Womens Big Ten???

[ARM]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

Not wishful thinking for me. I don't like the Big Ten idea.

Me either. More travel to play in a weaker league with a supposed benefit of $$$ that doesn't exist in women's hockey. BTN ignores us but for a game or two a year, so I'd prefer the league just let us be. If they aren't going to help, at least don't hurt.

 

[LIFT]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

I'm with Arm and Brookyone on this. Don't mess with my women's hockey unless you're going to give me some tangible benefit like every game in on TV so I can see the away games. BIG women's hockey would be a move in wrong direction for the lady Gophers as well as others.

 

[mnpokecheck]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

Me either. More travel to play in a weaker league with a supposed benefit of $$$ that doesn't exist in women's hockey. BTN ignores us but for a game or two a year, so I'd prefer the league just let us be. If they aren't going to help, at least don't hurt.

If it happens for women, it will be because Big Ten wants to push the brand and list national championships under that brand. 5-10 years away I would guess. I can't see how the Big Ten would leave it alone, probably some Title IX lawyer waiting in the wings if it didn't happen when they have 6 teams.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

Mich, Mich State, Miami of Ohio, Notre Dame could all add womens hockey relatively easy (notwithstanding the $$). I really would like to think it will happen when Red leaves Michigan. PSU was basically "forced" to include women when they added D1 men. They get ALOT of money from the state govt, more than any other school in PA -- and they have a lot of political appointees on their board so the pressure would've been too hot if they just did the men's team.

But if the above mentioned teams do join the ranks of womens hockey, I could see a league including them, OSU, PSU, Mercyhurst and RMU. 8 teams with an auto-bid. Lindenwood could join the WCHA in OSU's place. And RIT and Syracuse could join the ECAC which is more their geographic footprint anyway. Or for kicks we could have an all NY league - Clarkson, Cornell, St Lawrence, Colgate, Syracuse and RIT with an autobid. (That is really just kidding!)

- PSU added women's hockey with men's hockey because they had to to maintain Title IX compliance and (I believe) because the donor who financed the rink required it - it had little to do with politics.
- Big Ten conferences don't include outside members in any sports that I am aware of so I'm not sure why they would in women's hockey. If UM and MSU add hockey, that's your Big Ten conference - UM, MSU, OU, UW, Minnesota, and PS. Why would they bring other teams into their autobid conference and run the risk of one of the non-Big Ten schools getting the conference's autobid? They would be insane to do that because then they potentially lose one of the key benefits of the conference.
- History and matchups and rivalries are less and less of a factor in college sports conferences. The fact that Minnesota and UMD and other MN schools have a great rivalry is not relevant to conference formation - they can still play 1 or 2 times a year if they want. A 6 team conference only has 10 or (at most) 20 conference games a season and teams play 25-35 games.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

If it happens for women, it will be because Big Ten wants to push the brand and list national championships under that brand. 5-10 years away I would guess. I can't see how the Big Ten would leave it alone, probably some Title IX lawyer waiting in the wings if it didn't happen when they have 6 teams.

On what grounds? I doubt that the Big 10 conference is even subject to Title IX regulation. Title IX is education law and universities are subject to it because they are educational institutions that receive direct federal funding. The Big 10 itself is not. Even if it were I have a hard time seeing a case that could be made.

The confusion about what Title IX actually says and does drives me crazy sometimes.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

- PSU added women's hockey with men's hockey because they had to to maintain Title IX compliance and (I believe) because the donor who financed the rink required it - it had little to do with politics.

I'm pretty sure that it was all Pegula.

Big Ten conferences don't include outside members in any sports that I am aware of so I'm not sure why they would in women's hockey.

Not only do they not have any, the conference is actively opposed to the idea. Notre Dame would really have liked a chance to sign the same sort of deal with the Big 10 that they did with the ACC: participate in all sports but football. The Big 10 turned them down flat many times over several decades. It's all or nothing.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

I would think you may be alone in your concern since this discussion is based on weak speculation and wishful thinking at best. However, if anyone can join in this hallucination then no there would be little concern since Denver, CC, etc. may just as likely produce programs as would Michigan and State

Definitely speculation which is what makes it interesting, but UM and MSU are WAY more likely to add women's hockey than any Colorado D1 school. They have a ready made league waiting, legacy club teams, and a large base of D1 players and interest in their backyard. Ain't no D1 conference going to fly to Colorado for women's hockey on a regular basis..... good luck with that!!

 

[brookyone]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

Would The Fighting Illini have to change their name?

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

Would The Fighting Illini have to change their name?

Is Illini masculine or feminine.....???

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

A little time is a dangerous thing when you're speculating, so here is a potential new league alignment if Big Ten forms a conference with MSU and UM. Sucks for CHA, Sacred Heart, and Holy Cross but if the CHA wants to maintain an autobid they have really no choice unless other schools declare Division 1. At least Holy Cross and Sacred Heart are natural travel partners if they want to schedule that way:

ECAC – Stays the same – same lineup in mens and womens and everyone is pretty happy

Hockey East
• Providence
• Connecticut
• Boston College
• Boston University
• New Hampshire
• Maine
• Vermont
• Northeastern
• Merrimack (remember they have already declared they are joining)
• Maybe another school (U Mass Amherst or U Mass Lowell?)

Big Ten
• Ohio State
• Minnesota
• Wisconsin
• Penn State
• Michigan
• Michigan State

Western Conference
• Minnesota State
• Minnesota – Duluth
• Bemidji State
• St Cloud State
• North Dakota
• Lindenwood

College Hockey America
• RIT
• Mercyhurst
• Robert Morris
• Syracuse
• Holy Cross (at some point they have to join a Division 1 conference if they are serious and they aren't getting into Hockey East anytime soon with the rink they have)
• Sacred Heart (same deal as Holy Cross - they aren't getting into Hockey East for different reasons - especially with Bobby Valentine as AD after what he did to the Red Sox!!)
• Others ….

And there is still room for the Fighting Ill...Ambiguities if they want to join the Big Ten.... Comment away.

 

[mnpokecheck]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

On what grounds? I doubt that the Big 10 conference is even subject to Title IX regulation. Title IX is education law and universities are subject to it because they are educational institutions that receive direct federal funding. The Big 10 itself is not. Even if it were I have a hard time seeing a case that could be made.

The confusion about what Title IX actually says and does drives me crazy sometimes.

About opportunities not being equal.....remember the lawsuit filed that moved the MN Girls HS Hockey Tourney to the Xcel Center....lawsuits often have little to do with what makes sense, but rather perceived inequities.

 

[Hux]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

A little time is a dangerous thing when you're speculating, so here is a potential new league alignment if Big Ten forms a conference with MSU and UM. Sucks for CHA, Sacred Heart, and Holy Cross but if the CHA wants to maintain an autobid they have really no choice unless other schools declare Division 1. At least Holy Cross and Sacred Heart are natural travel partners if they want to schedule that way:

ECAC – Stays the same – same lineup in mens and womens and everyone is pretty happy

Hockey East
• Providence
• Connecticut
• Boston College
• Boston University
• New Hampshire
• Maine
• Vermont
• Northeastern
• Merrimack (remember they have already declared they are joining)
• Maybe another school (U Mass Amherst or U Mass Lowell?)

Big Ten
• Ohio State
• Minnesota
• Wisconsin
• Penn State
• Michigan
• Michigan State

Western Conference
• Minnesota State
• Minnesota – Duluth
• Bemidji State
• St Cloud State
• North Dakota
• Lindenwood

College Hockey America
• RIT
• Mercyhurst
• Robert Morris
• Syracuse
• Holy Cross (at some point they have to join a Division 1 conference if they are serious and they aren't getting into Hockey East anytime soon with the rink they have)
• Sacred Heart (same deal as Holy Cross - they aren't getting into Hockey East for different reasons - especially with Bobby Valentine as AD after what he did to the Red Sox!!)
• Others ….

And there is still room for the Fighting Ill...Ambiguities if they want to join the Big Ten.... Comment away.

Time is coming for realignment. I agree with the above, however, I think the Ivies will part company with the ECAC seeking their own autobid as the NCAA field expands to 12 teams. Have heard that things are afoot in the CHA/Atlantic and we can expect some big changes in the next five years. (Was told the same several years ago, but the Great Recession put the kibosh on schools adding or moving up.)

IVY LEAGUE
Brown
Cornell
Dartmouth
Harvard
Princeton
Yale
(C'mon Penn, stop wasting a great barn and move into the 21st century)

ECAC
Clarkson
Colgate
RPI
St. Lawrence
Quinnipiac
Union

ATLANTIC
Bentley
Mercyhurst
RIT
Holy Cross
Syracuse
Robert Morris
(St. Anselm could be in this mix as well)

 

[LtPowers]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

College Hockey America
• RIT
• Mercyhurst
• Robert Morris
• Syracuse
• Holy Cross (at some point they have to join a Division 1 conference if they are serious and they aren't getting into Hockey East anytime soon with the rink they have)
• Sacred Heart (same deal as Holy Cross - they aren't getting into Hockey East for different reasons - especially with Bobby Valentine as AD after what he did to the Red Sox!!)
• Others ….

If Holy Cross and Sacred Heart had any interest in joining a D-I conference, they would have done so years ago. They don't.


Powers &8^]

 

[LtPowers]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

And RIT and Syracuse could join the ECAC which is more their geographic footprint anyway.

That's nice of you to say, but the ECAC is already at twelve teams.


Powers &8^]

 

[pakidnyc]

That's nice of you to say, but the ECAC is already at twelve teams.


Powers &8^]

Is there a rule against a league having more than 12 teams?

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

If Holy Cross and Sacred Heart had any interest in joining a D-I conference, they would have done so years ago. They don't.


Powers &8^]

Blissful ignorance. They both applied to the ECAC when they were filling out the league after Vermont left, but the ECAC picked Quinnipiac instead. Holy Cross also has applied to Hockey East but their rink is not in compliance with the league requirements regarding seating capacity. They both want in to a league, they just can't get in to the ones that make geographic sense....and rinks are an issue for both. But in the scenario I posted, the 4 programs remaining in the CHA will be desperate to keep their autobid and overlook the deficiencies of Holy Cross and Sacred Heart to get back to 6 teams.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

Is there a rule against a league having more than 12 teams?

No, but why would they - 14 teams and only one autobid? Also, all the ECAC teams have both a men's and women's team and Syracuse has no men's team. The ECAC won't take a one gender program anymore and they aren't going to take on an odd number of teams by adding just 1 program (RIT). Agree with Lt on this one - don't see it.

 

[FRICKER]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

I don'tnow why I'm even wasting time responding to a bottom feeder who only wants to dish trash..................so I won't

 

[pakidnyc]

- PSU added women's hockey with men's hockey because they had to to maintain Title IX compliance and (I believe) because the donor who financed the rink required it - it had little to do with politics.

Actually they were considering several other womens sports instead of hockey which would have maintained TITLE IX. Lots of schools have men's hockey and not womens and are still NCAA compliant. It was not a condition of the donation.

 

[MGoBlueHockey]

Re: Womens Big Ten???

As the CCHA transitions to the Big Ten, isn't about time it's teams establish women's teams? I was disappointed that in light of his daughter being a prospective student/athelete, that Tom Anaatos didin't lead an effort to develop women's teams. The mid-west colleges & universities are years behind the rest of D1 women's hockey. how many even have club teams?

See my posts in the college hockey expansion thread about Michigan. They will have a program by the end of the decade.