mksioux Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 What is also being assumed here is that the Big Ten will stay at six teams, when numerous reports indicate that at least two other schools are considering hockey. If and when the Big Ten goes to 7 schools, that means 24 conference games. With 8 schools, 28 conference games, like the schedule the WCHA formerly had. Nothing that the Big Ten is "offering" will ever be subject to long-term contracts. Even for the short-term, why is the WCHA demanding that all it's teams play Minnesota. Wouldn't it be better for CC, Denver, UAA, and MTU to play Wisconsin, while the Minnesota schools and UND play UM? I agree and have said that all of this scheduling alliance talk by the Big Ten is nothing more than public relations. They want it to appear that this change is not as big as it really is. And it was clearly emphasized by the league office as talking points, as every single person associated with the Big Ten stressed it in their official statements. In the short-term, the scheduling alliance means little. In the long-term, this scheduling alliance means nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Is that a rhetorical question? Because the answer is quite clear. While McLeod may be demanding an either all or none - how long before Mankato goes ahead and schedules UM by itself just because it badly needs the money? What's McLeod going to do to Mankato, kick them out? The idea that there is solidarity behind McLeod is almost laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 While McLeod may be demanding an either all or none - how long before Mankato goes ahead and schedules UM by itself just because it badly needs the money? What's McLeod going to do to Mankato, kick them out? The idea that there is solidarity behind McLeod is almost laughable. I don't know the answer to this. Aren't there rules and regulation that all college athletic programs have to follow when they belong to a conference? Don't they prevent this from happening? I agree with Mike on this one. Hockey is an elite, small sport and while it is a huge money maker for programs such as UND, I don't see many new programs being started; at least not in this economy. Students across the country are facing big tuition increases in the coming years and 'investing in the future' by starting a new athletic program of any kind is going to be quite difficult, if not impossible. Unless, of course, they have a benefactor that has to resources to give, and give, and give.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 While McLeod may be demanding an either all or none - how long before Mankato goes ahead and schedules UM by itself just because it badly needs the money? What's McLeod going to do to Mankato, kick them out? The idea that there is solidarity behind McLeod is almost laughable. I think there is more solidarity behind McLeod than you think. The guy has a future in politics because he has the incredible ability to smooth things over and has impeccable timing in all things PR. It's a crying shame, though. Every year the officials show no progress towards improving. They actually get slower compared to the game. Their quality control is not there and yet they always wonder why people are so anti officials? The Old Boy network has dug its heels in big time in Denver at the WCHA front office. Of course, my opinion has always been turnover the whole office top to bottom and start fresh. That's not going to happen. Oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mizzou/sioux Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I'm in this catergory. I'm thinking this is going to make more schools fold than it does help college hockey. This is also why UND and a few of the other schools have to be careful. If they form a conference and leave a few other schools out in the cold other schools are in trouble. I hope I'm wrong but I see this move by the Big Ten taking schools away from college hockey, not adding any new ones. Sadly enough, at the moment I think this comment is right on the mark. Many of us Sioux fans are upset with the Gophers and the Badgers leaving the rest of the WCHA in the lurch, so to speak. If we (UND) rush out of the WCHA along perhaps with Denver, then aren't we doing the same thing to other smaller schools, potentially crippling additional hockey programs? For one thing staying in a league with Bemidji, Duluth, St. Cloud and Mankato eases travel expenses somewhat, something not to be overlooked. I'm not convinced that adding UBC is going to be as great as some suppose. I don't think Miami is going to leave the CCHA for all that travel to the WCHA. It's also rather doubtful Notre Dame could be convinced to switch leagues. All I am saying is let's not be hasty and greedy ourselves. At this point do we want to leave the best college hockey conference with all its championships and traditions to go off into the wild blue yonder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 What's McLeod going to do to Mankato, kick them out? Well it wouldn't be the first program he destroyed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 2 questions I have. #1 Minnesota sticks with the no Indian name policy and decides not to play UND? Would they reconsider this when Michigan Tech is on their home schedule as a non-conference game? #2. Since everyone knows the BTHC is about $$$$$ Whats the chances they relax their policy and invite UND in since UND is one the top money makers in all of college hockey if not the leader. I just think the BTHC could not hurt UND at all simply because we are at the top of the league. Ohio State and Penn State and now maybe Indiana...good luck with that