What's new
By:
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.

Starting D1 Hockey Program

I'm originally from the Chicago area, and I'd love to see NCAA hockey there again. Northwestern? DePaul? Loyola? But I wonder if the area isn't hockey-saturated, with the Blackhawks, AHL Wolves and Ice Hogs, USHL Steel
 
MavsFan said:
I'm originally from the Chicago area, and I'd love to see NCAA hockey there again. Northwestern? DePaul? Loyola? But I wonder if the area isn't hockey-saturated, with the Blackhawks, AHL Wolves and Ice Hogs, USHL Steel
Click to expand...

IL at large has about as many USAH registrants as California and Pennsylvania, if you want to compare how many teams are supported in those parts.

The biggest hurdle with the Chicago-area schools is that only UIC has access to an appropriately sized arena (3,000 to 8,000, depending on the school and where they’d be trying to fit into the landscape). And we’ve mentioned the issues there.

Money is the biggest (by a wide margin, I’d guess) obstacle for starting a program and that’s a pretty expensive obstacle.
 
MavsFan said:
I'm originally from the Chicago area, and I'd love to see NCAA hockey there again. Northwestern? DePaul? Loyola? But I wonder if the area isn't hockey-saturated, with the Blackhawks, AHL Wolves and Ice Hogs, USHL Steel
Click to expand...

Just my .02 but I can't see DePaul or Loyola happening. Neither is particularly deep-pocketed and therefore unlikely to invest in something that would compete against hoops for dollars and attention. Northwestern certainly has the resources but has signaled zero interest in following some of their B1G brethren into hockey.

Generally speaking, the big cities tend to be pro sports towns. Different story in places like Grand Forks where college sports is the only show in town.

That being said, Champaign-Urbana is far enough away from Chicago that Illinois could be a consistent draw. But waiting for Illini Hockey is stuff for a different thread.
 
Last edited:
Split-N said:
Of all the schools listed above, the one that surprises me most about not jumping in is Arizona, if only to keep up with rival Arizona State. The Arizona club program, at least when I was there, had all the trappings of a varsity program, including nice arena, season ticket holders, hefty budget (at least for a club program). Also sorta surprised that UNLV hasn't taken the plunge although maybe the Vegas/Henderson Knights might not be enthralled about the prospect of revenue competition.

Don't know what to think about Illinois anymore. The silence has been deafening.
Click to expand...

I don’t really think it’s competition for the same dollar though. The same way the wild and goofs don’t compete for the same dollar. If anything, having thriving college and pro communities are mutually beneficial.
 
I think there’s something to the theory that NHL teams sort of create their own demand.

I don’t know entirely how to quantify (much less prove) that claim, but I get the feeling that there’s a certain percentage of butts in seats that you get regardless of what local engagement is with a sport on a youth/HS/college/minor league level.
 
ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
I think there’s something to the theory that NHL teams sort of create their own demand.

I don’t know entirely how to quantify (much less prove) that claim, but I get the feeling that there’s a certain percentage of butts in seats that you get regardless of what local engagement is with a sport on a youth/HS/college/minor league level.
Click to expand...

Hockey is like any religion: There are true believers before you arrive, but you still have to create converts also.
 
Sean Pickett said:
Hockey is an expensive, money losing sport, so any school that wants to start a DI team has to be prepared to spend and lose millions each and every year . . . . So any school interested in adding men's hockey needs to be able to budget for that every year.
Click to expand...

Title IX compliance might also be part of the financial consideration. If a school is up against limits, adding a men's team might require adding another team opportunity for women.
 
DavidNardolillo said:
Title IX compliance might also be part of the financial consideration. If a school is up against limits, adding a men's team might require adding another team opportunity for women.
Click to expand...

It might be the exact reason that having a women’s hockey team is a better indicator than anything else (it seems, at least based on the past 12 months or so) for starting a men’s program.

The only shame here (IMO) is that it’s Lindenwood, and not a resurrection of St Louis U, benefitting from the Blues’ generosity.
 
slowe said:
I hope that was referring to Illinois? Whoever “they” are can be confident sure, but in like 5-10 years or what?

It’s been killing me waiting. Supposedly they were going to announce the launch last spring. Then they said wait for the dust to settle on COVID. I’d say by this point everyone should have a good idea of how it will impact the financials of the donors, the school, and athletic (football) revenue.

The AD typically does an end of the year review around May / June. If he doesn’t provide solid info on hockey I’m going to…..well….do nothing but continue to wait in frustration.
Click to expand...

It's IL.
 
DavidNardolillo said:
Title IX compliance might also be part of the financial consideration. If a school is up against limits, adding a men's team might require adding another team opportunity for women.
Click to expand...

Or the reverse. Case in point: Syracuse, which already has a women's team. Apparently, Title IX is in balance on the shores of Lake Onondaga, so if Syracuse becomes the much-dreamed-of 12th men's team in Hockey East, it would have to either start another women's sport or pull the rug out from under an existing men's sport (which would not be basketball).
 
Last edited:
Split-N said:
if Syracuse becomes the much-dreamed-of 12th men's team in Hockey East, it would have to either start another women's sport or pull the rug out from under an existing men's sport (which would not be basketball).
Click to expand...

Or football, and 'Cuse football has had *a lot* of lean years in recent times.
 
DavidNardolillo said:
Precisely. The net surplus has been reported to be around $15 million in recent years, although unclear how that breaks down via source (TV revenue versus Carrier Dome attendance, etc.)
Click to expand...
The 2019 EADA numbers supplied by Syracuse show a profit just under $16.9 million. However, that revenue could include institutional support, as well as student fees (I have no idea if Syracuse has them). A further look at the EADA numbers shows they reported men's basketball earned $19.6 million and football earned $15.8 million. Looking at Louisville's NCAA financial reports shows that they received $20,063,301 in media rights for 2020 ($3,960,463 for men's basketball, $15,760,338 for football and $342,500 for all other sports) and $$8,659,159 in non-media and non-bowl conference distributions ($1,040,531 for men's basketball, $7,295,000 for football and $323,628 non-specific). I would expect Syracuse received at least the same amount as Louisville, who joined the ACC a year later. So, about $11 million of the men's basketball profit comes from ticket sales, contributions, royalties and sponsorships, among other sources, while it appears that football needed the conference distribution to make money.

By the way, Syracuse is not in title IX balance, as their breakdown of athletic participants 53.7% male, but the university's overall undergraduate population is 54% female.

Sean
 
Last edited:
Sean Pickett said:
By the way, Syracuse is not in title IX balance, as their breakdown of athletic participants 53.7% male, but the university's overall undergraduate population is 54% female.
Click to expand...

That's Test One, so they must be using one of the other of the Three Tests:

Test One – proportionality; provide intercollegiate or interscholastic participation opportunities for women and men at rates that are proportionate to their respective rates of enrollment; or

Test Two – continued program expansion for the underrepresented sex; show that opportunities have been added for the underrepresented sex (nearly always girls and women) as their interests and abilities have developed and evolved; or

Test Three – full accommodation of the underrepresented sex; fully accommodate the underrepresented sex by offering every team for which there is sufficient interest and ability for a viable team, and sufficient competition in the geographic areas where the institution normally competes.
Click to expand...

I know a school near UND that has numbers that far out of balance and they get by on Test Three.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top