Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

[mnstate0fhockey]

If the North Stars had stayed in Minnesota I'd bet we'd have a Lacrosse team. (Obligatory North Stars tie in.)

Please don't feed the troll

 

[darker98]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

Do you only split hockey revenue with the hockey schools or do all schools get a piece of that pie?

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

Do you only split hockey revenue with the hockey schools or do all schools get a piece of that pie?

I believe they all share the BTN revenue, so non-hockey schools would get a piece of any added revenue the increased number of hockey games brings to the network, but only the hockey schools would get revenue generated from the conference tournament (tickets, concessions, merch), etc...

 

[Beer Pong Horn]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

Let's suppose that all goes well for Penn State in its first few seasons. The BTHC turns out to be a decent money generator- like how it is right now for some of the high end programs. In that scenario, if there's money to be made, some of the non-hockey B1G schools will start raising eyebrows and giving some serious thought.

Of course, the lack of proper facilities will be a major holdup, but does anyone think a Pegula sized gift is truly needed to get a program going?

I don't think a single Pegula-style gift is necessary, no, but a school would need a major giving program and a centerpiece gift or two to make hockey work, and ideally a placeholder arena with ice capacity too. Figure a $5-10 million centerpiece, with enough well-connected and rich hockey-loving alums to gather another $50 million for a BTHC school - total of $60M minimum to play with the big boys. It'd be a sliding scale after that, with a school looking to play in either HEA/NCHC or WCHA/ECAC falling in the upper or lower center of the spectrum, and an AHA school probably being able to fund a program with $20 million. This is a guess, btw, but somewhat informed.

You think so? Serious question. I thought I read in a number of places that it's the fastest growing sport in this country.

I agree with you - in theory, it has the excitement of hockey without the surface needs.

If the North Stars had stayed in Minnesota I'd bet we'd have a Lacrosse team. (Obligatory North Stars tie in.)

Shh, don't tell these guys.

 

[darker98]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

I believe they all share the BTN revenue, so non-hockey schools would get a piece of any added revenue the increased number of hockey games brings to the network, but only the hockey schools would get revenue generated from the conference tournament (tickets, concessions, merch), etc...

I thought I saw a spread sheet showing only 3 schools were making money. 1 of them barely. I think Minnesota is getting the short end of the stick.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

I thought I saw a spread sheet showing only 3 schools were making money. 1 of them barely. I think Minnesota is getting the short end of the stick.

There's no question about that. But it's not like Minnesota hasn't been getting the better end of the stick when it comes to Football and what they get from the rest of the league. It evens out.

 

[IronRangeHockey]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

As per usual, you have no idea what you are talking about. But keep talking in absolutes as if you do.


Having grown up in the Chicago area (left @ 19 in '88) under the boot heel of old man Wirtz, everything that EODS said is true. Here's what I wrote in the Hawks thread in the cafe about the dark years of the Hawks (1996-2007):


"To get into the psyche of Hawks fans who eventually stopped going to games you have to understand how depressing it was to see your team on the verge of a Cup over several seasons with several top level talents and then have management systematically dismantle it without any apparent plan or desire to ever get back to that point.

When I first started following the Hawks (early 80's) we had a core of Savard, Larmer, Secord, Doug Wilson, Troy Murray etc and that transitioned over 10 years to Roenick, Chelios, Belfour, Tony Amonte etc and then transitioned to almost an empty cupboard and stayed that way for over 10 freaking years.

Now this didn't happen in some small market, it happened in Chicago. There was money to spend and Wirtz just wouldn't do it and eventually, many of us just said screw it until the old man dies. And then he just kept on living and living and living...

Fast-forward to now and they (we?) seem like a front-running fanbase (and some are bandwagoneers, no doubt), but having grown up around it, at their core, Blackhawks fans are good fans. Those who criticize for the poor attendance in the late 90's early 00's just can't understand unless you lived through it. Honestly, they (management) weren't even trying to be good."


There's a lot more to it, but that's the core of it. It's awfully funny that a Minnesota sports fan would ever criticize any other fan base for attendance issues. The Gophers are really good this season and yet there are lots of empty seats for every game. Weren't a couple of Vikings games almost blacked out this season? Remember the Twins season where they averaged about 8k fans per game and didn't have their first sellout till the division clinching game? Where are the North Stars these days?

This sort of thing isn't exclusive to Minnesota (or Chicago or Madison), not saying that they are, but glass houses you know! Just realize that fans get to decide what they spend their money (and time) on and if the product is inferior and management doesn't seem to care, why would anyone feel obligated to hand over their money?

Couple points to make on your post.

