More about expansion for women's hockey

[Hux]

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.

BC's football revenue is generated from a cut of the ACC's take from television rights and bowl games, and obviously the gate.

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?!

Michigan's football revenue is enough to provide for pretty much everything in the athletic department. As I have said before, I think this goes to his not wanting to have to share the facilities because they are inadequate for two teams.

 

[UCONN FAN]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

Michigan's football revenue is enough to provide for pretty much everything in the athletic department. As I have said before, I think this goes to his not wanting to have to share the facilities because they are inadequate for two teams.

Well that and being a first class dick!

 

[Eeyore]

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.

I'd be surprised if BC football generates a profit. The ACC doesn't have the kind of TV contracts the SEC, Big 10 or a couple of other conferences do. Football is really expensive, starting with having 85 scholarships.

 

[Eeyore]

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?!

For Red, in ways both good and bad, the world remains stuck in 1950s Manitoba. Clearly one of the bad ways is his attitude towards women's hockey. Among the reasons it's a shame is that there are a lot of things about Red I like but this is obviously a large black mark against him.

That said, it's hardly just him. As I've said before, I'm disappointed in the overall level of support that the men's hockey world gives to women's hockey, particularly when compared to the people within men's basketball who have helped spread the women's game.

 

[Skate79]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

I'd be surprised if BC football generates a profit. The ACC doesn't have the kind of TV contracts the SEC, Big 10 or a couple of other conferences do. Football is really expensive, starting with having 85 scholarships.

True but the question posed centered around Massachusetts schools and which sports generate revenue. Not necessarily profit. No question that the SEC, Big Ten and Pac 12 are money machines and really help the other athletic teams. Our schools are more balanced between academics and athletics so there is less of a premium on athletics being revenue machines. Still it would be naive to assume that BC's move to the ACC was anything but $$$ driven. The Big East dismantling is just another example.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

True but the question posed centered around Massachusetts schools and which sports generate revenue. Not necessarily profit. No question that the SEC, Big Ten and Pac 12 are money machines and really help the other athletic teams. Our schools are more balanced between academics and athletics so there is less of a premium on athletics being revenue machines. Still it would be naive to assume that BC's move to the ACC was anything but $$$ driven. The Big East dismantling is just another example.

I'm not really sure what the relevance of looking at football revenue and ignoring its expenses is in the context of asking what schools might add women's hockey.

 

[Skate79]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

I'm not really sure what the relevance of looking at football revenue and ignoring its expenses is in the context of asking what schools might add women's hockey.

This is what UCONN Fan wrote which led to my response:

BTW in Massachusetts what women's college sport is a revenue generating sport? For that matter what men's college sport generates revenue?

 

[Eeyore]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

This is what UCONN Fan wrote which led to my response:

By that definition, they are *all* revenue generating. So it may be true but it isn't very useful.

 

[Hux]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

I'm not really sure what the relevance of looking at football revenue and ignoring its expenses is in the context of asking what schools might add women's hockey.

Because an institution like Michigan, with its ridiculous football profits, can afford to add women's hockey, whereas say a Maryland that has been losing money cannot.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

Because an institution like Michigan, with its ridiculous football profits, can afford to add women's hockey, whereas say a Maryland that has been losing money cannot.

Well, yes. That's exactly my point: you have to look at both revenues and expenses so that you can tell who is losing money on football rather than having profits from it to fund other things.

 

[ManBehindTheCurtain]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

Because an institution like Michigan, with its ridiculous football profits, can afford to add women's hockey, whereas say a Maryland that has been losing money cannot.

Maryland is joining the Big Ten. The most recent numbers I read said that within a couple of years member institutions of the conference will each be receiving $43 million per year in revenue from the Big Ten Network. Maryland seems likely to be able to afford hockey if they should happen to decide they want to go that direction. Hockey doesn't seem a natural at that latitude but who knows? They do have the NHL in DC.

 

[slowe]

Maryland is joining the Big Ten. The most recent numbers I read said that within a couple of years member institutions of the conference will each be receiving $43 million per year in revenue from the Big Ten Network. Maryland seems likely to be able to afford hockey if they should happen to decide they want to go that direction. Hockey doesn't seem a natural at that latitude but who knows? They do have the NHL in DC.

I'd like to see it there. Increased money coming in and geography isn't a big detriment, but still expands college hockey's footprint. It won't happen soon though. Maryland had to cut sports and has big bills to pay. Any money will go toward reinstating sports before adding an expensive one.

 

[OneTimer]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

I have said before that the Maryland - Philadelphia corridor has tremendous potential for women's hockey. Plenty of schools that could naturally support hockey. If one or two went first others would follow knowing they had built in local competition. All the usual concerns apply of course for cost etc.

 

[ManBehindTheCurtain]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

I have said before that the Maryland - Philadelphia corridor has tremendous potential for women's hockey. Plenty of schools that could naturally support hockey. If one or two went first others would follow knowing they had built in local competition. All the usual concerns apply of course for cost etc.

This is interesting. The other team joining the Big Ten is Rutgers, sort of more or less completely in a Maryland-Philadelphia corridor I would think.

 

[Back2BackU-MnPride2002]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

I think that the best way to figure out which schools would be most willing to fund a women's hockey team, would be to figure out which schools have Club hockey teams that are both good and well attended. Well attended usually means easy access to where it is they play, and if they already have a club team that's playing, and I know this is not always the case, but maybe the move might be more of a natural thing? If the only expense involved is some upgrades and scholarships, it might not be such a difficult thing, especially with schools looking for ways to help out their Title IX situation. But if there is no where for the team to play, well, that's a whole nother story.


But I think Michigan and Mich St have to be the best possibilities for additions to women's hockey. Or actually, maybe some west coast schools? They get into water polo and weird sports like that, so why not women's hockey?! UCLA, California, etc.? A bunch of those west coast schools used to have mens hockey, way back in the day.

But I know, travel costs would be just insane, and I doubt most of those west coast schools have much of a problem with Title IX?!

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

This is interesting. The other team joining the Big Ten is Rutgers, sort of more or less completely in a Maryland-Philadelphia corridor I would think.

No way - this region of the country can't even support men's D1 college hockey let alone women's college hockey. Prep/high school and Juniors hockey has come a long way in this area since I grew up there, but there is still little interest in the college game. Within 200-300 miles there are 5 NHL teams to see - Rangers, Islanders, Devils, Flyers, Capitals - no one wants to see a college game. U. Penn has had a guaranteed spot with its Ivy League comrades for years and won't step in. No way a poorly funded state school is going in on D1 college hockey in NJ, Eastern PA, MD.

 

[D2D]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

A logical candidate to add a D1 team is Liberty University, located in Lynchburg, Virginia. According to their website "Liberty University is the largest private non-profit university in the nation, the largest university in Virginia, and the largest Christian university in the world." They are very well-funded and already have a very strong Women's Club Team that just finished 2nd in the ACHA D1 National Tournament (to the University of Minnesota). They take their women's hockey very seriously, recruit heavily into Canada
[ http://www.liberty.edu/campusrec/clubsports/index.cfm?PID=25960&TeamID=3 ]
and they post detailed write-ups of every game onto their website
[ http://www.liberty.edu/campusrec/clubsports/index.cfm?PID=25955&TeamID=3 ].

They went 4-0 against the D3 teams they played this past season. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they are the next team to make the jump.

http://www.liberty.edu/campusrec/clubsports/index.cfm?PID=25959&TeamID=3

 

[Blackhawks Rule]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

When talking of the next program to make the jump from ACHA DI, to NCAA DI, it seems Notre Dame should be mentioned. Their academics and location would make them very attractive to recruits from Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Missouri. In addition, talk about new facilities, that stadium they built is state of the art fantastic, and has the room for a womens team. All conversations of football revenue pale in comparison to what the Fighting Irish rake in per year. They might even begin to pull in recruits from out east.

 

[Hux]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

When talking of the next program to make the jump from ACHA DI, to NCAA DI, it seems Notre Dame should be mentioned. Their academics and location would make them very attractive to recruits from Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Missouri. In addition, talk about new facilities, that stadium they built is state of the art fantastic, and has the room for a womens team. All conversations of football revenue pale in comparison to what the Fighting Irish rake in per year. They might even begin to pull in recruits from out east.

I was told earlier in the year by a former ND player and prominent supporter of the program that there have been discussions about a women's team, but the likelihood is minimal in the foreseeable future. (more than five years out)

 

[AggiesHockey]

Re: More about expansion for women's hockey

A logical candidate to add a D1 team is Liberty University, located in Lynchburg, Virginia...

Good post, but I must confess, logical candidate for D1 hockey and 'Liberty University in Lynchburg, VA' just made me do a spit-take with my IPA.

I would have thought that Texas A & M would be more logical, but alas they folded their women's club team a couple years back. Didn't recruit enough Canucks, I guess.