Hockey and the Big Ten

Donate To GopherHole

I think this will be much better for college hockey than most expect.
 

Being someone that lives outside of MN...I love the idea of 20 nationally televised games and a Big Ten Tourny...truthfully, if you were to ask anyone that is not a hard and true college hockey fan what WCHA means...they would not even know it had something to do with hockey...but you say Big Ten and they know what that is.

College hockey has grown profoundly in MN with the development of SCSU, MSU-Mankato and UMD being D1 programs...this growth hasn't translated into big TV dollars...with a big ten base...we can earn 2 times as much from TV than we earn from Fox regional coverage and it brings more eyeballs to the Big Ten network overall...more subscribers, more dollars plus a bigger percentage of TV revenue...plus I get to see the games.

I suspect that we will se some changes with other hockey leagues and more realignment...but the Big Ten brand has value and I beleive it will translate into hockey over time.
 

It will be interesting if MN ends it's association with UND. We don't play them in any sport in which we are not in their conference due to the Mascot situation. I assume that the Gophers will never play them unless it is in the NCAA tournament, unless the Sioux name is approved or ended for good.
 

GophersInIowa said:
Along with CC, Denver, MN-Duluth, Miami, Western Michigan, and others. That's why I think it would be a bad move for hockey as a whole. Sure it would help the Big Ten teams, but they already are in pretty good shape funding wise compared to a lot of the smaller school programs and this would widen the gap even more.

As someone already said, creating a BT conference will not create a lot more interest in college hockey. I personally would be less interested in it as a whole because we wouldn't have the in-state rivalries anymore. We wouldn't play UND as much as we do now.
Click to expand...

I agree its financially probably better for those B10 teams. But the CCHA and WCHA will really suffer. Every other school in the WCHA had a full arena when Minnesota came to town, I'm sure it was the same with the others. Do the folks in Mankato or Duluth get exited about Michigan Tech, Colorado College or Nebraska Omaha coming in...no. Thats why they have arenas that seat 2200, while UM and UW seat about 10k.

I wonder if this will make some other schools consider elevating their hockey from club level. Like Illinois and Northwestern.
 


I question how much $$ this is going to make the Gophers in particular. You speak of 20 games on the BTN, but outside of advertising, where is the extra $$? If I'm a cable/satellite provider, I'm not paying a higher subscriber fee just because you added these hockey games that only a tiny % of my audience gives two craps about. Football/basketball will still make up 99.5% of the value the BTN has to the distributors. I think the Gophers will lose more money from FSN than they will gain from the BTN. This may not be true for the other 5 as they may not make very much now.
 

Jike Spingleton said:
How true. I live in one of the few places in the country where college baseball is relevant - I've tried explaining to LSU fans that nobody cares how dominant they are in baseball, just like nobody cares how dominant we are (were?) in hockey, but I don't think they fully grasp that their sport is regional.

I wonder if I'd run into the same situation with Duke/Virginia/Syracuse lacrosse fans?
Click to expand...

College baseball is regional in terms of interest, but at least a majority of schools still play it. Major college hockey is far more regionalized than baseball in that regard. I don't think lacrosse fans harbor any similar illusion. Many Americans have never watched a lacrosse game period, much less a college lacrosse game.
 

ruralgopher said:
I think this will be much better for college hockey than most expect.
Click to expand...

I hope you're right, rural.

Haha, but for now, I'm pretty sad.

Initial concerns:
Who will we go out of our way to keep rivalries with? (hopefully UND, UMD, SCSU)
Will there be less Gopher hockey on TV? (better not be, or I will freak)
Will this mean better recruits who might have been satisfied with SCSU or UMD or even UND?
Exactly how much will this hurt UND hockey? (I hope a hell of a lot)
Average number of B10 teams in NCAA tourney? (3 of 6?) (4 of 6?)
 

MrGopher said:
I hope you're right, rural.

Haha, but for now, I'm pretty sad.

Initial concerns:
Who will we go out of our way to keep rivalries with? (hopefully UND, UMD, SCSU)
Will there be less Gopher hockey on TV? (better not be, or I will freak)
Will this mean better recruits who might have been satisfied with SCSU or UMD or even UND?
Exactly how much will this hurt UND hockey? (I hope a hell of a lot)
Average number of B10 teams in NCAA tourney? (3 of 6?) (4 of 6?)
Click to expand...

Great questions.

I don't think that the U will go out of their way to do anything with UND unless the mascot thing is solved, and with the state of ND involved now, I don't know if that will be soon. UMD, and SCSU are locks, I hope we also play MSU.

