Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

[Timothy A]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

Didn't NJ go through this Eaves dance last time they needed a coach? Its almost as if Lou floats Eaves name out there to the press to get the coach he's really after to sign for less money.

His name was floated last time, because when I saw this come up now, I thought "Not again".

And if he left, I'd have your coach on the top of my list. Imagine what he could do with the power and recognition of a B11 school behind him.

 

[GoBucky36]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

How would it look if he were to come out and say, "Yes, I have been in talks with the New Jersey Devils?"

It would look like Eaves is keeping an eye on what other opportunities are out there. He has no obligation to only want to coach the Badgers for the rest of his career and while Id like to see him be our coach for a long, long time; its not as if I would view him as a traitor if he did make the jump to the NHL.

 

[dggoddard]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

His name was floated last time, because when I saw this come up now, I thought "Not again".

And if he left, I'd have your coach on the top of my list. Imagine what he could do with the power and recognition of a B11 school behind him.

DU is working on a new contract for Gwoz that Sconnie will have to upset the apple cart to match. Not saying Bucky couldn't afford it, but it would take a college hockey record contract to pry him to Madison.

Quite frankly the recent success of Sconnie's football and basketball programs makes the hockey job far less prestigious these days.

You'll be better off with Mark Johnson and he'll give you the hometown discount.

 

[Almington]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

You'll be better off with Mark Johnson and he'll give you the hometown discount.

The discount wouldn't be worth the discord that would resonate within the hockey donor ranks as the views many have of Johnson as a men's coach are justifiably formed as of the result of the end of the Sauer era and relatively unchanged by his success on the women's side.

Eaves first team was definitely lacking in many areas, particularly top level talent. While I'm not knowledgeable enough of the era to comment on Sauer's final few years, as it wasn't until Eaves first year that I came to UW, many other people who's opinion I value attribute that deficiency to Johnson's poor recruiting.

Honestly, should Eaves leave UW, getting Gwoz as a replacement would be worth the cost. Alzarez wouldn't pay it, but it would be worth it. You are correct that for as long as Alzarez is the AD, hockey will be the poor unwanted stepsister to football and basketball at UW.

 

[GoBucky36]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

You are correct that for as long as Alzarez is the AD, hockey will be the poor unwanted stepsister to football and basketball at UW.

You need to remember though that football and basketball are a much bigger draw and much bigger moneymaker for the UW than hockey is. Alvarez has too look at what the best value for the UW is and sadly, thats not hockey.
Honestly, if Eaves should leave the UW, they need to just look at all the applicants and hire whomever the best candidate is. As much as Mark Johnson is loved in Madison, he might not be a lock for being the best applicant for the job.
As much as Id like to see Mark Johnson finally get the chance to coach the Badger men, I dont feel that the university owes it to him. He wasnt the first coach who applied for the mens' job and got passed over.

 

[Almington]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

You need to remember though that football and basketball are a much bigger draw and much bigger moneymaker for the UW than hockey is. Alvarez has too look at what the best value for the UW is and sadly, thats not hockey.

Football is top dog, but hockey is still a revenue producing sport and although it isn't as valuable as basketball (because of the TV contract) it is treated no better than the majority of the non-revenue producing sports inspite of the fact that it brings in 12,000 fans a game and overall revenue of over 5 million a season. The way that Alvarez treats the program is a joke given its history and statue. Any AD would be thrilled to have a program that pays for both itself, the comporable womans program, and still brings in a 7-figure check to help pay for other finctions of the athletic department. Stupid and short-sighted, plain and simple.

 

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

Football is top dog, but hockey is still a revenue producing sport and although it isn't as valuable as basketball (because of the TV contract) it is treated no better than the majority of the non-revenue producing sports inspite of the fact that it brings in 12,000 fans a game and overall revenue of over 5 million a season. The way that Alvarez treats the program is a joke given its history and statue. Any AD would be thrilled to have a program that pays for both itself, the comporable womans program, and still brings in a 7-figure check to help pay for other finctions of the athletic department. Stupid and short-sighted, plain and simple.

The Badger's hockey programs aren't as profitable as you might think....

http://mnhockeycentral.webs.com/BigTenNumbers.JPG

And TV revenue is a much bigger component of profitability than attendance, and that is an area that the Badger hockey program is lacking IMO. I'm not sticking up for Alverez by any stretch, but there is a reason he was pushing so hard for the Big Ten Hockey Conference. TV revenue sharing.

 

[icebadger]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

The Badger's hockey programs aren't as profitable as you might think....

http://mnhockeycentral.webs.com/BigTenNumbers.JPG

And TV revenue is a much bigger component of profitability than attendance, and that is an area that the Badger hockey program is lacking IMO. I'm not sticking up for Alverez by any stretch, but there is a reason he was pushing so hard for the Big Ten Hockey Conference. TV revenue sharing.

I think the point was that men's hockey doesn't lose money...and it doesn't, to the tune of roughly $1 million per year lately.

 

[Almington]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

And TV revenue is a much bigger component of profitability than attendance, and that is an area that the Badger hockey program is lacking IMO. I'm not sticking up for Alverez by any stretch, but there is a reason he was pushing so hard for the Big Ten Hockey Conference. TV revenue sharing.

Where is this mythical TV money going to come from? It isn't going to come from the BTN as that revenue is already evenly split , and I'll believe and ESPN hockey contract the day the first game airs.

Their is nearly zero TV money in college hockey, even for the almighty Big Ten.

 

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

Where is this mythical TV money going to come from? It isn't going to come from the BTN as that revenue is already evenly split , and I'll believe and ESPN hockey contract the day the first game airs.

Their is nearly zero TV money in college hockey, even for the almighty Big Ten.

Yes there is, and that was my point, that there was a very good reason Barry Alverez was pushing so hard for a Big Ten Hockey Conference. Yes, the men's hockey program at Wisconsin is profitable, but it is no where near the revenue generator hockey is at Minnesota (or historically Michigan). I was just pointing out that, by pushing so hard for a Big Ten Hockey Conference, Barry Alverez did a great service for UW and the UW hockey program.

Sucks for the Gopher Hockey program IMO, but the rest of the B10 has been carrying us in football for so long I think they probably told Maturi and the Gophers it was time for UMN to contribute something in return.

 

[Almington]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

Yes there is, and that was my point, that there was a very good reason Barry Alverez was pushing so hard for a Big Ten Hockey Conference. Yes, the men's hockey program at Wisconsin is profitable, but it is no where near the revenue generator hockey is at Minnesota (or historically Michigan). I was just pointing out that, by pushing so hard for a Big Ten Hockey Conference, Barry Alverez did a great service for UW and the UW hockey program.

Sucks for the Gopher Hockey program IMO, but the rest of the B10 has been carrying us in football for so long I think they probably told Maturi and the Gophers it was time for UMN to contribute something in return.

I still don't see where this mythical TV money is going to come from. Plus, UW and MN lose a 6 figure check that the WCHA cuts the teams every year. I fail to see who barry the blowhard did UW a service by pushing for the BTHC

 

[davearm]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

Contacting his agent is the same thing as contacting him. He has no reason to like about something like this. If he was seriously interested and had been contacted he could have simply not called the reporter back. He's a straight shooter. I trust him.

It would hurt recruiting if kids knew Eaves was out shopping for a better gig. There's your reason to lie/obfuscate/evade/whatever.

Who knows what the truth is, but the public answer from Eaves has to be "no" (or some variant).

 

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

It isn't mythical. Programs sign TV contracts. Both the Gophers and the Badgers have one with FSN now. The Big Ten has their own network so they will get all advertising revenue from the addition of more games to the BTN. Some, if not all, of the Big Ten teams will also sign secondary TV deals (at least I am sure Minnesota will).

How else did you think that Minnesota makes more revenue off hockey than UW despite having an arena with roughly 5,000 less seats?

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

It isn't mythical. Programs sign TV contracts. Both the Gophers and the Badgers have one with FSN now. The Big Ten has their own network so they will get all advertising revenue from the addition of more games to the BTN. Some, if not all, of the Big Ten teams will also sign secondary TV deals (at least I am sure Minnesota will).

How else did you think that Minnesota makes more revenue off hockey than UW despite having an arena with roughly 5,000 less seats?

Those would be valid points if the Minnesota and Madison (not Wisconsin) markets were the same.

Dane County and Wisconsin are nothing like Minnesota when it comes to numbers of people who want to watch hockey. There is no contract available here because there isn't a measurable audience to advertise to.

Hockey by itself is a niche sport in this state and the Badgers are a niche of that niche.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

It would hurt recruiting if kids knew Eaves was out shopping for a better gig. There's your reason to lie/obfuscate/evade/whatever.

Who knows what the truth is, but the public answer from Eaves has to be "no" (or some variant).

I agree with this and it won't surprise me in the least if we find out down the line that they had in fact spoken. Eaves has to deny it at this point as we have a couple of players who could still turn pro before this season.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

I have to agree with Almington on the TV money deal. Unless the BTN revenue is split by sport before they split the money amongst the schools, there's no direct benefit for UW in having more hockey games on the BTN. UW is already getting their 1/12th cut of the profits, whether the hockey games are on the BTN or not. You could argue that more games on BTN might be considered good publicity/advertising that might drive attendence up even higher, but I'll bet that's the extent of the extra money we'll see from the BTN.

That actual "extra" TV revenue that we're talking about is from secondary deals made with WPT and FSN. From the trends I've noticed in the last few years (fewer games available live on "normal" channels), I'd venture to guess that those deals aren't getting any more valuable- if they ever were that valuable to begin with. Like Gurt said: the market here isn't the same as it is on the other side of the St. Croix.

If Barry hasn't yet bothered to push for more exposure on WPT or FSN (if they are even interested), I'm not sure what would make him start doing it now. It's more likely that he'll try to set up PPV feeds through uwbadgers.com and see if he can make some bank off of that.

