Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

[Henry]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

I always thought that College hockey was more about skill development, however I see too much emphasis on conditioning, especially within the season and not enough on skill development. I think this leads to a more helter skelter brand of hockey and is why some players never go anywhere out of certain schools. Conditioning is necessary but it is still a game of great skill and that skill needs to be nurtured. So the point is well taken that a player must research the type of practices a particular program emphasizes.

 

[Henry]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Also I think the biggest problem is that in most areas with the exception of Minnesota I believe, hockey is not a high school sport. If it is at all it is relegated to the same level as the lawn bowling team. I think College hockey would benefit if there was more of a seemless transition from high school to college. But I think even Minnesota High Schools are losing kids to Juniors.

 

[blockski]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Canadian junior hockey better prepares players to jump to the NHL. NCAA is obsessed or has been obsessed with 21 year old freshman. Unlike other sports hockey is not centered on high school hockey. Junior hockey has no equivalent in the other major sports. It is expensive and Title IX almost guarantees you will have to have a women's team if you start a mens program. Lacrosse much cheaper and you get a pretty high end recruit academically, I don't see too much growth in college hockey. Most of these kids leave early anyway. They are better off to play Major Junior, if they don't go pro part of the deal is the junior team will pay for college. If they stay in Canada they can still play CIS. There are too any alternatives to college hockey. Also the college programs usually revolve around the coach and not star players. In Major junior it's like a junior NHL with players treated like stars and more games played. I think several good players have been derailed by going the college route. Petrecki would have developed into a Chris Pronger type had he gone the Major Junior route. He always looked like a fish out of water at BC.

Absurd.

 

[BoomGoestheDynamite]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

The Straight Edge: California ripe for Div. I NCAA hockey The writer obviously disagrees with you.

From The Rink Looks like Paul Kelly disagrees with you.

It is obviously an uphill battle but weirder things have happened in the past.

They don't really explain how nor provide any evidence that alumni, chancellors, and students at these schools are clamoring for college hockey or would fill up brand new arenas built for the sport on campus. I'd love to know what surveys would say about the general student interest on campus at the 4 Pac 10 schools he mentioned. And the whole domino theory never really seems plausible. With that in mind we should have had a full complement of Big Ten teams playing the game as is and I seriously doubt a lot of California players would burn their letter of intent to play for established, traditional hockey powers and take a flyer on a brand new expansion team. Some would, but plenty would not. Something not addressed in those article and something outsiders might not understand is that the Pac 10 fanbases are sadly less passionate about following their schools and the locations of a lot of the universities don't lend themselves to a college town like atmosphere. Whens its 75 in LA on October 28th its going to be a lot tougher sell to get the student body to head for the rink instead of the beach. Certainly harder than it would be in say Ann Arbor.

And Paul Kelly's job is to try to sell college hockey to non-traditional markets, so of course he would disagree with me. If he didn't, theres no reason for him to be employed.

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

All this talk about the West and the Southeast seems to be ignoring the BCS conferences that college hockey already has a foothold in, so to speak. They've got 5 Big-11 teams and 4 Big East teams, not to mention the "just outside the BCS" - MAC conference for which there are something like 3 teams. If they were to put a push on those conferences and non-hockey playing members, they could grow by quite a few teams and increase exposure considerably without leaving their current geographic footprint. If that were successful, then they could look at conferences just outside of the perimeter and use the success of the other BCS conferences as a selling point.

 

[Patman]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

All this talk about the West and the Southeast seems to be ignoring the BCS conferences that college hockey already has a foothold in, so to speak. They've got 5 Big-11 teams and 4 Big East teams, not to mention the "just outside the BCS" - MAC conference for which there are something like 3 teams. If they were to put a push on those conferences and non-hockey playing members, they could grow by quite a few teams and increase exposure considerably without leaving their current geographic footprint. If that were successful, then they could look at conferences just outside of the perimeter and use the success of the other BCS conferences as a selling point.

Again, everybody is promoting using the current conference access lines. Stop thinking like that, that is not how its going to happen. I mean, look, Robert Morris is in what? The Northeast Conference which includes Quinnipiac but didn't at the time (QU jumped to D-1)?

In general we haven't seen "conference pals" make the jump... its going to take an institutional spark based on confidence in traveling down that path. I bet RMU hopes they can get a solid year or two and capture the Pittsburgh market and propel upwards. That's how you need to think. Think markets... think situations... think schools looking for a distinction. Then you will have those schools which have a chance in seeing the potential for themselves.

----

You know the whole California deal... everybody looks to the Pac10 schools... and no doubt if that were to happen that would be landscape shift. But why not somebody else looking to get an edge or a name for themselves. What if it were one of those BigWest schools deeper down the Univ. of California or Cal State chain? Is that not growth? If we have the idea that growth will beget growth then this will be a positive thing and it'll spur interest. Take growth wherever it can come from. Growth is good as it adds variety and interest. Don't discount it because its not what you wanted.

