Niagara drops women's hockey!!

[hurstfan87]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

Yeah they had every chance to succeed just never were able to. Their arena is nice but it sucks that another team got dropped. Who's next

 

[dave1381]

Yeah they had every chance to succeed just never were able to. Their arena is nice but it sucks that another team got dropped. Who's next

False. They have made just one fewer Frozen Four than Mercyhurst. They did okay when they had a good league. Things went downhill fast when the ECAC ditched them.

 

[hurstfan87]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

Yeah didn't they move to cha after they went to the frozen four. Just because they went to a lesser conference made them that much worse.

 

[SlewFoot]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

My daughter played for Niagara. She's royally bummed but she played every game of her four years, and graduates in May.

It's all about money. Read the announcement. It's also on the NU athletics web site (www.purpleeagles.com). You can buy a lot of track shoes for the cost of one hockey player's gear (and NU didn't provide skates for the women). I think they'll have to build a track - that's likely why the track team won't be starting until 2013-14.

I agree. Its always about money. That's why Wayne State dropped their program and that's why St. Cloud State was contemplating dropping theirs last year. Travel expenses are higher for hockey than most athletic programs. And most womens' hockey programs don't generate enough revenue to come close to covering their expenses. Niagra is a pretty small school so I'm sure the cost per student was pretty high. http://niagarahub.com/2012/03/19/audio-niagara-ad-mclaughlin-talks-about-demise-of-womens-hockey/

 

[pakidnyc]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

Has this announcement RIT to CHA been made yet? As for right now, I Only know of 5 teams -- Mercyhurst, Syracuse, RMU, Penn St. and Lindenwood for 2012-13. Still not enough for an auto-bid.

 

[Cali]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

Has this announcement RIT to CHA been made yet? As for right now, I Only know of 5 teams -- Mercyhurst, Syracuse, RMU, Penn St. and Lindenwood for 2012-13. Still not enough for an auto-bid.

They are announcing tomorrow at 10:30am Press Conference.

 

[pakidnyc]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

. And most womens' hockey programs don't generate enough revenue to come close to covering their expenses. Niagra is a pretty small school so I'm sure the cost per student was pretty high.

While that is a true statement, it is also true that MOST NCAA sports PERIOD (men's or women's) don't come close to covering their expenses. In most schools, you have a premiere sport such as football or basketball that covers the expenses of ALL OTHER athletic teams in the school, period. If you don't believe that, ask any NCAA athletic director. Trust me, track/field, wrestling, swimming/diving, lax, crew, baseball, softball, gymnastics, tennis -- NONE of these sports are revenue generators at any school or even revenue neutral. In this particular case, they have the rink, which is the most expensive part of college hockey -- so, I really don't understand this one. But, it's no different than any number of schools like Notre Dame, Michigan, Miami of Ohio, UMich and the list goes on and on that have D1 Men's programs but dont' support women!

 

[SlewFoot]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

While that is a true statement, it is also true that MOST NCAA sports PERIOD (men's or women's) don't come close to covering their expenses. In most schools, you have a premiere sport such as football or basketball that covers the expenses of ALL OTHER athletic teams in the school, period. If you don't believe that, ask any NCAA athletic director. Trust me, track/field, wrestling, swimming/diving, lax, crew, baseball, softball, gymnastics, tennis -- NONE of these sports are revenue generators at any school or even revenue neutral. In this particular case, they have the rink, which is the most expensive part of college hockey -- so, I really don't understand this one. But, it's no different than any number of schools like Notre Dame, Michigan, Miami of Ohio, UMich and the list goes on and on that have D1 Men's programs but dont' support women!

Per the AD, finances were a big factor but not the only factor however he didn't really give any other reasons other than to say that it would allow them to give more opportunities for women athletes. I think if you read between the lines he's saying that some of the money saved on hockey could be used to set up a track program that would benefit twice as many women athletes plus Niagra has said in their release that they will be using some of the savings to beef up their La Crosse program. All in all its still about money. http://niagarahub.com/2012/03/19/aud...womens-hockey/

 

[giwan]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

While that is a true statement, it is also true that MOST NCAA sports PERIOD (men's or women's) don't come close to covering their expenses. In most schools, you have a premiere sport such as football or basketball that covers the expenses of ALL OTHER athletic teams in the school, period. If you don't believe that, ask any NCAA athletic director. Trust me, track/field, wrestling, swimming/diving, lax, crew, baseball, softball, gymnastics, tennis -- NONE of these sports are revenue generators at any school or even revenue neutral. In this particular case, they have the rink, which is the most expensive part of college hockey -- so, I really don't understand this one. But, it's no different than any number of schools like Notre Dame, Michigan, Miami of Ohio, UMich and the list goes on and on that have D1 Men's programs but dont' support women!