Less hockey on TV? Doubt it, unless you consider tape delay games as games on TV. If I remember right the BTN is trying to leverage a 2nd channel and that was a main driver for this, they need more live programming. Between the alternate channels I hope they can figure this out.

I think it will help recruiting. Probably won't hurt UND at all in the near term. Long term, kids will want to play in the best conference, which will be the BT.

I don't know how the math will work with pairwise, but it isn't hard to imagine MN, MI, WI, and MSU all in the tourney, but I think it will be 3 most years.

What are your thoughts?
 



ruralgopher said:
Great questions.

I don't think that the U will go out of their way to do anything with UND unless the mascot thing is solved, and with the state of ND involved now, I don't know if that will be soon. UMD, and SCSU are locks, I hope we also play MSU.

Less hockey on TV? Doubt it, unless you consider tape delay games as games on TV. If I remember right the BTN is trying to leverage a 2nd channel and that was a main driver for this, they need more live programming. Between the alternate channels I hope they can figure this out.

I think it will help recruiting. Probably won't hurt UND at all in the near term. Long term, kids will want to play in the best conference, which will be the BT.

I don't know how the math will work with pairwise, but it isn't hard to imagine MN, MI, WI, and MSU all in the tourney, but I think it will be 3 most years.

What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...

I agree with you about UND, except that i think this whole BTHC thing might be the tipping point for many of the UND alumni to actually switch their position and abandon their "save the Sioux" ambitions. This might help it end sooner and smoother for a lot of their fans.

Ideally, the BTN adds another full-time channel (none of this alternate channel business). They will probably pick up 7-8 Gopher games a year (conference games obviously), and the rest will fall into FSN's lap. Also, ideally, Frank and Doug will be making the call on FSN, while they get a legitimate pair to do the BTN games.

As far as the NCAA tourney goes, you're right, it has everything to do with pairwise. With that system, if all six schools dominate non-conf games, we could realistically see 5 of 6 teams in there. But I'd guess 4 would be the average. 3 in a bad year.

Another concern is the scheduling... I suppose there would be a home series and an away series against every team... 20 conference games. The Gophers played 34 regular season games this year (and had a few weekends off). This leaves a good amount of room (about 14-16 games) for non conference. I'd love to see 4 games with UND, 4 with UMD, and then a home and away series with SCSU, and another with Mankato every year. But that's just me.
 


i hate the idea of big ten hockey conference! hockey is a regional sport. Why would the U trade SCSU and UND for Penn State and Ohio State? Is that really more appealing? People in Columbus and Happy Valley dont care their hockey teams playing a UM or UW while people in this state do! Just wrong! Hockey needs to stay in this area and losing these rivalries is an atrocity. screw you penn state for bringing this to our doorstep.
 

I hate this idea as well. Playing UMD and UND in a non-conference series is alot different than competing against them to win the WCHA.
 



I like big ten hockey. It's not the job of the big ten schools to help the other smaller schools. It's just not. It's also not the job of the big ten schools to grow the entire sport of college hockey. The other schools have to do that as well. Why in the hell should the gophers or spartans or wolverines be expected to grow the sport in North Dakota and Duluth? The other schools have to do that.
 

It isn't the U's job to worry about the wcha or any of its teams. It is the U's job to look out for the U. The BTN has paid huge dividends and if the addition of hockey makes the conference better, the U has to think about what is best for themselves. Every sport could be a 'regional' if you wanted it to be.
 

ruralgopher said:
It isn't the U's job to worry about the wcha or any of its teams. It is the U's job to look out for the U. The BTN has paid huge dividends and if the addition of hockey makes the conference better, the U has to think about what is best for themselves. Every sport could be a 'regional' if you wanted it to be.
Click to expand...

And a sport can't have nationwide appeal just because you want it to.
 

Ralph_Wiggum said:
I like big ten hockey. It's not the job of the big ten schools to help the other smaller schools. It's just not. It's also not the job of the big ten schools to grow the entire sport of college hockey. The other schools have to do that as well. Why in the hell should the gophers or spartans or wolverines be expected to grow the sport in North Dakota and Duluth? The other schools have to do that.
Click to expand...

So subsidizing Ohio State and Penn State hockey is better?
 


ruralgopher said:
Good thing the NHL didn't have this foxhole mentality.
Click to expand...

But even that is very hit-or-miss. The NHL is bleeding money in Phoenix, Nashville, Miami, Atlanta...

