mikejm

I thought the Gophers' season was over.

Air Force wants to play Army. They are trying to get Navy to move their hockey program up from club status.

^I remember Hakstol telling me four years ago that Davidson was a real "project".

You destroyed any semblance of credibility you might have had.

Is that a rhetorical question? Because the answer is quite clear.

Sa-weeeeet!!!!!!!! Thanks

I don't think they have a choice, pal; Big Ten rules. As long as there are 6 BT teams in a sport, I think the conference has to be there. I haven't paid any attention lately, but I'm guessing there are some grumblings at GPL. There are some pretty smart hockey fans over there who see the folly of this whole mess and what it could lead to.

Go back and study the history of Division I college hockey. This is a sport that is on thin ice. As I've pointed out, "we" are only 58 teams, and this may kick a couple of those to the curb. Rock the boat just a little bit and a few more schools may say to heck with it and fold their teams, too. Then, yes, it will be tougher to get into the NCAA tournament, because there won't be one. You do realize there used to be NCAA championships at all three levels, right? And that the number of DI teams hasn't always been so small?

I will take that as a compliment of the highest order. Delany is an egotistical idiot. He is also not a hockey guy. No one in the BigTen(+2) is hockey. This sport is going to get pushed aside by the BT. All this is to them is revenue capture. They don't care if they kill the CCHA in the process. And if that happens, you'll see DI hockey fall even further into the irrelevant category.

I'm going with "never". We all love and live and breath a niche sport.

I can't believe adding hockey to the BTNetwork is going to impact their revenues by multi-millions $$$$ (Remember, every net dollar delivered by the BTN is divided by 12; they'd have to net $12 million new money to deliver $1 mil each to Minn and Wisc). It increases their programming options, but there is a cost to that as well. Every member is going to have to give up at least a portion of their current television revenues, if not the entirety. And I just don't see a college hockey coach making 3/4 large. Sorry.

Thank you for this.^

If your revenue projections are for hockey television, I am laughing. As much as I love college hockey, and as much as I think it is a big deal, it remains extremely small potatoes on the national scene. I truly hope Illinois, Indiana and a whole bunch of other schools start varsity hockey programs. But we are still but 58 colleges and universities. Money-wise we are a blip on almost anyone else's radar.

This is college hockey we're talking about. There are only 58 teams. "Institutional peers" hardly matters. Competitive peers at this point is the key, and the WCHA clearly is the top of the heap. Minnesota has become irrelevant competitively. Wisconsin is more stable, but I still am not hitting the panic button over this.

Thanks. Let the rodents both leave; they'll soon find out the BTHC isn't the bed of roses they have been led to believe. Minn is in trouble attendance-wise as evidenced by lots of empty seats in Mariucci and the grumbling is getting louder about the coming season ticket price increases and re-seating there. Wisconsin only sold out the Kohl twice this year. Tell me home series against Ohio State and Penn State are going to help the declining attendance in those rinks. BTHC made all kinds of statements about how it was going to help college hockey. This has nothing to do with any hockey programs except the six members there. This is an opportunity for the WCHA to show itself as a true supporter of college hockey at-large: I say remain as a 10-team conference (so as to not cannibalize the CCHA) and schedule road games against some of the weaker sisters remaining there to help them with their revenues. With the WCHA's rotating schedules, we don't get Minn or Wisc at home every year, so making up that lost revenue is not that critical. In fact, at least in UND's case, the only "lost" revenue is the few single-game tickets made available for the Gopher games. The Ralph has a waiting list for season tickets again, and I doubt very much that our season ticket prices will be reduced once the BTHC begins play. As I said, let them leave. This is whole thing is about money for the Big Ten Conference led by Barry Alvarez and Jim Delany. I think the schools themselves will come to see this development as a net-loss on their own campuses. Unfortunately for them, there is nothing they can do about it. The real power schools in the WCHA, however, can make this a big win by showing support for struggling existing teams and by encouraging other schools to get into college hockey.

+1 Why monkey around with the WCHA when it is obviously the top conference in the country?

Please explain your thoughts here ^.

I just don't believe that losing Wisc and Minn is the death knell for the WCHA. If we are talking about a "loss", those two schools come out on the net-negative side of the equation compared to the rest of the WCHA. I'm not weeping, nor gnashing my teeth. So far I have refrained from shredding my clothing. I think I'll be okay.

From a strictly constitutional point of view, I think Omdahl is correct. I made a comment earlier about a constitutional crisis in the making; this would be the second time it is accurate. This is going to be a real mess, and I am not including the NCAA in making this determination.

I don't really care too much about missing two schools that have placed 1-5-5-8-3-3-2-6-6-3-2-7 (Wisc) and 6-3-3-2-4-3-1-1-7-5-7-5 (UMTC) in the WCHA final standings the last twelve years.

The UND/DU game was a battle, and the Sioux were fortunate to get the win. But I think a re-match next weekend will be a very different game with a healthy Gregoire in the lineup. Either Trupp/Malone/Frattin or Gregoire/Knight/Hextall would be THE top line on 90% of college hockey teams. It is pretty easy to bottle up one top line; I think the Pioneers will have trouble trying to match up with two.

Thursday,

I think I read the 2011 Final Five attendance was over 70,000; not too bad for a show without Minnesota and Wisconsin. Who needs 'em? Oh, and might it be fun to tell the Gophers they can't play the Sioux once they are no longer "obligated" to do so by conference affiliation? Mariucci is getting to be a ghost town; wait 'til they try to fill the place with the BTHC.

I am feeling a very lop-sided game tonight.

You don't think there might be anything wrong with the test?