82SiouxGuy Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Just to clarify... I totally agree with you, I just think Chicago would be a more fun place to visit. Chicago may be a little more fun, but KC isn't bad. And it has some great barbecue places. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Target Center has never been a great facility and the ice there was always poor. Then again, poor ice, that would be a great preparation for the teams for the poor ice in some of the NCAA tournament venues selected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stack Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 I'm actually good with the Target Center if that works. Ice was never great but the hockey was those years they were building the X. It's great for fans with all of the places to stay, eat, and drink. Plus it's easy to get to for UND, ST Cloud, Duluth and even Omaha. I'd prefer it to be a permanent site and don't like the idea of going from the Twin Cities/Omaha/Denver. The X is better for hockey but the Target center works for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 As someone else said, I'd be all for a rotation of Target Center and the X every other year. Again, I'm speaking from a purely personal perspective, as I live in the Cities and have grown quite fond of the Final Five being local. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USA Hockey Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 The Target Center isn't the best hockey arena by any means, but I think it makes sense to have it there over anywhere else (at least during the years the B10 is at the X). Omaha wouldn't be a bad place, but you can't tell me that you will draw more fans in Omaha than in Minneapolis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ole in MSP Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 The Target Center isn't the best hockey arena by any means, but I think it makes sense to have it there over anywhere else (at least during the years the B10 is at the X). Omaha wouldn't be a bad place, but you can't tell me that you will draw more fans in Omaha than in Minneapolis. Where will the remnants of the WCHA hold their postseason tourney? The twin cities is a natural place for them to hold a tourney too. Facilities may be too large, but it is a central location for them. Tech, Bemidji, Mankato, UAA, who else is in there now? Where will the CCHA go also, or will they combine with the WCHA. This may all have been discussed earlier, but I missed it. Can any one update me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Where will the remnants of the WCHA hold their postseason tourney? The twin cities is a natural place for them to hold a tourney too. Facilities may be too large, but it is a central location for them. Tech, Bemidji, Mankato, UAA, who else is in there now? Where will the CCHA go also, or will they combine with the WCHA. This may all have been discussed earlier, but I missed it. Can any one update me? Maybe they should have their's in the REA?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxScore Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Where will the remnants of the WCHA hold their postseason tourney? The twin cities is a natural place for them to hold a tourney too. Facilities may be too large, but it is a central location for them. Tech, Bemidji, Mankato, UAA, who else is in there now? Where will the CCHA go also, or will they combine with the WCHA. This may all have been discussed earlier, but I missed it. Can any one update me? I believe the remaining WCHA and CCHA teams have agreed to form one conference together but have not decided on a name for the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 I believe the remaining WCHA and CCHA teams have agreed to form one conference together but have not decided on a name for the league. The leftover CCHA teams joined the WCHA. The CCHA will no longer exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fargosioux Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 Where will the remnants of the WCHA hold their postseason tourney? The twin cities is a natural place for them to hold a tourney too. Facilities may be too large, but it is a central location for them. Tech, Bemidji, Mankato, UAA, who else is in there now? Where will the CCHA go also, or will they combine with the WCHA. This may all have been discussed earlier, but I missed it. Can any one update me? I could see the WCHA holding their tournament in Green Bay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ole in MSP Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 I could see the WCHA holding their tournament in Green Bay. Or perhaps Milwaukee, although that is not a hockey hotbed. Both are more central to the combined league members from Michigan and Minnesota. Just a note, Lucia says the U of M will continue to play the other Minnesota schools regularly and a yearly series with BC. With 20 Big 10 games, 2 with BC, and perhaps 8 or more against the Minnesota schools, there may not be much opportunity left for UND to play the Gophers. Is this planned? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 Or perhaps Milwaukee, although that is not a hockey hotbed. Both are more central to the combined league members from Michigan and Minnesota. Just a note, Lucia says the U of M will continue to play the other Minnesota schools regularly and a yearly series with BC. With 20 Big 10 games, 2 with BC, and perhaps 8 or more against the Minnesota schools, there may not be much opportunity left for UND to play the Gophers. Is this planned? Minnesota won't play UND at all because of the nickname. If the nickname is retired it may change. I don't believe they are going to play a regular series against each of the other Minnesota teams every year. The talk was that they would play a series against either 2 or 3 of them and would play the others in an annual Minnesota tournament and the teams would rotate. So it would probably be 2 game series against 2 of the schools and a single tournament game against the other 2 for a total of 6 games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted April 21, 2012 Share Posted