Everybody knows that teams in smaller markets in Canada would do much better. I would rather have the NHL sacrifice broader American acceptance in favor of stable teams in solid markets.

Now I'm getting quite-off topic, I'll shut up about that now.
 

Why would the Big Ten schools want to create a league for themselves? Every year they all have a chance to make the tourney. With both the WCHA and CCHA Michigan, MSU, UW and the U could realistically make it every year! With the league does anyone think 4 or 5 teams will make the tourney? With how watered down the big schools will make their NC schedules its hard to see it.
 

ruralgopher said:
It isn't the U's job to worry about the wcha or any of its teams. It is the U's job to look out for the U. The BTN has paid huge dividends and if the addition of hockey makes the conference better, the U has to think about what is best for themselves. Every sport could be a 'regional' if you wanted it to be.
Click to expand...

Yes, but if their actions hurt college hockey as a whole, it will eventually start to affect the U as well. This could be a positive thing in the short run, but could potentially be very negative for college hockey as a whole in my opinion. Smaller programs could very easily go belly up. That's not a good thing.

Also, competing against UND, UMD, St. Cloud St. every year is a lot more exciting to me than playing Ohio St., Michigan St., or Penn St. Yes, this action could result in more publicity for the sport, but it also could alienate current fans as the intrastate rivalries will not be the same.
 


ruralgopher said:
Good thing the NHL didn't have this foxhole mentality.
Click to expand...
.
Yeah, its been so wildly successful that the Phoenix franchise is about to end up in Winnipeg. I know that you think that anyone opposing Big Ten hockey is a small minded fool. However, most of us that oppose the move simply understand how great college hockey and playing in the WCHA currently is and are unwilling to risk it all trying to shoot the moon by trying to growi the sport beyond its current borders.

Hypothetically, if the Gophers were able to leave the Big Ten for football and join a conference with, lets say Wisconsin, Notre Dame, Missouri, Akron and Toledo would you be willing to do it as long as it amounted to some more money?
 

ruralgopher said:
$$. The conference needs more live programming to make the big ten network 2 viable. Big ten network 2 = more subscriber fees.
Click to expand...

There is no way that the Big Ten is going to be able to hold the cable and satellite programs hostage again over college hockey. Everyone caved the first time because of the widespread popularity of football and basketball. They are going to get laughed trying it a second time with hockey as their additional programming.
 

this is Perfect, Gophers stick with the only REAL D1 teams in the big ten conference. The arrogant, racist nicknamed team known as general custer will have nothing. they are nothing without their "fake rivalry's" with Minn/Wisc.

Minn/Wisc can go back to NOT playing them in all sports because of their obvious mistreatment of native americans. Not to mention their 14 canadians, having kids get frostbite underage and letting them play, etc etc etc.

Poor englestad arena, wont be able to host postseason games, such a shame, ha ha ha ha.
 

Ron Johnson Super Fan said:
.
Yeah, its been so wildly successful that the Phoenix franchise is about to end up in Winnipeg. I know that you think that anyone opposing Big Ten hockey is a small minded fool. However, most of us that oppose the move simply understand how great college hockey and playing in the WCHA currently is and are unwilling to risk it all trying to shoot the moon by trying to growi the sport beyond its current borders.

Hypothetically, if the Gophers were able to leave the Big Ten for football and join a conference with, lets say Wisconsin, Notre Dame, Missouri, Akron and Toledo would you be willing to do it as long as it amounted to some more money?
Click to expand...

I don't think that people who are longing to hang on to tradition are small minded fools. I think people who think that this will 'ruin' college hockey are being a bit small minded. As to Phoenix and the NHL, 2 points. 1, that is one 'non-traditional' location that has struggled, others are succeeding wildly. 2, bad management is bad management. Even Edmonton nearly went broke because of bad management and that was when they were contructing beer bottle pyramids with Stanley Cups. As to your football analogy, I have no idea what you are attempting to correlate there so I'm not going to attempt to respond.

Ron Johnson Super Fan said:
There is no way that the Big Ten is going to be able to hold the cable and satellite programs hostage again over college hockey. Everyone caved the first time because of the widespread popularity of football and basketball. They are going to get laughed trying it a second time with hockey as their additional programming.
Click to expand...