 

[4four4]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

They don't really explain how nor provide any evidence that alumni, chancellors, and students at these schools are clamoring for college hockey or would fill up brand new arenas built for the sport on campus. I'd love to know what surveys would say about the general student interest on campus at the 4 Pac 10 schools he mentioned. And the whole domino theory never really seems plausible. With that in mind we should have had a full complement of Big Ten teams playing the game as is and I seriously doubt a lot of California players would burn their letter of intent to play for established, traditional hockey powers and take a flyer on a brand new expansion team. Some would, but plenty would not. Something not addressed in those article and something outsiders might not understand is that the Pac 10 fanbases are sadly less passionate about following their schools and the locations of a lot of the universities don't lend themselves to a college town like atmosphere. Whens its 75 in LA on October 28th its going to be a lot tougher sell to get the student body to head for the rink instead of the beach. Certainly harder than it would be in say Ann Arbor.

And Paul Kelly's job is to try to sell college hockey to non-traditional markets, so of course he would disagree with me. If he didn't, theres no reason for him to be employed.

Paul Kelly can a have a legacy like no other if he is able to recruit at least 2 schools in non-tradtional areas of the country to play in the icebox.

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

I don't disagree with that. I also never said I favor expanding college hockey with multiple BCS schools. Just that that would be the only way for significant growth for the sport nationally. I personnally don't have a problem with the way things are. But for those who desire the sport to grow by leaps and bounds, you can add all the GVSUs, Lindenwoods, RITs, Clarksons, Mankatos, etc. that you want. It won't make a difference for your cause. That only increases visibility to the casual fan incrementally, if at all. Yes, it will add a few thousand die-hards at those new schools, but not any fans from elsewhere. Can you imagine the "ratings" (I'm well aware our sport doesn't actually get ratings, just using it for lack of a better term) for a GVSU vs. RIT tournament game outside of the college hockey die-hard circles, Rochester, and wherever GVSU is located (no disrespect, I'm just too lazy to look it up right now)?

I knew my ears were burning.......

GVSU is located in Allendale, Michigan, just outside of Grand Rapids. Pretty much about an hour drive from Ferris State, Michigan State, and Western Michigan. And has made quite a habit of collecting the Directors Cup for having the best overall Athletic Department in Division Two right now.

Frankly, its the lack of room in the CCHA and having a big donor really pushing for it is about the only thing really keeping the Lakers from having a pretty competive Hockey program.

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Again, everybody is promoting using the current conference access lines.

To the best of my recollection, the reason I brought this up is that no one else (on this thread) had. All the BCS school thought on here has been about the PAC-10 and SEC, neither of which is realistically going to happen in the foreseeable future IMHO. So I'm not sure who you mean by "everybody".

Stop thinking like that, that is not how its going to happen.

In your humble opinion...

I mean, look, Robert Morris is in what? The Northeast Conference which includes Quinnipiac but didn't at the time (QU jumped to D-1)?

What is your point? I wasn't talking about them. I was talking about Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State (Big-11), Providence, UConn, Notre Dame (Big East - I know I said 4, but I just still haven't adjusted my brain to BC being in the ACC), Western Michigan, Bowling Green, and Miami (MAC).

In general we haven't seen "conference pals" make the jump... its going to take an institutional spark based on confidence in traveling down that path.

So it's never happened before so don't try it? And based on this logic you think that this...

What if it were one of those BigWest schools deeper down the Univ. of California or Cal State chain?

...is a good idea? ok, whatever.

I bet RMU hopes they can get a solid year or two and capture the Pittsburgh market and propel upwards. That's how you need to think. Think markets... think situations... think schools looking for a distinction. Then you will have those schools which have a chance in seeing the potential for themselves

Gee, I seem to remember promoting the same exact logic in the tournament format change thread using RIT as an example and you jumped down my throat spouting off about RIT thinking they are entitled to something or some such nonsense. Try and keep your stories straight. I know you don't like us for whatever reason. But don't contradict yourself just for a senseless attack.

 

[Henry]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Been watching Calgary Windsor Memorial Cup. There is no comparison, a much more entertaining brand of NHL style hockey. Put your Kool Aid down and watch a few games. College Hockey is shrinking not growing.

 

[FRICKER]

Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Henry......I agree that minor hockey is a good brand of hockey, but I've been turned off by the NHL players "putting it on cruise control" during the regular season. I share Red Wing seasontickets and am hesitant to take games after they return from a Western road trip, or when they play back-to-back games with the first one on the road.....boring!!!! My interest in college hockey has gone up at the same time as these athletes give 100% every game. Yes, they don't have the skill level of Sergi Federov, but if he only "shows" that elite skill level evry 4-5 minutes/game, and only when he feels like it, what good is it. The level of hockey you prefer is a personal choice, and I marvel at the way NHL'ers skate & shoot, and move the puck - if only it was 24/7!!!