trio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aff Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 2 questions I have. #1 Minnesota sticks with the no Indian name policy and decides not to play UND? Would they reconsider this when Michigan Tech is on their home schedule as a non-conference game? #2. Since everyone knows the BTHC is about $$$$$ Whats the chances they relax their policy and invite UND in since UND is one the top money makers in all of college hockey if not the leader. I just think the BTHC could not hurt UND at all simply because we are at the top of the league. Ohio State and Penn State and now maybe Indiana...good luck with that trio. UND will not be invited, under any circumstances, to the Big 10. And it couldn't afford to, even if it was. Playing in the BTHC would require UND to be broadcast on the Big 10 network. That would require UND to "buy in" to the network, as other schools (Nebraska) have been forced to do, and at this point, its not cheap. It would also mean that the Big 10 would have to negotiate to get the BTCH on in North Dakota regular television, which while possible, hardly seems worth the time with the population of the state. Add to that, how do you see something like this going down in Big 10 meetings? Do you really think that the most powerful athletic conference in the country is going to sit around debating the implications of adding a school like UND to the conference over what is basically filler for the network? No, they won't. UND isn't even close to having the academic profile to being associated with the conference. There was an uproar over Nebraska for petes sake. In addition, the Big10 is an "all in" association, they don't take affiliates. I'l add to this, those of you that are looking to Notre Dame for help on this... they'll be in the conference in the next decade, its inevitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 I'l add to this, those of you that are looking to Notre Dame for help on this... they'll be in the conference in the next decade, its inevitable. Football or hockey? Doubtful on football. They make too much money even when they suck to join the Big10. I'm rather curious if Notre Dame will do what UAH is doing and just go independent? Harder to get to the NCAA but as an indie they control their destiny much better.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aff Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Football or hockey? Doubtful on football. They make too much money even when they suck to join the Big10. I'm rather curious if Notre Dame will do what UAH is doing and just go independent? Harder to get to the NCAA but as an indie they control their destiny much better.... Your thinking of old information regarding the amount they pull in for football... the big 10 network has changed everything, and was impetus for expansion last summer. The figures before nebraska joined last year had Indiana and Purdue pulling in 5 million more than notre dames contract with NBC due to the equal revenue sharing of the Big 10 (which is also the reason that nobody cares how much Minnesota whines about moving their hockey program). The conference is going to be moving to 16 teams, and one of them is going to be Notre Dame... there's too much money for everybody involved for it not to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USA Hockey Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Here is my two cents on the Big Ten Hockey Conference. I actually do not think it is going to be the powerhouse that some may think. When you look at the current six members, three of them (Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan) have been consistent programs over the course of history. I understand that Michigan State has had some success, but they have also been very inconsistent. Ohio State is a football and basketball powerhouse and doesn't care too much about hockey (I don't think they have ever made the NCAA's). Penn State is a startup program, and I don't care how big the school is, it takes a long time establish a good hockey program (look at Notre Dame). Now there is talk of schools like Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana starting programs. If this is the case, I don't see how it benefits schools like Minnesota and Wisconsin to be playing startup bottom feeder teams every weekend. The nice thing about the WCHA, even without Minnesota and Wisconsin, is that it has established programs, and as a North Dakota fan I would rather play established programs than startup programs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikejm Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Now there is talk of schools like Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana starting programs. If this is the case, I don't see how it benefits schools like Minnesota and Wisconsin to be playing startup bottom feeder teams every weekend. The nice thing about the WCHA, even without Minnesota and Wisconsin, is that it has established programs, and as a North Dakota fan I would rather play established programs than startup programs. Think of the Strength of Schedule ramifications for all the teams involved. I've heard people talking about how the BTHC will get an auto-bid plus another one or two at-large seedings. Imagine what their SOS is going to look like with 8 games against legitimate cupcakes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Would scholarship dollars make T-Birds fly higher? Under the brightest of lights on the biggest of stages, our athletic future may be shaped by what is one of the biggest differences between the NCAA in the United States and Canadian Interuniversity Sport: Scholarships. A decision on the University of British Columbia joining the NCAA ranks is coming soon. Open forums have already taken place in preparation for the final decision in May that will shape the direction of UBC Athletics for years to come..... .....The jump would have different effects on different teams. For example, UBC men’s hockey would likely join Division I, which includes the likes of former NCAA champions University of Minnesota and University of North Dakota. Such exposure would go a long way in encouraging talented hockey players from the Lower Mainland to stay and play closer to home. “In the short term, it’s just like moving houses. It’s always a hassle, change always has uncertainty and it could be a bit of a scary ride for a couple of years,” Philip noted. That said, the university has a buffer to that uncertainty, in that it's committed to playing in Canada until at least 2012-13, giving teams some time to prepare for their ascension to the elite should UBC join the NCAA. “This has been going on for many years and the time has finally come for a decision,” Philip said. “We’re going to have to do this right, and I believe that we are doing it right.” As much guff as Star takes for predictions and analysis, he typically isn't too far off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Would scholarship dollars make T-Birds fly higher? As much guff as Star takes for predictions and analysis, he typically isn't too far off. Thought UBC would have moved up two years ago, as there has been a lot of political pressure from the CIS and other Canadian schools to prevent UBC from moving to the NCAA. The pressure on them to stay has only increased. Guff that I get from places like bisonville, an echo chamber for myopic knuckleheads, is a badge of honor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 Thought UBC would have moved up two years ago, as there has been a lot of political pressure from the CIS and other Canadian schools to prevent UBC from moving to the NCAA. The pressure on them to stay has only increased. Guff that I get from places like bisonville, an echo chamber for myopic knuckleheads, is a badge of honor. They're irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Five Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 Here is my two cents on the Big Ten Hockey Conference. I actually do not think it is going to be the powerhouse that some may think. When you look at the current six members, three of them (Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan) have been consistent programs over the course of history. I understand that Michigan State has had some success, but they have also been very inconsistent. Ohio State is a football and basketball powerhouse and doesn't care too much about hockey (I don't think they have ever made the NCAA's). Penn State is a startup program, and I don't care how big the school is, it takes a long time establish a good hockey program (look at Notre Dame). Now there is talk of schools like Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana starting programs. If this is the case, I don't see how it benefits schools like Minnesota and Wisconsin to be playing startup bottom feeder teams every weekend. The nice thing about the WCHA, even without Minnesota and Wisconsin, is that it has established programs, and as a North Dakota fan I would rather play established programs than startup programs. First off, this whole thing sucks IMO just wanted to get that out there. OK. I'm curious with OSU and PSU. They have the money to make things happen. With the Big 10 exposure (name, tv, etc) I wonder if they will be able to be more successful in recruiting. For example, in the early going of the conference let's say they are competing with WCHA schools like Mankato, AA, Tech or Bemidji etc for a prospect from Canada. Will the name recognition, TV, big time college sports atmosphere, etc turn that recruit towards those schools? I personally believe that those schools are gonna reap the benefits of this and will become competitive in a hurry. I think the local kids (midwest, etc) will stick to the local schools but it is with those type of kids of really have no local allegience where I think psu and osu will make some hay early on in the recruiting process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USA Hockey Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 First off, this whole thing sucks IMO just wanted to get that out there. OK. I'm curious with OSU and PSU. They have the money to make things happen. With the Big 10 exposure (name, tv, etc) I wonder if they will be able to be more successful in recruiting. For example, in the early going of the conference let's say they are competing with WCHA schools like Mankato, AA, Tech or Bemidji etc for a prospect from Canada. Will the name recognition, TV, big time college sports atmosphere, etc turn that recruit towards those schools? I personally believe that those schools are gonna reap the benefits of this and will become competitive in a hurry. I think the local kids (midwest, etc) will stick to the local schools but it is with those type of kids of really have no local allegience where I think psu and osu will make some hay early on in the recruiting process. Good points Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishSiouxFan Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 First off, this whole thing sucks IMO just wanted to get that out there. OK. I'm curious with OSU and PSU. They have the money to make things happen. With the Big 10 exposure (name, tv, etc) I wonder if they will be able to be more successful in recruiting. For example, in the early going of the conference let's say they are competing with WCHA schools like Mankato, AA, Tech or Bemidji etc for a prospect from Canada. Will the name recognition, TV, big time college sports atmosphere, etc turn that recruit towards those schools? I personally believe that those schools are gonna reap the benefits of this and will become competitive in a hurry. I think the local kids (midwest, etc) will stick to the local schools but it is with those type of kids of really have no local allegience where I think psu and osu will make some hay early on in the recruiting process. We should be fine as long as we add big name brand, powerhouse schools like Minnesota State Moorehead. What top recruit would want to play for Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, or MSU when they could be a Dragon! Seriously, UND needs to consider it's options and do what's right for UND and not the WCHA. I like the idea of a conference with UND, Denver, CC, UNO, Air Force, Miami, Notre Dame, and UBC with room left over to expand out west. A conference with a media market like that would trump anything the Big Ten threw at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckysieve Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 I think people who are against the Big Ten hockey conference are being very short sighted. Having the Big Ten brand associated with college hockey automatically raises the profile of the sport. Minnesota is a Big ten University. Why should we playing Bemidji, Mankato, Nebraska, and Alaska mulitiple times per season but not Michigan and Michigan State? The WCHA is watered down now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIRE HELMET GUY #26 Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 I think people who are against the Big Ten hockey conference are being very short sighted. Having the Big Ten brand associated with college hockey automatically raises the profile of the sport. Minnesota is a Big ten University. Why should we playing Bemidji, Mankato, Nebraska, and Alaska mulitiple times per season but not Michigan and Michigan State? The WCHA is watered down now. The Gophers have not exactly been lighting any of those teams up lately, can hardly call it watered down. I'd much rather play them then PSU, OSU. The Big 10 is all about basketball and football, could give two rips about hockey. I hope the formation of this conference changes things but I have alot of doubts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 I think people who are against the Big Ten hockey conference are being very short sighted. Having the Big Ten brand associated with college hockey automatically raises the profile of the sport. Minnesota is a Big ten University. Why should we playing Bemidji, Mankato, Nebraska, and Alaska mulitiple times per season but not Michigan and Michigan State? The WCHA is watered down now. Nice to see that you're drinking already this morning... It's not even noon yet. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickboy1956 Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 I think people who are against the Big Ten hockey conference are being very short sighted. Having the Big Ten brand associated with college hockey automatically raises the profile of the sport. Minnesota is a Big ten University. Why should we playing Bemidji, Mankato, Nebraska, and Alaska mulitiple times per season but not Michigan and Michigan State? The WCHA is watered down now. BTHC = more cupcakes like Penn State, OSU and MSU to feast on. On the other hand, the way things have been going, UMTC could be the cupcake feasted on 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 Why should we playing Bemidji, Mankato, Nebraska, and Alaska mulitiple times per season but not Michigan and Michigan State? I agree why should you play teams that kick your azz when you could be playing against teams who you MIGHT beat. Yeah, real exciting hockey ya got to look forward to in the coming years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckysieve Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 I agree why should you play teams that kick your azz when you could be playing against teams who you MIGHT beat. Yeah, real exciting hockey ya got to look forward to in the coming years. Like I said we are a Big Ten school. We should be playing other Big Ten schools. It's a pretty simple concept. I guess Im more open to the idea because I've had season tickets for Gopher football and basketball my whole life so when I think of Gopher opponents I think of Big Ten schools. Not these rinky dink glorified junior colleges like BSU and Omaha. I believe Minnesota and Michigan have played each other more times than any other schools in the history of college hockey. It's a great idea to get that rivalry back to where it was and it wont take long for it to become one of the most intense rivalries in the nation. In time Michigan will be a rivalry for the Gophers on par with the Sioux rivalry now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted April 15, 2011 Share Posted April 15, 2011 Not these rinky dink glorified junior colleges like BSU and Omaha. . You really can't be that pompous of a jerk can you? Put down the crack pipe... You realized that these two schools you just insulted have done something the all powerful UMN hasnt' lately, they have acutally made the Final Five and or the NCAA tourney BSU has made the Frozen Four since Minnesota last made the tourney... BSU also made the tourney as an at large bid in 2010... BSU made the Final Five this season and won a game. UNO made the NCAA tourney in 2011... UMN well they hosted a home series this year, the league had to expand to 12 teams for the Gophers make the tourney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.