As much of a classic Barry The AD hater as I am, I don't see any reason to say that he's completely mismanaging the program. But I don't think hockey is a big priority for him, despite its moneymaking potential. Given a choice between making hockey a bigger income machine and trying to lift football and basketball to higher levels of success, he'll choose the latter. In that way, he's a lowest common denominator kind of guy when it comes to the business side of the UW athletic department. While I don't think he'll ever really cheap out on the hockey program, I think its perfectly reasonable to assume that he'll probably never go for one of those "richest coach in college hockey" contracts.

 

[Almington]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

It isn't mythical. Programs sign TV contracts. Both the Gophers and the Badgers have one with FSN now. The Big Ten has their own network so they will get all advertising revenue from the addition of more games to the BTN. Some, if not all, of the Big Ten teams will also sign secondary TV deals (at least I am sure Minnesota will).

How else did you think that Minnesota makes more revenue off hockey than UW despite having an arena with roughly 5,000 less seats?

The marginal increase in BTN revenue from advertising (given that overall hockey isn't going to draw much better number than any other programing) will be offset by the cost of a live broadcast (sat time is not cheap) plus that increase inrevenue will be split 12 ways. I just don't see where this magic increase in profitability is going to come from.

I suspect that MN is going to be the ONLY school with a secondary TV package since the BTN will retain rights to all of the B10 games, meaning that only the NC games will be availible, and if the past in any indication, those are going to be against less than marque teams, and thus not particularly valuable.

MN makes more than UW in revenue by charging nearly twice as much per ticket (IIRC, $39 vs $22 face), plus UW averages between 12 and 13k tickets as opposed to MN's ~10.5k. Add to that the fact that UW has a larger student section (~2,500 vs ~1,500) which decreases the difference in the number of full paying customers between the schools.

 

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

Those would be valid points if the Minnesota and Madison (not Wisconsin) markets were the same.

Dane County and Wisconsin are nothing like Minnesota when it comes to numbers of people who want to watch hockey. There is no contract available here because there isn't a measurable audience to advertise to.

Hockey by itself is a niche sport in this state and the Badgers are a niche of that niche.

Not disagreeing with you. My comments were not meant to slight UW, but to show that IMO Barry Alverez has done more for the UW hockey program than it appeared he was getting credit for in this thread.

Again, I'm not standing up for Alverez by any means because I don't know nearly as much about the history there as you guys do, but he did work awfully hard to get a B10 Hockey Conference deal done and that WILL server UW well (at least short term).

 

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

I have to agree with Almington on the TV money deal. Unless the BTN revenue is split by sport before they split the money amongst the schools, there's no direct benefit for UW in having more hockey games on the BTN. UW is already getting their 1/12th cut of the profits, whether the hockey games are on the BTN or not. You could argue that more games on BTN might be considered good publicity/advertising that might drive attendence up even higher, but I'll bet that's the extent of the extra money we'll see from the BTN.

That actual "extra" TV revenue that we're talking about is from secondary deals made with WPT and FSN. From the trends I've noticed in the last few years (fewer games available live on "normal" channels), I'd venture to guess that those deals aren't getting any more valuable- if they ever were that valuable to begin with. Like Gurt said: the market here isn't the same as it is on the other side of the St. Croix.

If Barry hasn't yet bothered to push for more exposure on WPT or FSN (if they are even interested), I'm not sure what would make him start doing it now. It's more likely that he'll try to set up PPV feeds through uwbadgers.com and see if he can make some bank off of that.

As much of a classic Barry The AD hater as I am, I don't see any reason to say that he's completely mismanaging the program. But I don't think hockey is a big priority for him, despite its moneymaking potential. Given a choice between making hockey a bigger income machine and trying to lift football and basketball to higher levels of success, he'll choose the latter. In that way, he's a lowest common denominator kind of guy when it comes to the business side of the UW athletic department. While I don't think he'll ever really cheap out on the hockey program, I think its perfectly reasonable to assume that he'll probably never go for one of those "richest coach in college hockey" contracts.

Considering I don't believe their current TV deal gives them much money at all, I think a 1/12 cut of the increases in the B10 Conference TV deal will be more profitable.

With the addition of more hockey games on the BTN, they will be able to charge the cable providers more for carrying the channel, which will result in more revenue for the Big Ten.

So yes, the BTHC will benefit UW from a financial standpoint, and that was the entire reason why Alverez pushed so hard for the formation of the conference.

 

[Almington]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey: Vol. XVIII - Belief in a Better Tomorrow

As much of a classic Barry The AD hater as I am, I don't see any reason to say that he's completely mismanaging the program. But I don't think hockey is a big priority for him, despite its moneymaking potential. Given a choice between making hockey a bigger income machine and trying to lift football and basketball to higher levels of success, he'll choose the latter. In that way, he's a lowest common denominator kind of guy when it comes to the business side of the UW athletic department. While I don't think he'll ever really cheap out on the hockey program, I think its perfectly reasonable to assume that he'll probably never go for one of those "richest coach in college hockey" contracts.

I fail to see why he can only improve football and basketball at the cost of ignoring the rest of the teams. I understand that spending is a zero sum game, but this isn't a question of finances, but of priorities. The athletic director as a duty to improve the entire athletic department, not just the few select sports that he cares about.