 

[Caustic Undertow]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Been watching Calgary Windsor Memorial Cup. There is no comparison, a much more entertaining brand of NHL style hockey. Put your Kool Aid down and watch a few games. College Hockey is shrinking not growing.

I don't need to drink Koolaid to consider College Hockey as entertaining as Junior Hockey. I suspect I have greater fan involvement than most people on this board with Major Junior, and in fact "adopted" Windsor as the team I preferred to follow back when a Western Conference final was a major accomplishment and they played in a facility that redefined "old and decrepit." Major Junior is a good product, and a good place for professionals to develop.

I am pretty fair about not bagging on Major Junior's negatives on this board; with the exception of a post or two, your purpose in this conversation appears to be to bag on college hockey. Your suggestions are not credible.

To touch on other areas of discussion, I think the idea of Pac Ten expansion is farfetched, due to distance issues. If any one schools thinks, "what would be involved in adding D-1 hockey," the lack of local competition would quickly sink the idea. You could campaign for a handful of schools to add at the same time, but the question most would ask would be, "Why would we want to?"

The Alaska schools came to their conferences in a package deal--but they were the motivated parties. Hockey makes more sense there than any other sport. Why would a thriving athletic department at Washington or Oregon need to add hockey? It is not worth the effort. At least Penn State or Syracuse would have existing teams within driving distance to play.

 

[solovsfett]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Been watching Calgary Windsor Memorial Cup. There is no comparison, a much more entertaining brand of NHL style hockey. Put your Kool Aid down and watch a few games. College Hockey is shrinking not growing.

...seriously. You're on an NCAA Hockey message board. Find a junior board to go nuts on. You won't find much agreement about your Jr vs NCAA argument here.

and I don't think you'll find it when looking at the remaining 4 teams in the Stanley Cup as well. Pavelski, Cammaleri, Heatley, Burish, Toews, Gionta, Van Riemsdyk, Carle, Ortmeyer, Madden, Keith et al

yeah you're right NCAA hockey sux and can't produce quality NHL'ers

 

[bronconick]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Incremental adding of programs on the college hockey fringes will keep the basic status quo at 60-70 programs, but won't generate the kind of substantial growth to get into the 100 program-area where college hockey becomes more viable as a national sport. To generate growth momentum, you need the copycat effect from schools that can afford it. We can debate whether hockey should be a national sport (some people think it should only be an east/midwest sport), but I still believe the emphasis needs to be on big school brands in the south and west. The fringe East-Midwest programs will come anyway once the bigger schools South and West start adding programs.

That's a completely unrealistic situation to hope for. One or two schools aren't going to join up because their travel costs would suck abysmally, and they won't generate a bandwagon effect for hockey at Florida, for instance, unless Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama show up on the schedule, not Miami (OH), Alabama-Huntsville and Boston College.

And to expect for a conference like the PAC-10 or SEC to say "Hey, why don't we get a bunch of us to play hockey in a SEC/PAC-10 league" when BCS conferences in the Midwest and Northeast like the Big-10 and Big East don't mandate it yet (if ever) is so far off the reservation it defies rational belief.

Odds are if it ever reaches that point, I'll have lost interest in college hockey due to WMU folding out of the destroyed remnants of the CCHA, and your Pioneers will be soldiering on in mid-major obscurity in the weakened WCHA while USC's players (being paid more than most minor league players, so they stay all 4 years) matchup with Minnesota for the national title played in the Rose Bowl.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Odds are if it ever reaches that point, I'll have lost interest in college hockey due to WMU folding out of the destroyed remnants of the CCHA, and your Pioneers will be soldiering on in mid-major obscurity in the weakened WCHA while USC's players (being paid more than most minor league players, so they stay all 4 years) matchup with Minnesota for the national title played in the Rose Bowl.

SC has too much salary tied up in football, bouncy-ball, and baseball. They'd need a couple Hollywood alumni hockey fans to step up with large donations to cover that payroll

...for the national title played in the Rose Bowl.

They can't even produce a quality ice surface indoors in a football stadium. Think what would happen in Pasadena in April
I might even consider going to one in that football stadium. The view would suck something fierce, but Pasadena in April... nice!

 

[Patman]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

That's a completely unrealistic situation to hope for. One or two schools aren't going to join up because their travel costs would suck abysmally, and they won't generate a bandwagon effect for hockey at Florida, for instance, unless Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama show up on the schedule, not Miami (OH), Alabama-Huntsville and Boston College.

And to expect for a conference like the PAC-10 or SEC to say "Hey, why don't we get a bunch of us to play hockey in a SEC/PAC-10 league" when BCS conferences in the Midwest and Northeast like the Big-10 and Big East don't mandate it yet (if ever) is so far off the reservation it defies rational belief.

Odds are if it ever reaches that point, I'll have lost interest in college hockey due to WMU folding out of the destroyed remnants of the CCHA, and your Pioneers will be soldiering on in mid-major obscurity in the weakened WCHA while USC's players (being paid more than most minor league players, so they stay all 4 years) matchup with Minnesota for the national title played in the Rose Bowl.

Be careful what you wish for.

Its not even that... I think for a BCS conference to flip into hockey then hockey would have to become the nation's number two or strong number 3 sport... and by then you'll see others jumping in as well.

Fact of the matter is that is out of the control of the expansive "college hockey community" in whatever manifestation.

 

[DarthBruno]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

Also I think the biggest problem is that in most areas with the exception of Minnesota I believe, hockey is not a high school sport. If it is at all it is relegated to the same level as the lawn bowling team.

You must never have been to the US Northeast. In my little state of RI, most public and I believe all private high schools have competitive boys' and girls' varsity hockey teams, some with JV programs as well.

I will grant that the best high school hockey programs in New England are those at private boarding schools and a few outstanding Catholic high schools, such as Catholic Memorial in MA and Mount St. Charles in RI, rather than at public high schools. However, the public high schools with robust hockey programs feed the prep schools and junior hockey regularly. And most kids who play high school hockey also play on good programs in the h.s. off-seasons. (My nephew in MA did this: Bridgewater Bandits when not on the ice for his public high school team, which he captained.)

 

[unhpuckfan2001]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

You must never have been to the US Northeast. In my little state of RI, most public and I believe all private high schools have competitive boys' and girls' varsity hockey teams, some with JV programs as well.

I will grant that the best high school hockey programs in New England are those at private boarding schools and a few outstanding Catholic high schools, such as Catholic Memorial in MA and Mount St. Charles in RI, rather than at public high schools. However, the public high schools with robust hockey programs feed the prep schools and junior hockey regularly. And most kids who play high school hockey also play on good programs in the h.s. off-seasons. (My nephew in MA did this: Bridgewater Bandits when not on the ice for his public high school team, which he captained.)

Agreed; they hold the New Hampshire High School hockey championships at the Verizon Wireless Arena in Manchester, so there is at least SOME following of High School in this state. Brian Foster was the highest touted goalie in the country out of high school (that's what I wastold, and I have reason to trust the source, but I'm sure that could easily be dis / proved) and he's orginally from Bow, NH.

 

[Osorojo]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

While I would like to see college hockey grow in the number of teams playing the sport, and really think it's important that we don't contract, I most definitely would hate to see it turn into bouncy-ball lite.

Or football lite. The Florida State Supreme Court yesterday ruled that the NCAA could NOT prevent records of college academic cheating from release to the public. The NCAA worked hard to protect their ability to cover up such messes from public view - but the court realizes the public subsidizes athletic scholarships.

Presumably this ruling extends to college athletics beyond football; even into the (virgin?) area of college hockey. This decision may be a crushing blow to the growth of college hockey programs which, to build winning records, rely upon scholarships to recruit hockey players with questionable academic credentials, academic aspirations, and academic performance.* We all know who these recruits are: it's painfully obvious from the start they are not seeking a degree, but subsidized ice time, exposure, and development to become professional hockey players. You know - the one and two year talented hockey dropouts we read so much about.

* The FSU athletes in this case cheated on an ON-LINE MUSIC APPRECIATION TEST, among others.

 

[scsutommyboy]

Re: Should College Hockey grow? Does it need change?

While I would like to see college hockey grow in the number of teams playing the sport, and really think it's important that we don't contract, I most definitely would hate to see it turn into bouncy-ball lite.

Or football lite. The Florida State Supreme Court yesterday ruled that the NCAA could NOT prevent records of college academic cheating from release to the public. The NCAA worked hard to protect their ability to cover up such messes from public view - but the court realizes the public subsidizes athletic scholarships.

Presumably this ruling extends to college athletics beyond football; even into the (virgin?) area of college hockey. This decision may be a crushing blow to the growth of college hockey programs which, to build winning records, rely upon scholarships to recruit hockey players with questionable academic credentials, academic aspirations, and academic performance.* We all know who these recruits are: it's painfully obvious from the start they are not seeking a degree, but subsidized ice time, exposure, and development to become professional hockey players. You know - the one and two year talented hockey dropouts we read so much about.

* The FSU athletes in this case cheated on an ON-LINE MUSIC APPRECIATION TEST, among others.

I know quite a few two and done players that were very good students while they were in school. Just because someone doesn't graduate before playing pro hockey doesn't mean they are not good students.