dame etc. it is embarrassing that Massachusetts does not have a DI women's program in any of their state schools while they have 2 DI programs on the men's side. BTW in Massachusetts what women's college sport is a revenue generating sport? For that matter what men's college sport generates revenue?
Last edited:
PurpleEagle4ever
New member
giwan
Really??!!
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
Spoke with someone in hockey there and there was talk. He was not an insider but close to the program.
Spoke with someone in hockey there and there was talk. He was not an insider but close to the program.
PurpleEagle4ever
New member
Very interesting, please post if you hear anything else.
Back2BackU-MnPride2002
New member
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
Well, one thing to consider when you are talking about Michigan starting up Women's hockey, is that they would be the 5th Big Ten team with Women's hockey if they did do it. Once there are 6 teams, then all 6 of those schools are required by Conf rules to break from whatever conf they are presently in and form a Big Ten Conf.
Now personally, I think this would be a very good thing for Women's hockey. Adding 2 teams at big schools like Michigan and MSU probably, where they could be supported and maybe thrive, is always a good thing. But also, I am sure the teams in the WCHA might not mind seeing Minnesota and Wisconsin go? Gives the teams that are left an automatic bid and an easier chance of winning it.
But, that would leave the WCHA with only 5 teams. It might be necessary for the WCHA to first have at least 1, if not 3 teams ready to come in and replace the teams that are leaving.
I suppose the most logical teams to join the WCHA would be Denver and/or CC. I don't know that there are anymore Minnesota based teams that could make the jump to Div 1, and I don't know if they allow schools to do that anymore? Be Div 3 in all sports but hockey? I thought I read somewhere that they don't allow that anymore?! If Iowa had Title IX issues, they might be an option, but wouldn't they then join the Big Ten?! NDSU and SDSU are Div 1 in cbb right now and Div 1AA in fb, I believe? Not sure how they sit Title IX wise, but they might be the best two options? They are located near the other WCHA schools and right on the edge of the hottest recruiting grounds in the country, so their recruiting budget might not be too high and their travel expenses wouldn't be a problem?
I'm sure there are probably some things that I just can't think of right off hand that, oh, I suppose I honestly have no clue as to if they'd have a rink to play in. Ah, I'm sure that would be probably the main reason they wouldn't be good options? Anyone heard anything about these schools or am I completely coming out of left field with this idea?!
Well, one thing to consider when you are talking about Michigan starting up Women's hockey, is that they would be the 5th Big Ten team with Women's hockey if they did do it. Once there are 6 teams, then all 6 of those schools are required by Conf rules to break from whatever conf they are presently in and form a Big Ten Conf.
Now personally, I think this would be a very good thing for Women's hockey. Adding 2 teams at big schools like Michigan and MSU probably, where they could be supported and maybe thrive, is always a good thing. But also, I am sure the teams in the WCHA might not mind seeing Minnesota and Wisconsin go? Gives the teams that are left an automatic bid and an easier chance of winning it.
But, that would leave the WCHA with only 5 teams. It might be necessary for the WCHA to first have at least 1, if not 3 teams ready to come in and replace the teams that are leaving.
I suppose the most logical teams to join the WCHA would be Denver and/or CC. I don't know that there are anymore Minnesota based teams that could make the jump to Div 1, and I don't know if they allow schools to do that anymore? Be Div 3 in all sports but hockey? I thought I read somewhere that they don't allow that anymore?! If Iowa had Title IX issues, they might be an option, but wouldn't they then join the Big Ten?! NDSU and SDSU are Div 1 in cbb right now and Div 1AA in fb, I believe? Not sure how they sit Title IX wise, but they might be the best two options? They are located near the other WCHA schools and right on the edge of the hottest recruiting grounds in the country, so their recruiting budget might not be too high and their travel expenses wouldn't be a problem?
I'm sure there are probably some things that I just can't think of right off hand that, oh, I suppose I honestly have no clue as to if they'd have a rink to play in. Ah, I'm sure that would be probably the main reason they wouldn't be good options? Anyone heard anything about these schools or am I completely coming out of left field with this idea?!
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
Wrong. With six teams it can be a Big 10 conference sport but it is not required. This comes from talking with someone in the Big 10 offices. Whether one thinks they would make it one has been the subject of some disagreement.
Wrong. With six teams it can be a Big 10 conference sport but it is not required. This comes from talking with someone in the Big 10 offices. Whether one thinks they would make it one has been the subject of some disagreement.
Back2BackU-MnPride2002
New member
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
Hey, I would never argue with someone having inside info, and so I have to ask, are there different rules for men's and women's hockey? Or when I heard that the creation of the Men's BTHC wasn't optional once PSU went Div 1, was that just misinformation?! Because that is what I read, that if a 6th Big Ten school went to Div 1 in hockey, it was not an option for the other 5 teams to remain in their conferences.
Hey, I would never argue with someone having inside info, and so I have to ask, are there different rules for men's and women's hockey? Or when I heard that the creation of the Men's BTHC wasn't optional once PSU went Div 1, was that just misinformation?! Because that is what I read, that if a 6th Big Ten school went to Div 1 in hockey, it was not an option for the other 5 teams to remain in their conferences.
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
That was misinformation. They decided to make it a Big 10 sport primarily because they thought it would improve the programming lineup on the Big 10 Network. They didn't have to make it a conference sport, though.