April 21, 2012 The WCHA could hold theirs at a smaller arena like Mariucci, or Ridder could probably suffice for the number of fans they would probably get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFG Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Minnesota won't play UND at all because of the nickname. If the nickname is retired it may change. I don't believe they are going to play a regular series against each of the other Minnesota teams every year. The talk was that they would play a series against either 2 or 3 of them and would play the others in an annual Minnesota tournament and the teams would rotate. So it would probably be 2 game series against 2 of the schools and a single tournament game against the other 2 for a total of 6 games. Minnesota will play series against 3 of them every year and play the odd one out in the first round of the Minnesota tournament to ensure they face every team. So the Minnesota teams will take up 8 games for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishSiouxFan Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Minnesota will play series against 3 of them every year and play the odd one out in the first round of the Minnesota tournament to ensure they face every team. So the Minnesota teams will take up 8 games for them. The question remains whether they will play those games in the other teams arenas or insist on playing only at home. The only thing that the other Minnesota teams will miss about plaing UM is the revenue from the ticket sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigskyvikes Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 The question remains whether they will play those games in the other teams arenas or insist on playing only at home. The only thing that the other Minnesota teams will miss about plaing UM is the revenue from the ticket sales. Nothing like a team that believes they are "entitled"! Can't wait for this new league to start, than showing how elite it is, and maybe some entitled team may want to play teams from that elite league called the NCHC! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFG Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 The question remains whether they will play those games in the other teams arenas or insist on playing only at home. The only thing that the other Minnesota teams will miss about plaing UM is the revenue from the ticket sales. I believe 2 are in Mariucci and one is at another school, so the other schools will have Minnesota visit their arena once every 4 years, while the tournament is in the X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishSiouxFan Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I believe 2 are in Mariucci and one is at another school, so the other schools will have Minnesota visit their arena once every 4 years, while the tournament is in the X That's a crap deal and you know it! I think it's hilarious that UM is acting like their doing a huge favor by cutting the crusts of the turd sandwiches they're feeding the other Minnesota schools. Have fun filling your arena with Michigan, Ohio State, Michigan State, and Penn State fans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bale31 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 That's a crap deal and you know it! I think it's hilarious that UM is acting like their doing a huge favor by cutting the crusts of the turd sandwiches they're feeding the other Minnesota schools. Have fun filling your arena with Michigan, Ohio State, Michigan State, and Penn State fans Honestly, from a Mankato perspective, MN is treating us a hell of a lot better than anyone else that's leaving the conference. They have agreed to both the "Minnesota Cup" and, for the first 2 years, a home-and-home series with Kato. I have also been told that it's probably going to morph into a 4-year agreement in which it's a home-and-home for 3 years and the 4th year MN has a home series, but they will have to pay a hefty price for that 4th year. I think that's going to be the way it works from this point forward. MN is going to have to play more return trips simply due to the fact that they aren't going to get enough schools to come in and play them without a return trip. They've got to fill up their schedule since the league is smaller and they are going to need to play more return trips. There is no upside for most schools to go to Mariucci without getting either return trip OR a very large check paid to them. I hate to break it to you guys, but if there is anyone that MSU fans are really disgusted with it's the schools in the NCHC. Minnesota has been classy through this entire transition and Lucia has done and said all the right things. I, personally, gained a whole new respect for Minnesota and the way they are going about their business. I historically haven't defended the Gophers in hockey, but after this, I can't say anything bad about the way they are going about their business. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 All Minnesota did is roll over for Jim Delaney and Barry Alvarez and the fat Big Ten Network paycheck. The good of college hockey came in at least fourth on the list. MSU-Mankato came in somewhere behind that. PS - Minnesota is playing nice because they don't need you little guys (BSU, UMD, SCSU, MSU-M) making too much noise to the Legislature in St. Paul. Be sure to pick up the crumbs they leave you. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFG Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 All Minnesota did is roll over for Jim Delaney and Barry Alvarez and the fat Big Ten Network paycheck. The good of college hockey came in at least fourth on the list. MSU-Mankato came in somewhere behind that. PS - Minnesota is playing nice because they don't need you little guys (BSU, UMD, SCSU, MSU-M) making too much noise to the Legislature in St. Paul. Be sure to pick up the crumbs they leave you. The fat BTN paycheck? Minnesota's AD has said Minnesota will probably less money in the B1G conference than they did in the WCHA. Here's part of an e-mail he sent me on March 22nd, 2011 when I was sharing my opinion against going to the B1G to him: "Also, please know I do not think the “U” will make money with the change, contrary to popular belief. I'm quite confident that it will probably cost us some. Fact is we are a member of the Big Ten Conference and now six institutions sponsor Men’s Hockey. That qualifies to become a Big Ten sport and Hockey will become one in 2013-2014. We will continue to play many of our traditional rivals and In-State colleagues. Change is never easy but I am confident all will work out." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bale31 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 All Minnesota did is roll over for Jim Delaney and Barry Alvarez and the fat Big Ten Network paycheck. The good of college hockey came in at least fourth on the list. MSU-Mankato came in somewhere behind that. PS - Minnesota is playing nice because they don't need you little guys (BSU, UMD, SCSU, MSU-M) making too much noise to the Legislature in St. Paul. Be sure to pick up the crumbs they leave you. Really, what was MN supposed to do? Drop out of the Big Ten for "the good of college hockey"? Come on, let's be realistic about it. I'm not going to get in a pissing match, but why was it only up to MN to do "what is good for college hockey"? What about UND, DU, CC, MIami, SCSU, UMD, UNO and WMU? All of those schools had the ability to help a lot of other schools. It's disingenuous to act as though their hands were tied and this was something that they had to do. It's something they wanted to do. And that's fine. It's their right to do that and if they are better off for it, it's all good. But, please, let's stop acting as though college hockey programs are above the money-grab that all college athletics have become. There is no such thing as acting for "the good of college hockey". MN and WI aren't immune from that and neither is UND or anyone else in the NCHC. I know that you guys automatically think cynically about MN, and that's fine. But they have been making the best of a bad situation. Yes, the Big Ten started everything, but, realistically, they weren't going to be able to stop it without screwing over every other athletic program that they have. The only option that was available was to go with the flow, join the Big Ten and preserve as many of the relationships as possible. Yes, that might mean that they default to the other MN schools, but they're doing exactly what they've always said they would do. They are being stewards of the game in the state of Minnesota. Maybe it's a PR ploy and maybe they truly believe that's their role. I don't know and, frankly, it doesn't matter. They are doing what's best for hockey in the state of Minnesota. All that being said, what's done is done. I think MSU will actually come out of this in a pretty good position. It's not where I would like us to be, but we'll be fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Really, what was MN supposed to do? Drop out of the Big Ten for "the good of college hockey"? The Big Ten's "if six play a sport we play in conference" rule is strictly a Big Ten rule. They could've changed their own rules to allow for the traditional hockey conferences to stay together. Instead, they chose Penn State and forming BIg Ten Hockey over the traditional conferences. The Big Ten looked out for themselves first (as well they should). Don't be mad at DU, CC, UMD, UNO, UND, et al for doing the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxFanatic Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 The Big Ten's "if six play a sport we play in conference" rule is strictly a Big Ten rule. They could've changed their own rules to allow for the traditional hockey conferences to stay together. Instead, they chose Penn State and forming BIg Ten Hockey over the traditional conferences. The Big Ten looked out for themselves first (as well they should). Don't be mad at DU, CC, UMD, UNO, UND, et al for doing the same. No offense but once again I'll ask the question for Bale. What was Minnesota suppose to do? Notice the singular use? Everyone knows that they could've changed their own rules but to do that, that requires more than one school agreeing on doing so right? You very well know that besides Minnesota, the other Big Ten hockey schools were all for forming the BTHC. I got a good laugh when I saw people saying Minnesota should've/could've threatened to leave the Big Ten to stop the formation. With that said, I still get a good laugh at people trying to spitball Minnesota. I may hate the school but they handled the conference shakeup crap pretty well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bale31 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 The Big Ten's "if six play a sport we play in conference" rule is strictly a Big Ten rule. They could've changed their own rules to allow for the traditional hockey conferences to stay together. Instead, they chose Penn State and forming BIg Ten Hockey over the traditional conferences. The Big Ten looked out for themselves first (as well they should). Don't be mad at DU, CC, UMD, UNO, UND, et al for doing the same. I'm well past being mad about it. It's just the reality. I just can't stand when any school (or fans of said schools) that made a jump for a new conference acts like it was everyone else's fault. Everyone had a hand in it and that includes everyone in the NCHC. If you want to blame MN for it, you have to blame your own school for everything that's happened too. As far as the Big Ten, I don't think that's being realistic. Again, you're asking for a niche sport (and as much as we all love college hockey, it's still a niche sport) to get special rules that no other sport gets. Penn State wasn't going to add a program unless a Big Ten Hockey Conference was formed. Honestly, you can't think that the other 11 conference schools are going to look at Penn State and tell them they are going to look out for other institutions that they aren't affiliated with in a niche sport instead of looking out for Penn State. Penn State will win that battle 100 times out of 100. Asking them to do anything of the sort would defeat the purpose of the Big Ten Conference as a whole. 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.