mikejm Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 The earlier reports I saw indicated this whole MSUM hockey thing was being pushed by the owners of the UP to try and make money for their arena. I see failure written all over it. Kinda like Bison athletics. UP Center is not the sugar daddy-in-waiting. And yes, it might fail. At least they are trying to try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzie679 Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 This is incredibly short-sighted. UND is a legitimate college hockey powerhouse, among a handful of programs that can probably be counted on to be among the top five each and every year. That being said, UND is a big fish in a teeny, tiny little pond. What you continually suggest is that UND take its ball (or in this case, puck) and go start a new conference somewhere. That's fine, and almost understandable. But what happens to the rest of the WCHA? The Fighting Sioux fill barns throughout the conference. You saw what Sioux fans did at the Final Five. People were suggesting the X would be a ghost town without the Gophers and/or Badgers. Officials have been quoted as saying they actually had 100+ MORE people through the turnstiles every session than last year, and most of the crowd was demonstrably Sioux fans. So you leave the WCHA to start your own gig and watch half of the remaining teams turn belly up? Say four WCHA teams fail. That takes us from 58 down to 54. And let's assume a couple CCHA teams fold as a result of the BTHC. Now we're down to 52 Division I teams. Once that ripple starts washing its way across college hockey, what do you think is going to happen? Do you honestly believe some university administrators are going to look at THAT landscape and decide to invest the millions of dollars it takes to establish a new program? No way. College hockey is already operating a 16-team championship tournament under a sort of "wink-wink" deal with the NCAA; normally they want 60 teams to support that big of a playoff structure. You want to go back to 12? When I was a UND student, the hockey playoff was a four team deal. Is that what you want to see? Fighting Sioux hockey has been a supporter of start-up and fledgling hockey programs since its beginning. "We" played Bemidji as it moved from DII to DI, and look what that program has turned out to be. We played Mankato while they were an independent after working their way up from DIII to DII to DI. I've watched DI college hockey continue to contract, and I don't like that trend at all. I don't really believe the BTHC is about "growing the sport", but I am willing to at least look the other way while those schools go off on their own. I do not want to sit idly by while the sport dwindles further. This is the time to look at the big picture; time to ensure there is a future for college hockey. What good is being that big fish if the pond you are in is drying up? You ever see what happens to a fish caught in a tidal pool? They don't last long. Excellent post! Without John Mariucci, SCSU hockey wouldn't exist. He knew the sport had to grow for the sake of all NCAA hockey programs. And it needs to grow more! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzerman19 Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Excellent post! Without John Mariucci, SCSU hockey wouldn't exist. He knew the sport had to grow for the sake of all NCAA hockey programs. And it needs to grow more! wasn't Herbie also instrumental to scsu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Whether or not they have any business doing so, they do have a pretty big sugar daddy in line to help fund a hockey program. The Moorhead States of the world polluted Division II football, now they want to do it to Division I Hockey? No way they should be allowed to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzie679 Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 wasn't Herbie also instrumental to scsu John Mariucci was actually the one who got the ball rolling at the university and the legislature. He begged a very reluctant Herbie to take the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jk Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 UND should not act responsibly (considering the health of various programs in the WCHA and CCHA) to be "nice." They should do it selfishly, because keeping college hockey healthy is ultimately in UND's own best interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Moorhead St Reaches out to WCHA I cant bear the thought of this. It's like adding a Summit league school to out beloved WCHA. UND needs to do what's best for UND, not what's best for College Hockey. I could care less if "weaker" programs fold. They are exactly that: weak. If there was less teams in college hockey, Minnesota and Wisconsin would have to travel more for nonconference Big Ten games to places like UND. The Big Ten is not good for college hockey. The WCHA did not add BSU and Omaha cause it was good for college hockey, they did it cause they thought it was good for the WCHA. They knew Minnesota and Wiscosin were leaving and had to do something about it. If Minnesota and Wisconsin can leave the WCHA so should UND. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzie679 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 UND needs to do what's best for UND, not what's best for College Hockey. I could care less if "weaker" programs fold. They are exactly that: weak. If there was less teams in college hockey, Minnesota and Wisconsin would have to travel more for nonconference Big Ten games to places like UND. If Minnesota and Wisconsin can leave the WCHA so should UND. So you would like to see "weaker" programs fold because you want to see Minnesota play at The Ralph?? You're quite the visionary 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikejm Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 So you would like to see "weaker" programs fold because you want to see Minnesota play at The Ralph?? You're quite the visionary I'll let you run with this for awhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Supporter Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Yep that BTHC is surely the money maker. Michigan: -$44,000 Michigan State: -$429,000 Ohio State University: -$2.5 million HOLY CRAP!!! Wisconsin: -$925,000 Minnesota: $3.5 million Didn't get all the quotations right, but you get my drift.... A) The numbers quoted above are for the year 2009 only, and include men's and women's teams. The men's only total for 2009 is a bit different. Michigan: -$44,000 Michigan State: -$429,000 Ohio State University: -$1.6 million Wisconsin: $1,031,000 (Note the change from loss to profit) Minnesota: $4.3 million B) The data also indicates that a NUMBER of schools somehow, someway managed to show exactly ZERO PROFIT OR LOSS for that year. Here's a partial list of schools where revenue matched expenses down to the dollar: Boston College Brown University Holy Cross Harvard Miami of Ohio Princeton Robert Morris UConn UMass (Amherest) Western Michigan I find it extremely hard to believe that those numbers came out exact for all those universities. In short, those reports aren't worth the paper they're printed on IMHO. FWIW, for that year your school reported a profit of $1,475,302 on Men's Hockey, and an implied loss of $59,203 on the women's program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 So you would like to see "weaker" programs fold because you want to see Minnesota play at The Ralph?? You're quite the visionary I am saying would UND hockey be as big as it is if UND was playing Division III hockey? Or Division III schools in Division I hockey? Would UND be drawing 11,000 a game for moorehead state, minot st, blackhills st, mayville st. Its not about adding schools to college hockey for the sake of expansion. Its quality over quantity. and UND needs to do what's best for UND. How far will attendance suffer in a water-down league? Attendance is basically at a peak. Not to mention you could say UND just lost over $180,000 ($15 extra a game ticket for playing Minnesota x 12,000) for Minnesota leaving the WCHA. (probably more if Wisconsin was scheduled to play at the ralph the same year unlike this one). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walsh Hall Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 The BTHC can only hurt college hockey. I can't see a plausible scenerio were it is a net positive. If I had to guess which four teams would average the best finish in the WCHA if the league stayed intact over the next 20 years I would pick UND, UM, Denver, and UW. Historically the gophers and badgers are great college programs. It hurts to lose them in many ways. Average attendance will drop and interest will drop. I didn't look at the numbers, but these schools, UM in particular, has to pull in a larger than average gate on the road. That will hurt the remaining schools revenue. Also, having those games draws folks to the games and thereby drives interest in the sport. The cumulative dates circled on the calender will drop. Can you image the impact on attendance if UND left as well? The final five would be luck to draw 5000/game. My worst case scenerio is several teams folding. If the number of NCAA D1 teams dipped to 45-50 I'd think that would have a major impact on quality of the remaining teams and recruiting. What's good for college hockey is good for UND. UND is always going to be a big fish no matter the size of the pond, but I fear the size of the pond may be shrinking. Taking away 2 top programs from two of the top conferences is tough to absorb. Out of curiousity, after shift, if everyone else remained the same, how would you rank the conferences? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 There was a reason why NDSU felt the need to get out of Division II, and it was because it was getting watered down by schools who didn't want to, or wouldn't spend the money to be viable teams. If you start adding the same type of team to the WCHA, you run the risk of having a perennial doormat that won't spend the money and is a Division 1 program in name only. You don't think that the Big Ten schools will recruit players and point that out to every recruit? 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.