The Hawks attendance issue is a bit more recent than "early 00". As far as the NS's vs the Hawks issue the difference I see is the "Original 6 attitude" and the love that team recieves while the obvious has been ignored. Hawk fans can lean on the management excuse until the legs buckle as can the old Stars fans.

When it comes to the Gophers attendance (which I really dont care about) that fanbase is arguably the largest hockey fanbase in the midwest, selling out games for decades, until recently ofcourse. Indicative of times changing in the sport. I attended probably 10yrs straight of Badger Hockey games and Brewer games with attendance being less than 50% (hate to admint that).

Ever think of how many people in MN are in hockey attendance on any given weekend during the season? 150+ HS programs, 5 D1 programs and an NHL team? 2 nephews both played for the Badgers during their down years, and 1 nephew played for the Sioux (more recently), my son in law played for the Gophers, so I spent alot of time traveling to games over the past 25 years and i've seen all of them go though attendance issues, the last place I thought i'd see that is with the Gophers, but it happens.

Didn;t the Wild have something like 400+ sellouts, and not being a Wild fan I'd say that teams management is less than stellar. So does that make the Wild fanbase better than both the Hawks and NS's?

I think people in general should try and curb their hate for any given program, or atleast grow up enough to have some respect for others. Wether its a WI resident who hates everything MN, or a Minnesotan who mocks WI for their hockey programs. It ruins it for everyone, especially the kids playing it.

As far as football goes, who cares, unless you're a Packer fan I guess. I'm not a football fan at any level.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

Shh, don't tell these guys.

That's the equivalent of arena football. Worthless.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

I thought I saw a spread sheet showing only 3 schools were making money. 1 of them barely. I think Minnesota is getting the short end of the stick.

I think Minnesota gains the least with this, Penn State probably gains the most, but I think all the schools will benefit somewhat from the new conference. I could be wrong.

 

[aparch]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

United Center opened in 1994 and holds 19k.

Wrong. Over 20,500 for hockey.
As for the Blackhawks attendance argument: (from Here and Here)

1994-95 - 1/26 - 20,818 - 101.5%
1995-96 - 1/26 - 20,391 - 99.5%
1996-97 - 3/26 - 19,397 - 94.6% - Above: MTL, DET
1997-98 - 5/26 - 18,356 - 89.5% - Above: MTL, DET, PHI, STL
1998-99 - 8/27 - 17,330 - 84.5% - Above: MTL, DET, PHI, FLA, STL, NYI, BUF
1999-00 - 16/28 - 16,274 - 79.4% - Below: FLA, EDM, PIT, CGY, NJD, PHX, VAN, WAS, ANA, TB, CAR, NYR
2000-01 - 24/30 - 14,996 - 73.1% - Below: TB, FLA, PHX, ANA, CAR, NYI
2001-02 - 23/30 - 15,568 - 75.9% - Below: CAR, BOS, NSH, NYI, ATL, PHX, ANA
2002-03 - 24/30 - 14,794 - 72.2% - Below: PIT, ANA, BUF, ATL, PHX, NSH
2003-04 - 27/30 - 13,253 - 64.7% - Below: NSH, CAR, PIT
2005-06 - 29/20 - 13,318 - 64.9% - Below: NYI
2006-07 - 29/30 - 12,727 - 62.1% - Below: STL
2007-08 - 19/30 - 16,814 - 82.0% - Below: CAR, LA, ATL, NJ, WAS, FLA, BOS, NSH, CBJ, PHX, NYI
2008-09 - 1/30 - 22,247 - 111.2%
2009-10 - 1/30- 21,356 - 108.3%
2010-11 - 1/30 - 21,423 - 108.7%
2011-12 - 1/30 - 21,505 - 104.9%

The Death of Dollar Bill really kick started the return, along with Rocky doing "all the right things" or "correcting past mistakes," which got the bandwagoners back.


But going back to this thread, that still never stopped any of the Wirtz family from donating to their alma mater. Obviously, it's something that neither the Wirtz family AND Northwestern could care about.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

I think Minnesota gains the least with this, Penn State probably gains the most, but I think all the schools will benefit somewhat from the new conference. I could be wrong.

Of course they will, or they wouldn't do it. The gain is not increased revenue from the BTN - BTN's revenue needle will barely budge with the addition of the BTHC. The gain is from the increased number of home games that the BT teams will be able to command now that they're free of pesky away dates with the likes of NMU and UAA.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

Couple points to make on your post.

The Hawks attendance issue is a bit more recent than "early 00".

When it comes to the Gophers attendance (which I really dont care about) that fanbase is arguably the largest hockey fanbase in the midwest, selling out games for decades, until recently ofcourse. Indicative of times changing in the sport. I attended probably 10yrs straight of Badger Hockey games with attendance being less than 50% (hate to admint that).

No, the Hawks attendance issues were only between 97 and about 07. (EDIT: See Aparch's post above.)

And there has never been a season (or even a game) of Badger hockey with less than 50% attendance, let alone 10 straight years.

 

[JF_Gophers]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

Wrong. Over 20,500 for hockey.
As for the Blackhawks attendance argument: (from Here and Here)

I'm sure that 20k includes SRO and the like. The number I pulled was just from Wiki. It wasn't meant to be the exact number by any means. Anyways, I was supporting the Hawks in the arguement.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

Of course they will, or they wouldn't do it. The gain is not increased revenue from the BTN - BTN's revenue needle will barely budge with the addition of the BTHC. The gain is from the increased number of home games that the BT teams will be able to command now that they're free of pesky away dates with the likes of NMU and UAA.

I think Minnesota had pressure to do it. I'm not convinced they will make much more than they are on hockey right now (how much will BTN revenue really go up with added hockey games? Without Gophers?), but are carried by other schools in the conference in football and basketball.

I would be very interested in seeing the before and after financials to see exactly how they shake out.

 

[JDUBBS1280]

No, the Hawks attendance issues were only between 97 and about 07. (EDIT: See Aparch's post above.)

And there has never been a season (or even a game) of Badger hockey with less than 50% attendance, let alone 10 straight years.

How is '07 "early 00's"? And you dropped your hockey program at one point, so saying you "never" had attendance issues feels like a bit of a stretch. By the way, do the good people of Wisconsin know that you're using their tax money to post here on the clock?

 

[IronRangeHockey]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

No, the Hawks attendance issues were only between 97 and about 07. (EDIT: See Aparch's post above.)

And there has never been a season (or even a game) of Badger hockey with less than 50% attendance, let alone 10 straight years.

You said you moved from Chicago in 1988? I was in attendance for the majority of the games between 85 and 95, it was pretty choppy. You're probably right it never hit that low but it wasn't exactly sellouts either, so dont fool yourself into thinking the Badgers are anything special when it comes to attendance breakers, no college hockey fanbase is now. UND most recently and definately not Minnesota anymore.

 

[goldy_331]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

By the way, do the good people of Wisconsin know that you're using their tax money to post here on the clock?

C'mon....


Everyone knows there are no good people in Wisconsin!

 

[IronRangeHockey]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

As far as the topic goes. I was hoping Notre Dame would have joined the Big 10.

 

[Beer Pong Horn]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

I think Minnesota had pressure to do it. I'm not convinced they will make much more than they are on hockey right now (how much will BTN revenue really go up with added hockey games? Without Gophers?), but are carried by other schools in the conference in football and basketball.

I would be very interested in seeing the before and after financials to see exactly how they shake out.

Of course they did. Minnesota was perfectly happy to be in the (old) WCHA, thank you very much, with home dates against UND, UW-Madison, UMD, and to a lesser extent SCSU making quite a bit of money and drawing a large number of fans. Granted, UAA, DU and CC never drew well, and MSUM and Tech (and later, UNO and Bemidji) were variable at best, but the U seemed to accept that. In the BTHC, the only nearby rival is UW, though there's a good chance that Michigan and State alums will come out of the woodwork for those series at the Mooch.

LynahFan hit it on the nose though - the other schools are more free to schedule whoever is good or draws well. The U has apparently committed to play all the other Minnesota D-1 teams, which makes sense with the new and refurbished arenas in Duluth, Bemidji and St. Cloud, and the reasonably large arena in Mankato. They'll draw well wherever they play instate. Hopefully Michigan and State will make an effort to do the same with the NCHC and WCHA teams there, and Wisconsin will pick up a number of regional sites - but we all know that home-and-home is not likely for small-market teams like LSSU.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Who will be the 7th member of the Big Ten Hockey Conference?

How is '07 "early 00's"? And you dropped your hockey program at one point, so saying you "never" had attendance issues feels like a bit of a stretch. By the way, do the good people of Wisconsin know that you're using their tax money to post here on the clock?

By that logic, Marquette University hockey has the worst attendance in the country.

Sorry, you're correct, our attendance in 1960 was abysmal.


PS - I'm not a state worker, I'm not a liberal and I don't live in Mosinee. Oh yeah, and I'm not in a union. Not that there's anything wrong with liberal, unionized state workers from Mosinee.

I'm wasting time at my private sector job. In Madison. Keep trying though Dubbie.