You are right, they aren't going to go out and pitch a Big Ten Hockey Network. They are going to go after a 2nd BTN that will have football and basketball mixed over both channels so providers have to pick them both up. They need more live programming to make it happen though, hence the hockey.
 

ruralgopher said:
You are right, they aren't going to go out and pitch a Big Ten Hockey Network. They are going to go after a 2nd BTN that will have football and basketball mixed over both channels so providers have to pick them both up. They need more live programming to make it happen though, hence the hockey.
Click to expand...

But the only additional programming going from one station to two would be Big Ten college hockey. They already have basketball and football. Spreading it over two channels as opposed to one doesn't mean you are getting anything extra besides hockey and people aren't naive enough to believe otherwise. The Big Ten network already has a great deal in place. They get a high user fee on basic tiers and still get to sell their top football and basketball games to ESPN/ABC. It astonishes me how fast the greed kicks in. Hey, we were able to extort some extra money from the public a couple of years back, why not try it again for twice the money!

As far as the football analogy it probably wasn't very apt because Minnesota isn't a strong football program right now. A better analogy would be OSU, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Penn State, and Nebraska forming a new conference with Oklahoma and Texas and kicking Minnesota and the other little sisters of the poor to the curb because they only need to take care of their own programs. Why not consolidate the strong programs into a few conferences and keep all the money to themselves? Its not their job to subsidize Gopher football.
 

howeda7 said:
College baseball is regional in terms of interest, but at least a majority of schools still play it. Major college hockey is far more regionalized than baseball in that regard. I don't think lacrosse fans harbor any similar illusion. Many Americans have never watched a lacrosse game period, much less a college lacrosse game.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But I also believe that college hockey has a broader appeal in the areas in which it is played than baseball does. Meaning, there are more pockets of this country where college hockey is a huge deal than there are for college baseball.

When I lived in South Florida for a year, nobody gave a damn about Miami Hurricanes baseball, and they're one of the premier programs in the nation. College baseball gets totally lost in the shuffle in Southern California, despite having USC, UCLA, Cal State Fullerton, etc.. Meanwhile, hockey takes center stage in New England and the Upper Midwest.

As someone who grew up on the west coast and never cared much about hockey until attending Minnesota, I like the idea of a Big Ten hockey conference. The best part, so far, is how much it irks Sue fans. :D Having seen the interest in their club teams, I would be surprised if Indiana and Illinois didn't add varsity hockey by the end of the decade, and if so, the B10 hockey conference is serving its purpose.
 

ruralgopher said:
$$. The conference needs more live programming to make the big ten network 2 viable. Big ten network 2 = more subscriber fees.
Click to expand...

I find it very hard to believe there's going to be a Big Ten Network 2 and even harder to believe it will be built on the back of hockey. The BTN is primirily available in 8 states and in at least 5 of those 8 states (PA, OH, IL, IN and IA) college hockey will draw a very limited audience. Further, this is a network that from ~March 10th to ~August 25th has almost no relavent programming. Now we're going to make two channels? If I was the CEO of a cable company I'd offer you a penny per subsriber for 'BTN2', say 'take it or leave it' and consider that generous.
 

Jike Spingleton said:
Agreed. But I also believe that college hockey has a broader appeal in the areas in which it is played than baseball does. Meaning, there are more pockets of this country where college hockey is a huge deal than there are for college baseball.

When I lived in South Florida for a year, nobody gave a damn about Miami Hurricanes baseball, and they're one of the premier programs in the nation. College baseball gets totally lost in the shuffle in Southern California, despite having USC, UCLA, Cal State Fullerton, etc.. Meanwhile, hockey takes center stage in New England and the Upper Midwest.

As someone who grew up on the west coast and never cared much about hockey until attending Minnesota, I like the idea of a Big Ten hockey conference. The best part, so far, is how much it irks Sue fans. :D Having seen the interest in their club teams, I would be surprised if Indiana and Illinois didn't add varsity hockey by the end of the decade, and if so, the B10 hockey conference is serving its purpose.
Click to expand...

I disagree about Miami baseball. They draw very big crowds compared to any Big 10 school. It's true that there isn't a huge following among casual fans, but in reality there isn't a huge following for Gopher Hockey among casual fans either. But like Gopher hockey, a large % of Miami baseball games are televised, etc. How many Gopher baseball games are? It's probably not as popular as it was pre-Marlins (darn those pro teams coming in and ruining great programs!) but I don't think you can say 'nobody gives a damn.' As with anything, it's usually about winning. For example, Virginia is building a very good program. They frequently sell out week-end games now, and baseball outdraws the great lacrosse team. 5 years ago they drew flies.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom