What's new
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.

Why is the NCAA D-I women's hockey tournament so second-rate?

Keith Willard, the "NCAA’s assistant director of championships", simply did not get the job done. This event was sold out a long time ago, and there is absolutely no reason why it shouldn't be televised! How many events do you watch on TV where there is practically nobody in the stands? The fact that this game is not on TV anywhere is solid proof that the NCAA doesn't give a whiff about promoting women's hockey. A blown opportunity if there ever was one.

A contract is a contract.
 
Re: Why is the NCAA D-I women's hockey tournament so second-rate?

Sure, but why did they sign a contract that wouldn't allow anyone to broadcast the game?
I'm going to do my best Oliver Stone here. Why would the NCAA support and actually try to grow women's hockey? Look at the decisions that are made when it comes to seeding vs. travel. I remember the up roar last year (some of it warranted) about the first round match ups. The NCAA couldn't have cared less about protecting the #1 seed vs travel costs. We know women's hockey is the one of if not the most expensive woman's collegiate sport. More interest means, increased teams, an increased tournament field, increased costs to run the championship. Hey if Oliver Stone can produce JFK I'll throw this theory out there........

Basically we know the answer. Nobody at the NCAA cares about women's hockey or it's fan. Football and March Madness, That's it!
 
Re: Why is the NCAA D-I women's hockey tournament so second-rate?

Basically we know the answer. Nobody at the NCAA cares about women's hockey or it's fan. Football and March Madness, That's it!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
 
Re: Why is the NCAA D-I women's hockey tournament so second-rate?

Sure, but why did they sign a contract that wouldn't allow anyone to broadcast the game?

As noted, it is all about the $$$$$. The NCAA isn't about to fork over coinage to get out of a contract so they can broadcast a game that is already being streamed for free. Additionally, broadcasting is expensive. You need to sell ads to cover expenses, never mind make a profit. That takes planning and additional money to have someone spend time drumming up ad revenue. Obviously, women's hockey is not a cash cow...it isn't worth the effort as far as they are concerned.
 
Re: Why is the NCAA D-I women's hockey tournament so second-rate?

The NCAA web site where I go to find the video stream tells me the game is being played at "Riddler Arena".

Next to "Batman Field", if I'm not mistake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ARM
Re: Why is the NCAA D-I women's hockey tournament so second-rate?

According to my cable listings, here is what is on at 3:00 on some of the channels that would be logical for a NCAA Division 1 championship game.

1) ESPN - World Series of Poker
2) NBC Sports Channel - Formula One Racing
3) CBS Sports Network - NCAA basketball analysis & then NBA D-league
4) ESPNU - Women's College Softball

ESPN2 is showing NCAA women's basketball which I understand, but the others (especially CBS Sports & ESPNU) are a complete slap in the face to women's college hockey.

The fact the Frozen Four used to be televised and now not with more available sports channels is hard to believe.
 
Back
Top