Edit: It is true that once a Big 10 conference was formed it was not optional for individual schools to remain in their previous conferences. Participation in the Big 10 is all or nothing. Once Big 10 hockey became a reality, all six schools were required to join.
That was misinformation. They decided to make it a Big 10 sport primarily because they thought it would improve the programming lineup on the Big 10 Network. They didn't have to make it a conference sport, though.
Edit: It is true that once a Big 10 conference was formed it was not optional for individual schools to remain in their previous conferences. Participation in the Big 10 is all or nothing. Once Big 10 hockey became a reality, all six schools were required to join.
Back2BackU-MnPride2002
New member
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
Both of your comments make a lot of sense. I figured the BTN issue may have had something to do with it. Thanks.
Both of your comments make a lot of sense. I figured the BTN issue may have had something to do with it. Thanks.
HockeyEast33
New member
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
How many years did U Mass Amherst not have a men's D1 program?? UMass Lowell only had one earlier because it started before they became part of the U Mass system and were still a private institution. I don't hear any evidence that the two U Mass programs are interested in or likely to add women's hockey, especially given the success of BU, BC, Harvard, and NE - they would have to play 5th fiddle in the state at best - which was the argument for not having a MA state men's team for so long. And the men's team has never really been that good since it started - just overshadowed by the other men's teams in MA and New England. Few good MA/New England kids say "I have always wanted to play for U Mass....".
That is the fundamental difference between MA and MI for women's hockey - MA has good D1 programs in abundance. Michigan has NO D1 women's hockey team and is churning out 5-10 D1 level players per year (my math may be low there). That is way more embarrassing than the MA public schools not having teams.
How many years did U Mass Amherst not have a men's D1 program?? UMass Lowell only had one earlier because it started before they became part of the U Mass system and were still a private institution. I don't hear any evidence that the two U Mass programs are interested in or likely to add women's hockey, especially given the success of BU, BC, Harvard, and NE - they would have to play 5th fiddle in the state at best - which was the argument for not having a MA state men's team for so long. And the men's team has never really been that good since it started - just overshadowed by the other men's teams in MA and New England. Few good MA/New England kids say "I have always wanted to play for U Mass....".
That is the fundamental difference between MA and MI for women's hockey - MA has good D1 programs in abundance. Michigan has NO D1 women's hockey team and is churning out 5-10 D1 level players per year (my math may be low there). That is way more embarrassing than the MA public schools not having teams.
Hux
Alfond to Ridder & rinks in between
The UMass program was "suspended" in 1978. The word around campus in the early 80's was that it would be reinstated once an arena was built on campus, which it was 20 years ago.
I was at media day for the arena and then AD Bob Marcum told me they would have a women's program within five years. That went away with the big cuts they had to the athletic dept. in the late '90's. Short of a miracle/someone with very deep pockets making a donation there is no way UMass adds a women's team.
Last edited:
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
I'm guessing that at BC, football is the primary revenue generator with basketball and hockey not far behind. Most of the money I would also assume in football comes from any TV revenue the school gets when their games are on TV.
At BU, hockey rules but I'm not sure how much it contributes to the school's coffers. The other sports probably feed off of whatever the hockey program is able to bring to the table. And of course alumni fundraisers.
At Harvard, all of our athletic programs are university subsidized and are not revenue generators (not when you compare it to the millions that the school rakes in from research grants and consulting gigs). Without our Endowment, I daresay that most of the athletic programs would be eliminated or severely cut back. Heck, the men's basketball program has to hold phone a thons to raise money for Tommy Amaker to do recruiting trips. Harvard gives him pocket change but nothing that would allow him to do any major trips to compete for players that are recruited by Stanford or Duke.
I'm guessing that at BC, football is the primary revenue generator with basketball and hockey not far behind. Most of the money I would also assume in football comes from any TV revenue the school gets when their games are on TV.
At BU, hockey rules but I'm not sure how much it contributes to the school's coffers. The other sports probably feed off of whatever the hockey program is able to bring to the table. And of course alumni fundraisers.
At Harvard, all of our athletic programs are university subsidized and are not revenue generators (not when you compare it to the millions that the school rakes in from research grants and consulting gigs). Without our Endowment, I daresay that most of the athletic programs would be eliminated or severely cut back. Heck, the men's basketball program has to hold phone a thons to raise money for Tommy Amaker to do recruiting trips. Harvard gives him pocket change but nothing that would allow him to do any major trips to compete for players that are recruited by Stanford or Duke.
Back2BackU-MnPride2002
New member
Re: More about expansion for women's hockey
I've been reading all about how Michigan's coach Red has been the one stopping any momentum towards starting up a women's program at Michigan? How should such a sexist attitude affect his legacy and Michigan's legacy as well for letting it happen? Or is there something about the situation I'm missing? Does he think it would just be too expensive and too much of a financial strain on the athletic dept?! Or does he feel it might cause too many conflicts between the men's and women's programs? It's kind of sad but he's considered this legend, and yet he seems to be working against hockey?!
I've been reading all about how Michigan's coach Red has been the one stopping any momentum towards starting up a women's program at Michigan? How should such a sexist attitude affect his legacy and Michigan's legacy as well for letting it happen? Or is there something about the situation I'm missing? Does he think it would just be too expensive and too much of a financial strain on the athletic dept?! Or does he feel it might cause too many conflicts between the men's and women's programs? It's kind of sad but he's considered this legend, and yet he seems to be working against hockey?!