Reusse column: Big Ten hockey unpopular ... and very expensive

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
62,125
Reaction score
18,625
Points
113
per Reusse:

The idea that the Gophers would be moving to a Big Ten with one true rival, Wisconsin, and losing North Dakota, UMD, Denver and Colorado College as conference opponents not played well with the Mariucci faithful. There's another irritant among these fans in the run-up to the new schedule: cost.

I received this e-mail from a hockey season-ticket holder, after a previous piece on athletic director Norwood Teague's fuzzy math in suggesting the Gophers had recouped the 800 grand paid to North Carolina to cancel a football series. The e-mail read:

"Some more interesting math. I am a Gopher hockey season ticket holder and last year my renewal went to $1,920 for two tickets. That worked out to $76.80 per game for 25 games -- an increase of $15.20 per game over the previous year.

"This year the renewal was the same price but the number of games dropped to 20 games. That is $96 per game or another increase of $9.40. This amounts to a 56% increase over two years. Even if you take off the preferred seating cost of $200 per ticket, it is an increase of 23% over two years.

"I am not sure that most of the season ticket holders know because they don’t show the cost per game on the renewal, just a total renewal price.''

http://www.startribune.com/sports/blogs/207231731.html

Go Gophers!!
 

He only left out a few facts in that article....but frankly par for his course.
 


bleedsmaroonandgold said:
What key facts is he missing? It sounds like Gopher fans are paying more per game to watch less quality competition.
Click to expand...

Well, for starters he left out 4 games that ticket holders will be getting...that makes just a bit of difference in the cost. Second, there is no discussion of donations for seating in the story. Those donations amounts change what your tickets cost greatly. Thirdly, I'm willing to bet there is not a huge difference in competition quality. You swap Penn State for Anchorage which evens up. You gain Michigan and MSU and lose North Dakota and Denver....even trade for me. We still play the MN schools.

Reusse has an agenda, like always and its quite obvious to people who actually know the truth or are willing to spend 5 minutes doing just a little bit of research.
 

I wouldn't worry too much about the lowered quality of competition. It's only a matter of time before Jim Delaney invites UND, Denver, and CC to the Big Ten.
 


Why are people so upset about not playing the non-Minnesota WCHA schools? Why is Denver and CC so much more appealing than Michigan and Michigan State? Why is Michigan Tech and Anchorage more appealing than Penn State and Ohio State?
 

Omega015 said:
Why are people so upset about not playing the non-Minnesota WCHA schools? Why is Denver and CC so much more appealing than Michigan and Michigan State? Why is Michigan Tech and Anchorage more appealing than Penn State and Ohio State?
Click to expand...

Denver, CC, and North Dakota are more appealing than Michigan and Michigan State because the lowest of the 3 WCHA schools mentioned finished above the higher of the two between Michigan and Michigan State in the pairwise. Also, we will play less games vs. Minnesota schools this year than last year. I think the biggest concern is that our weaker schedule is going to give us less protection in the pairwise rankings for when we take Friday night off against weak opponents (which is something this team is prone to doing).
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
Denver, CC, and North Dakota are more appealing than Michigan and Michigan State because the lowest of the 3 WCHA schools mentioned finished above the higher of the two between Michigan and Michigan State in the pairwise. Also, we will play less games vs. Minnesota schools this year than last year. I think the biggest concern is that our weaker schedule is going to give us less protection in the pairwise rankings for when we take Friday night off against weak opponents (which is something this team is prone to doing).
Click to expand...

So the fact that Denver and CC were better than Michigan and Michigan State for one season means we shouldn't have a B1G conference?

There are 23 national titles between those 6 B1G teams, the conference will be fine.

I would much rather the Gophers play Michigan, Michigan State, Boston College, and Notre Dame every year than play any of the schools in the WCHA. With the exception of the intrastate games, this schedule is much more appealing to me than we've had for years. It's also much more appealing nationally, and the only way to grow college hockey is to give it appeal outside of Michigan, Minnesota, and Massachusetts. Everyone knows what the B1G is, nobody knows what the WCHA is.
 

Omega015 said:
So the fact that Denver and CC were better than Michigan and Michigan State for one season means we shouldn't have a B1G conference?

There are 23 national titles between those 6 B1G teams, the conference will be fine.

I would much rather the Gophers play Michigan, Michigan State, Boston College, and Notre Dame every year than play any of the schools in the WCHA. With the exception of the intrastate games, this schedule is much more appealing to me than we've had for years. It's also much more appealing nationally, and the only way to grow college hockey is to give it appeal outside of Michigan, Minnesota, and Massachusetts. Everyone knows what the B1G is, nobody knows what the WCHA is.
Click to expand...

I never said that, I just said that that is why people are upset about the weaker schedule next year. I'm also for the B1G hockey conference, and I think the Michigan rivalry will grow into a fun one for the Gophs (though I do really hope we get NoDak back on the schedule, I love the rivalry with them, and I hate them so much). I am just pointing out that a ticket holder complaining that increased prices for what, based on the most recent season, is going to be weaker competition is a legitimate argument to make. Furthermore, even though in the long run I don't think CC and Denver are going to be appreciably better than Michigan MSU, based on the most recent season, they likely (though by no means certainly) will be next year. I do think that is a short-term problem for a locker room that seems to have a habit of getting cocky and lazy on Friday nights and losing to teams who have no business being on the ice with us because a weaker schedule will be less forgiving of bad losses.

But yes, I agree with you on the value of the B1G conference for the sport as a whole, and think that it will be fun to have rivalries that can carry over from the gridiron to the court to the ice.
 



bleedsmaroonandgold said:
I never said that, I just said that that is why people are upset about the weaker schedule next year. I'm also for the B1G hockey conference, and I think the Michigan rivalry will grow into a fun one for the Gophs (though I do really hope we get NoDak back on the schedule, I love the rivalry with them, and I hate them so much). I am just pointing out that a ticket holder complaining that increased prices for what, based on the most recent season, is going to be weaker competition is a legitimate argument to make. Furthermore, even though in the long run I don't think CC and Denver are going to be appreciably better than Michigan MSU, based on the most recent season, they likely (though by no means certainly) will be next year. I do think that is a short-term problem for a locker room that seems to have a habit of getting cocky and lazy on Friday nights and losing to teams who have no business being on the ice with us because a weaker schedule will be less forgiving of bad losses.

But yes, I agree with you on the value of the B1G conference for the sport as a whole, and think that it will be fun to have rivalries that can carry over from the gridiron to the court to the ice.
Click to expand...

not all that legitimate in the fact that they're silly enough to take only one season into account when arguing that point. kind of like trying to make an argument on one small piece of a much larger pie.
 



It will take a few years, but the B1G will be the premier hockey league. The old WCHA is now a second tier league and the new NCHC will weaken over the years. The only reason the North Dakota's and UMD's type schools were so popular was because they played with the Big Boys. Hockey was the only sport where those schools could compete at the highest level. Now they will be in a conference with limited exposure and will not be rivals of any powerhouse schools. Recruits will pick a Penn St or Ohio St over a NCHC school just as they pick a B1G or SEC school over a WAC school in football.
 



I'm pretty Lucia was quoted saying he has never met Reusse. So who dies first Sid or Reusse? Sid seems healthy for his age, Reusse looks about 15 years older than he is, which is really saying something.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom