star2city Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Indeed, star2city. I'd really like to know what Notre Dame's stipulations were because they've must've been pretty egregious for the NCHC to make that press release. You'd have to think that the NCHC was willing to give Notre Dame some allowances or benefits to a degree. Yeah? It was known that Notre Dame had already signed a regional TV deal for Notre Dame's sole benefit. The NCHC was certainly willing to live with that, if the contract was modified to allow the conference to "own" a couple of those games for the benefit of the conference. Notre Dame must have said no, and the NCHC must have walked away and felt they couldn't deal with a school that is all about itself and no one else. The WCHA was a league run for and by Minnesota, the CCHA was a league run for and by the Michigan Big Ten schools. What schools from either league would go back into a poor relationship with a league run for Notre Dame's interests? They all learned their lessons. In this case, ND won't even provide the fans for a conference tournament. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxnami Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Good job, nice to be a part if a conference with a spine. Insert your own joke as to what McClown would have done for Notre Dame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 I think Notre Dame is consistent. They tried to pull the same garbage with the Big 10 in football. They want their cake and eat it too. I can't blame them. Most of the schools in the realignment news have acted the same or similarly. But where the line is drawn is when you can swallow some of your greed for the good of whatever conference you are trying or wish to join. Texas wanted, at one point, to join the Pac 12 and the Big 10 but they probably got similar stories from both of them: You cannot be the top dog in our conference with your own tv deal and the conference commissioner at your beck and call. So, instead of just going independent (which I thought Texas was going to do), they axed the Longhorn Network and agreed to the Oklahoma stipulation that the Big 12 commissioner, long known for being in Texas' pocket (basically), resign. It looks like Texas "settled" for the Big 12, but in fact, the Big 10 doesn't look so great and the PAC 12 is still forgotten by the most prominent National Sports media (ESPN is too busy revelling in the SEC). Notre Dame likes to believe they are relevant and desired because of their historic program when in fact they are wanted because of how well their fanbase travels and their branding/marketing presence. Their football hasn't been relevant since the late '80s and their hockey program, though somewhat on the upward slope, hasn't been bigtime really yet. At this point, without Notre Dame swallowing their egos a bit, it will be HEA or independent. I'm hoping Independent because then (hopefully) Notre Dame will realize that college hockey isn't college football. And you'll see the Notre Dame program flounder. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxFanatic Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 So instead of Notre Dame we get St. Clown. Time to rename the conference. At this point, I'd rather have St. Cloud than having our conference be Notre Dame's *****. Adding WMU & SCSU proved to be an insurance policy in the event that the NCHC and ND couldn't come to terms with each other. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Probably the worst consequence of Notre Dame's decision is how it affects Bowling Green. With ND going to Hockey East, RPI likely goes with them, so in turn the ECAC adds RIT to replace RPI. If ND had gone to the NCHC, the NCHC probably would have stopped at seven schools. In that case, the CCHA could have easily relaunched with WMU, BGSU + AHA 4 + RIT + UAH for a total of eight schools (+ nine if Buffalo joins). Now, the CCHA has at most six schools, and really depends on Buffalo starting in 2013. BGSU and UAH may both be badly harmed by ND's decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey1 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 It was known that Notre Dame had already signed a regional TV deal for Notre Dame's sole benefit. The NCHC was certainly willing to live with that, if the contract was modified to allow the conference to "own" a couple of those games for the benefit of the conference. Notre Dame must have said no, and the NCHC must have walked away and felt they couldn't deal with a school that is all about itself and no one else. The WCHA was a league run for and by Minnesota, the CCHA was a league run for and by the Michigan Big Ten schools. What schools from either league would go back into a poor relationship with a league run for Notre Dame's interests? They all learned their lessons. In this case, ND won't even provide the fans for a conference tournament. Can you please elaborate on this statement " The WCHA was a league run for and by Minnesota " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxnami Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Can you please elaborate on this statement " The WCHA was a league run for and by Minnesota " Case and point, the Minnesota rule at the Final 5. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Wonder if ND is demanding the same from HE; can't see HE bending over for ND either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Can't believe the audacity of Notre Dame. They have had 2 frozen 4 runs recently. Before that what?? Nothing!! Props to the NCHC for not caving to the demands of a school that thinks they are bigger than they actually are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey1 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Case and point, the Minnesota rule at the Final 5. Do you mean this same Minnesota Rule at the final 5 that is voted on and approved by all ( except Minnesota who votes against it) WCHA AD'S and coaches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Do you mean this same Minnesota Rule at the final 5 that is voted on and approved by all ( except Minnesota who votes against it) WCHA AD'S and coaches. I have a hard time believing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Can't believe the audacity of Notre Dame. They have had 2 frozen 4 runs recently. Before that what?? Nothing!! Props to the NCHC for not caving to the demands of a school that thinks they are bigger than they actually are. I'd like to think that HE wouldn't be so "flexible" either. Regardless of what ND might bring to the table, that conference is Boston-centric and I doubt BC, BU, etc. would be willing to give away what they already have just to please the Golden Domers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey1 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 I have a hard time believing that. You might want to ask your AD about it then. I have been to many away blueline luncheons and the Minnesota rule is brought up from time to time and each AD or coach who is talking at the luncheon says we vote in favor of the rule for the gate revenue. All members in the WCHA share in the final five revenue regardless if they are in the final five or not. I'm not saying this is the right thing to do but for financial reasons it is what they do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Can you please elaborate on this statement " The WCHA was a league run for and by Minnesota " In most respects, Minnesota wanted weak central leadership in the WCHA. By keeping the leadership weak and archaic (no real business plan for TV, limited social media, archaic website), Minnesota was the school that benefited almost exclusively from its own television contract with no sharing required. McLeod's banana republic leadership of the WCHA served Minnesota well - Minnesota didn't have to share or hand over any of their home games to a conference contract. The four regional Minnesota schools were too fearful of Minnesota's political power to seriously question things. Anchorage and Tech were just happy to be in. Wisconsin even threatened to leave for the CCHA out of disgust. Alvarez at Wisconsin, say what you want about him, had a low tolerance for incompetence and conference cronyism - which is one reason he wanted to get the h*** out of the WCHA. Maturi at Minnesota, on the other hand, as long as the $'s are coming in, he doesn't care about excellence. See Goldie hockey, football, basketball. If the WCHA had installed leadership that would have brought the WCHA into the 21st century with actual regular season TV contracts, Minnesota would have lost power and money. Minnesota needed to keep McLeod around to keep the conference weak - to keep the conference more like a 1970's scheduling association than a modern conference. McLeod's incompetence served Minnesota's purposes very well. It's too bad that Minnesota, by endorsing McLeod over all these years, has now effectively forced McLeod on Bemidji and Mankato at a time when those two schools deserve so much better. The NCHC will be a real conference, with strong competent central leadership (hopefully), with a real business plan, with a real TV contract, run by business professionals with a passion for hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey1 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 In most respects, Minnesota wanted weak central leadership in the WCHA. By keeping the leadership weak and archaic (no real business plan for TV, limited social media, archaic website), Minnesota was the school that benefited almost exclusively from its own television contract with no sharing required. McLeod's banana republic leadership of the WCHA served Minnesota well - Minnesota didn't have to share or hand over any of their home games to a conference contract. The four regional Minnesota schools were too fearful of Minnesota's political power to seriously question things. Anchorage and Tech were just happy to be in. Wisconsin even threatened to leave for the CCHA out of disgust. Alvarez at Wisconsin, say what you want about him, had a low tolerance for incompetence and conference cronyism - which is one reason he wanted to get the h*** out of the WCHA. Maturi at Minnesota, on the other hand, as long as the $'s are coming in, he doesn't care about excellence. See Goldie hockey, football, basketball. If the WCHA had installed leadership that would have brought the WCHA into the 21st century with actual regular season TV contracts, Minnesota would have lost power and money. Minnesota needed to keep McLeod around to keep the conference weak - to keep the conference more like a 1970's scheduling association than a modern conference. McLeod's incompetence served Minnesota's purposes very well. It's too bad that Minnesota, by endorsing McLeod over all these years, has now effectively forced McLeod on Bemidji and Mankato at a time when those two schools deserve so much better. The NCHC will be a real conference, with strong competent central leadership (hopefully), with a real business plan, with a real TV contract, run by business professionals with a passion for hockey. OMG, Wasn't aware Minnesota controlled the WCHA website, social media, TV contracts. Yes, Minnesota has a nice TV contract but that was something they set up with the BTN network and FSN just like UND set up their tv contract with FSSN and FSC ( I think that is what it is called) How did Minnesota stop other schools from doing the same thing. McLeod may have been a clown in some peoples eyes but to say Minnesota was pulling his strings is interesting to say the least. I have to hand it to you it is a nice conspiracy theory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnboyND7 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Not really understanding all of the Notre Dame hate going on. Notre Dame is a Bigtime Division 1 school. Tons of fans nationwide. Whether anyone likes it or not, they get to be a lot more picky than a lot of other schools about conference deals in any sport. If UND could do what Notre Dame is doing, you can bet your house that they would. Notre Dame is going to get a pretty good deal to join some conference, and as a result, that conference is going to get a lot of exposure because Lo and Behold, they get to play against the University of Notre Dame. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 OMG, Wasn't aware Minnesota controlled the WCHA website, social media, TV contracts. Yes, Minnesota has a nice TV contract but that was something they set up with the BTN network and FSN just like UND set up their tv contract with FSSN and FSC ( I think that is what it is called) How did Minnesota stop other schools from doing the same thing. McLeod may have been a clown in some peoples eyes but to say Minnesota was pulling his strings is interesting to say the least. I have to hand it to you it is a nice conspiracy theory. For Minnesota, it wasn't any conspiracy. Just "normal" business to employ incompetent people, and still make a weekly run to the bank. Minnesota didn't want the B1G for hockey.Still doesn't. But the BTN forced in on them, over Maturi's crying. Minnesota has all the capabilities that Wisconsin has athletically - yet Minnesota is such a joke compared to them in everything. Why? Alvarez demands excellence in everything. Minnesota doesn't, and the results show. If Maturi had wanted McLeod gone, Maturi would have called up the other four regional Minnie schools and joined UND, DU, and CC (which wanted McLeod gone long ago) in voting him out. Why didn't Minnesota get rid of McLeod long ago? Simple answer: McLeod's lack of any vision and lack of administrative ability for the WCHA served Minnesota perfectly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey1 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 For Minnesota, it wasn't any conspiracy. Just "normal" business to employ incompetent people, and still make a weekly run to the bank. Minnesota didn't want the B1G for hockey.Still doesn't. But the BTN forced in on them, over Maturi's crying. Minnesota has all the capabilities that Wisconsin has athletically - yet Minnesota is such a joke compared to them in everything. Why? Alvarez demands excellence in everything. Minnesota doesn't, and the results show. If Maturi had wanted McLeod gone, Maturi would have called up the other four regional Minnie schools and joined UND, DU, and CC (which wanted McLeod gone long ago) in voting him out. Why didn't Minnesota get rid of McLeod long ago? Simple answer: McLeod's lack of any vision and lack of administrative ability for the WCHA served Minnesota perfectly. I agree Wisconsin has had Minnesota number in Football ( Basketball and Hockey have been a wash in head to head games) but if Minnesota has been a joke to Wisconsin in " Everything" why has Minnesota beat Wisc in the border battle ( head to head competition in all sports played )for the past three years in a row. If Minnesota had such a strong hold on the WCHA leadership , what does that say about the other members in the league , including UND leadership for letting this happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 I agree Wisconsin has had Minnesota number in Football ( Basketball and Hockey have been a wash in head to head games) but if Minnesota has been a joke to Wisconsin in " Everything" why has Minnesota beat Wisc in the border battle ( head to head competition in all sports played )for the past three years in a row. If Minnesota had such a strong hold on the WCHA leadership , what does that say about the other members in the league , including UND leadership for letting this happen. Read this to get a clue on the importance of TV rights: http://espn.go.com/d...onal-tv-revenue The WCHA didn't have Tier I or Tier II TV contracts (except for the Final Five) - only Tier III, which are owned by schools. Maturi didn't want the WCHA to have Tier I or Tier II TV contracts, as that allowed Goldie to have a bigger Tier III contract, which Goldie didn't have to share with anyone. It takes a supermajority to make significant changes in a league - like firing McLeod. Maturi could always protect McLeod by pressuring the four Minnesota minnies to follow his line. Same kind of crap happened in the Big 12 as in the WCHA: Texas got what it wanted in the past. But, finally, to keep the Big 12 conference together (as Texas had no other options ), Oklahoma and the other schools finally got what they wanted: Beebe was fired as Big 12 Commissioner (he was seen as being in Texas' pocket), and all TV revenue (except Tier III) will be shared equally. Minnesota wielded even more power in the WCHA compared to Texas in the Big 12. Minnesota hates the idea of the B1G hockey, because Minnesota is mostly viewed as a parasite in that conference (except in hockey), so it can't wield any real influence anymore like it did in the WCHA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockey1 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Read this to get a clue on the importance of TV rights: http://espn.go.com/d...onal-tv-revenue The WCHA didn't have Tier I or Tier II TV contracts (except for the Final Five) - only Tier III, which are owned by schools. Maturi didn't want the WCHA to have Tier I or Tier II TV contracts, as that allowed Goldie to have a bigger Tier III contract, which Goldie didn't have to share with anyone. It takes a supermajority to make significant changes in a league - like firing McLeod. Maturi could always protect McLeod by pressuring the four Minnesota minnies to follow his line. Same kind of crap happened in the Big 12 as in the WCHA: Texas got what it wanted in the past. But, finally, to keep the Big 12 conference together (as Texas had no other options ), Oklahoma and the other schools finally got what they wanted: Beebe was fired as Big 12 Commissioner (he was seen as being in Texas' pocket), and all TV revenue (except Tier III) will be shared equally. Minnesota wielded even more power in the WCHA compared to Texas in the Big 12. Minnesota hates the idea of the B1G hockey, because Minnesota is mostly viewed as a parasite in that conference (except in hockey), so it can't wield any real influence anymore like it did in the WCHA. You have some interesting opinions, and your entitled to them, so I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that Minnesota had control of McLeod and the rest of the WCHA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Notre Dame's decision was based largely on television. Soon, each conference in the country will announce its own television deal with NBC Sports Network (what Versus will turn into in January) to air college hockey games nationally. Notre Dame has reached its own agreement with NBC Sports to air its games, separately from the conference contract. http://www.eagletrib...ey-East-in-2013 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakotadan Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 So if that is true, the NCHC could have still brought them on board but just not given them a cut of the conference TV deal. It would still be beneficial to have ND in the league from a marketing and branding standpoint. And even if they have their own TV deal for home games, having them in the conference would still help with increasing the revenue from the conference TV contract as they would still show up on the conferences broadcast games when they are playing on the road. Either way, it still doesn't justify bringing SCSU into the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissSioux85 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Bowling Green will join WCHA in 2013-2014 http://www.bgsufalcons.com/news/2011/10/4/HOCKEY_1004112909.aspx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 CCHA........dead! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakota fairways Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 CCHA........dead! too bad for Alabama Huntsville they are really going to have a tough time now 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.