Stanford… maybe not for football.
If your referring to the hockey it’s not worth the money for the fans around here. Final five was probably the coolest sports event around. I loved college hockey and now I hardly watch it.
The BTT at MSG was a complete disaster.
www.sbnation.com
Don't want to get too much into the hockey debate because this is the football board, but really the only reason the hockey stuff changed is because Penn State added hockey. Once you had 6 Big Ten Schools you had to join the Big Ten hockey conference. It's how it works for all sports in the Big Ten. It wasn't really just a money thing (except maybe for Penn State).
Do you know what a national brand means?
This goes for many people. While I enjoy watching the Gophers in hockey, it clearly isn't the same. The pundits can think we're going to come around. They haven't, and they won't. The right thing to do is get the old WCHA back together again and kick out Norte Dame. If they won't participate in the Big 10 in all sports, so be it. I know, it's a football board. However, we have to look at the whole picture. Gopher hockey isn't a good fit for the Big Ten. Never has been, never will.
Preach on brother. Great take. It’s football and I’ll drop it but it’s been a sore spot for many. Go gophers
Notre Dame was is the WCHA I grew up with in 70s. I like having them in the same conference.
Gophers lost to Rutgers on Weakling Wednesday. It was a disaster.These folks have a complete opposite view:
The Big Ten Tournament in New York City was a success
The bright lights of Madison Square Garden helped the conference produce its most exciting tournament in years.
I didn't like it, mostly because it was a week early before the other Conference Tournaments but it was not a complete disaster. Pretty good crowds, entertaining games, IMO.
I could easily see them going back to MSG or Brooklyn in the next 10 years.
Indeed, from a local angle NY was a flop.Gophers lost to Rutgers on Weakling Wednesday. It was a disaster.
Only If Washington gets a hockey program.
UND and Duluth should have always been in Big Ten hockey.
With the Kraken, that certainly could be a possibility. Seattle has really embraced hockey. I still don't get why Northwestern and Illinois don't add Mens/Womens NCAA B1G hockey. I know Illinois seriously looked at adding it.
Not quite -- johns hopkins allows the the big ten to have a lacrosse conference as there are only 5 other teams that sponsor lacrosse. What benefit does adding north dakota and duluth provide the big ten? They added notre dame because of the national brand.
While I appreciate teams like Lindenwood, Augustana and LIU Brooklyn making the jump to D1; getting teams like UW, USC, Oregon and a Illinois would really help college hockey.
I blame Bezos
Cal is a state school btw, so same potential jeopardy attached to UCLA is still there
North Dakota and Duluth were at one point in the same hockey conference as 5 of the current Big 10 hockey teams (all but Oh St & Penn St). It would restore several regional rivalries and fill up Mariucci Arena more often.
While true citing that MSU, Michigan and Notre Dame were in the wcha as recently as 1980 and spent 10 years with the Sioux and Bulldogs doesn't seem relevant.
It would be fun to have a B1G hockey with a bunch of associate members.
Is there really much hockey TV revenue to share? I heard Lou Nanne say the Gophers lost several hundreds of thousands of dollars with the reduced amount of games being sold to FSN/BSN.
That document is an interesting read. Skim it like Mandel apparently did and you'd think the 9-10 million extra is all unavoidable costs. Well, no. It's really how the athletic department plans to invest the extra Big Ten bucks in the athlete experience - essentially the fringe benefits of being an athlete. Faster and more comfortable travel. Better and more available meals and snacks. Stipends for electronics. Expansion of their early-enrollee program.
Rabid fanbases, great arenas.