Oh it is different at least in my opinion for schools such as ND UM MSU as those schools have dollars and at least to claim such RICH hockey traditions. ADs should be embarrassed.

 

[pakidnyc]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

Oh it is different at least in my opinion for schools such as ND UM MSU as those schools have dollars and at least to claim such RICH hockey traditions. ADs should be embarrassed.

Yes, but that is on the men's side....I don't think there is a women's hockey program, or a single women's sport at any school, for that matter that "makes money." There are a few hockey examples, but it is mostly football (even at schools such as ND UM and MSU) that carries the rest of teh sports. Think of how many tickets they can sell (and do) in a season as compared to how many hockey tickets (men's or womens). THere are a very few exceptions for hockey, but not sure in those cases, even then that they "make money" for the school.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

Well sure, it's about the money, but it's also about the benefit side of the equation too.

Yes, women's hockey is one of the most expensive sports. It's not just the travel costs, it's all equipment, etc. I forget where the NCAA has disclosed this info but you can see spending by sport. It's not cheap.

So if you're going to invest in a sport, you need some benefits to justify that kind of expense. (and Title IX isn't going to help much since there are cheaper ways of achieving compliance) You need the program to have some chance of bringing glory to the school. Can you blame Niagara for wanting to get out? They weren't able to match Mercyhurst's success, and this team has never had any chance of making NCAAs for the last decade, and fewer schools have a real chance of winning an NCAA championship. Sure, the CHA will finally get up to six teams in the future, but who can be confident about the long-term future of the league? Might Penn State someday jump for a Big 10 Hockey Conference? Who knows.

It's clear to me that the NCAA was really misguided in not supporting the CHA. The women's hockey committee within the NCAA certainly wanted to give the CHA an autobid waiver, but the larger body refused. It really stifled the growth of the sport. Imagine if the CHA had a waiver early on, and Findlay had never dropped the sport, and it was viable for OSU to join the CHA (note:not blaming OSU for backing out). Maybe then these schools could've had something more prestigious than a CHA championship to aim for, and kept investing the sport. It's a shame, and it was really awful for the NCAA not to support the sport by granting an autobid waiver.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

This Amy Moritz article from the Buffalo News has a bit more information. The comment is also insightful:
http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/c...rsity/niagara-womens-hockey/article771429.ece

Amy covered that Women's Frozen Four in 2002. Back then Margot Page was so thrilled with how the program had progressed so rapidly and how so many didn't really give her a chance to succeed. It's sad to see things end like this.

 

[LtPowers]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

Wait, do Niagara fans really see the move to AHA as a "downgrade" for the men's program? The AHA /saved/ their men's program; they sure wouldn't have lasted long as an independent, and no one else offered them a spot.


Powers &8^]

 

[ARM]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

It's clear to me that the NCAA was really misguided in not supporting the CHA. The women's hockey committee within the NCAA certainly wanted to give the CHA an autobid waiver, but the larger body refused. It really stifled the growth of the sport. Imagine if the CHA had a waiver early on, and Findlay had never dropped the sport, and it was viable for OSU to join the CHA (note:not blaming OSU for backing out). Maybe then these schools could've had something more prestigious than a CHA championship to aim for, and kept investing the sport. It's a shame, and it was really awful for the NCAA not to support the sport by granting an autobid waiver.

It is possible that your point is true, but it would require more support to be accepted as a given. If the schools that have folded had the overriding goal of reaching the NCAA tournament, then they could have followed the Mercyhurst model for doing so. An auto bid isn't going to help any individual program that is unwilling to fund its team to a level necessary to compete. The auto bid obviously wasn't a huge issue in the Findlay decision, because they dropped the sport at a point where an auto bid was on the horizon for the conference. Wayne State dropped a men's program that competed in a conference that already had an auto bid, and once the men's team was gone, the women's program had to be on thin ice as well. Niagara had to believe that obtaining an auto bid was a question of when, not if, for the CHA, but that wasn't enough. Had they wanted to chase that carrot, the auto bid would probably have arrived before they had a team strong enough to earn it.

The auto bid could be a factor. However, it is not clear cut enough that one can conclude that these programs would have survived if the conference had been granted a waiver.

 

[WestsideTigersFan]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

Wait, do Niagara fans really see the move to AHA as a "downgrade" for the men's program? The AHA /saved/ their men's program; they sure wouldn't have lasted long as an independent, and no one else offered them a spot.


Powers &8^]

I don't think there is any question that AHA is considered a significant downgrade when you consider where Niagara was playing. Yes, no one offered them a spot, and you can debate whether or not they would have survived as an independent. Had their former conference not folded and they had left of their own choice, you couldn't help it but consider it a significant step backwards.

 

[binnyrus]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

Many of you, like me, remember the 2002 FF in Durham, NH. Probably the single most outstanding performance of that tournament was that of the Niagra goaltender . . . Tania Pinelli (I believe she was also in the Kaz running that season). Niagra lost to UMD in the semi, but the only reason Niagra was in the game at all was because of how Pinelli stood on her head. Hard to believe that a program that was in the Frozen Four is no more.

 

[LtPowers]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

I don't think there is any question that AHA is considered a significant downgrade when you consider where Niagara was playing. Yes, no one offered them a spot, and you can debate whether or not they would have survived as an independent. Had their former conference not folded and they had left of their own choice, you couldn't help it but consider it a significant step backwards.

I disagree; in 2010, the CHA champion was a lower seed in the national tournament than the AHA champion. It really wasn't that much of a step down, especially not when you consider going from a weakening 4-team league to a strengthening 12-team league.


Powers &8^]

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

It is possible that your point is true, but it would require more support to be accepted as a given. If the schools that have folded had the overriding goal of reaching the NCAA tournament, then they could have followed the Mercyhurst model for doing so. An auto bid isn't going to help any individual program that is unwilling to fund its team to a level necessary to compete. The auto bid obviously wasn't a huge issue in the Findlay decision, because they dropped the sport at a point where an auto bid was on the horizon for the conference. Wayne State dropped a men's program that competed in a conference that already had an auto bid, and once the men's team was gone, the women's program had to be on thin ice as well. Niagara had to believe that obtaining an auto bid was a question of when, not if, for the CHA, but that wasn't enough. Had they wanted to chase that carrot, the auto bid would probably have arrived before they had a team strong enough to earn it.

The auto bid could be a factor. However, it is not clear cut enough that one can conclude that these programs would have survived if the conference had been granted a waiver.

Dunno about Findlay, but IIRC, the demise of Wayne State's Hockey programs was for a large part driven by reduced funding coming in from the State. At first glance, it appears the Niagara decision was driven more from an internal "manage resources with the funds we have" kind of trigger, and the decision appears to have been to support more athletes ~35 vs ~20 with the same amount of funding, but choosing cheaper sports on a per athlete basis. Not suggesting it is right or wrong, but as a former track athlete myself, know full well the ins and outs of that sport, so this is a mixed emotions decision from my point of view.

The reality is the Budget crunch decisions are NEVER pleasant, whether it be in sports or Business. These are the HARD lesssons in life. They always suk when you are directly affected, specially if you did not see them coming. I've seen my share of layoffs at the places I've worked over the years.

Wishing all the players on the current roster the best of luck. Whatever they do, my advice to them is to not make any rash short term decisions. Life is too short. Taking some extra time now to make the right move (or non move) will pay dividends down the road.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

This is quite sad news.

 

[WestsideTigersFan]

Re: Niagara drops women's hockey!!

I disagree; in 2010, the CHA champion was a lower seed in the national tournament than the AHA champion. It really wasn't that much of a step down, especially not when you consider going from a weakening 4-team league to a strengthening 12-team league.


Powers &8^]

You are going to base your argument on the seeding of the 2010 NCAA tournament? The conference crumbled around them, parts had already left and the whole thing was on life support by 2010. If you looked outside of that one year, its a step backwards. You went from a league that was greatly respected in its prime to a league that was the worst one in college hockey then, and still is today. Has it improved yes. But the fact that even today, after all the growth and improvement it is still the weakest in college hockey tells you exactly how terrible it was then. Look at AHA's record outside the conference. It is easily the weakest league in DI hockey. BY A LONG WAYS.