http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/43900612.html
It will be interesting to see who they're looking at for a 12th team.
It will be interesting to see who they're looking at for a 12th team.
BIG TEN HOCKEY?? on BIG TEN NETWORK?? NOOO???
Minn
Wisc
Mich
Mich St
Ohio St
Notre Dame?
Here is my ideal WCHA: Minn, Mankato, St. Cloud, UMD, UND, wisc, Bemidji, Denver, CC, AK-Anch, AK-Frbnks, and.... UN-Omaha. That's 12. (Omaha needs the WCHA more than Air Force)
My ideal CCHA: NorthernMich, MichTech, Mich, Mich St., Lake Superior St., Ferris St, WesternMich, NotreDame, OSU, MiamiOH, BowlingGreen and Alabama-Huntsville (from CHA). That's 12.
WCHA (10): Air Force, Alaska, Anchorage, Bemdiji, CC, Denver, Duluth, Mankato, Omaha, St Cloud
CCHA (10): Bowling Green, Ferris, Huntsville, Lk Superior, Miami, Niagara, No Mich, Robert Morris, Tech, W Mich
Big Ten (6): Minnesota, Michigan, Mich St, Ohio St, Wisconsin, Notre Dame (by invite)
CHA: disbanded
Why? Minnesota still rules the state, but the prestige will shoot back up when the Big Ten dominates the otherwise powerful WCHA. We'd no longer have UND, and in-state rivals fighting for our star players. We'll also return to the conference that we play ALL other sports in, as we should.
WCHA (10): Air Force, Alaska, Anchorage, Bemdiji, CC, Denver, Duluth, Mankato, Omaha, St Cloud
CCHA (10): Bowling Green, Ferris, Huntsville, Lk Superior, Miami, Niagara, No Mich, Robert Morris, Tech, W Mich
Big Ten (6): Minnesota, Michigan, Mich St, Ohio St, Wisconsin, Notre Dame (by invite)
CHA: disbanded
Why? Minnesota still rules the state, but the prestige will shoot back up when the Big Ten dominates the otherwise powerful WCHA. We'd no longer have UND, and in-state rivals fighting for our star players. We'll also return to the conference that we play ALL other sports in, as we should.
Maybe I'm reading it wrong but where does UND fit in?
The U is a rival to local teams due to geography, and national teams due to prestige. The U will always be high on opponents lists. That argument means little.1. The U is the top rival of St. Cloud, Mankato, Duluth, North Dakota, and Bemidji St (if they joined the conference). The popularity of Hockey in those schools is (partially) motivated by their only chance to compete with the Big Boys who are big nationally in other sports (The U, and Wisconsin). The same goes for N. Mich, Bowling Green, etc. when they get a chance to play Mich and Mich St.
It's not elitist -- the BigTen is our conference in ALL sports, hockey the exception. Why?? We babied the small schools enough to get them up to D-I level, now prepare to cut the cord and let them dictate their own futures. As for comparing the MAC and football and such -- we're not being elitist, again, they just aren't competing. When they do produce a league champ, they are usually solid. They still get national attention, same as us.2. Having a 'big school' conference is elitist in a way, suggesting that we are 'above' those smaller schools is not the right attitude for hockey, especially in the State of Hockey. Football and Basketball both struggle with their 'ranking' of BCS conferences over 'mid-major' conferences. It sucks that the MAC and the Big10 occupy the same geography, but the MAC schools really don't compete on the same level. The MAC is essentially the 'irrelevant' conference of the region. Your proposed CCHA and WCHA would become like the MAC of college hockey. College Hockey as it exists is beautiful because it is above that.
It's not like we'd never play them. I'll touch on this later per one of your other points. For now, look at the reverse. Ohio State is a notable school, Big Ten or not. They are a multi-sport rival, yet we rarely play them in hockey. That's a bunch of crap.3. College hockey is special in places like Minnesota, Michigan, and the Northeast because the rivalries are between schools that are so much more closer (geographically) than the rivalries in football and basketball. It is a sport that divides hockey fan families because brothers could just as easily go to The U as to St. Cloud or Duluth. The state of Minnesota is united in its love for hockey, and it is intensified by the internal competition we have. It emphasizes the 'cult' feel of College Hockey.
Not much to comment on here. Minnesota dominates and will continue to. More D-I schools mean more kids going to their local school, meaning less to the U -- which means more highly touted out-state kids coming here. I liked Vanek, Kessel could've been more well liked, but I'd rather have the Wooger's full MN-roster, than 90% MN and a few 'elitists' -- to use your term.4. That internal competition is just as important and fierce on the recruiting front. When we watch players from St. Cloud and North Dakota and Duluth play each other, the rivalries are intense because many of them were rivals back in their high school hockey days.
Let's see. Final Five typically includes Minnesota and Wisconsin, so we'll assume both make a Big Ten tourney as well. That said, you're comparing the next 3 best school in the WCHA to the next 3 best schools in the Big Ten. North Dakota, Denver, CC -or- Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St. I think we'd agree it's a draw on that one. So to answer, yes, the intensity would still be the same. Argument moot.5. The WCHA final five is THE best event in college hockey. Period. Do you think a big ten tournament could even come close to that level of intensity? They probably would put it in indiana or chicago just like the basketball tournament. Absolutely ridiculous. The CCHA tournament is great too (from what i hear) because of the fact that geographical rivals can meet and compete in a great environment.
Again, I agree it would suck to lose No Dak as a conference rival. However, it would be awesome to gain Michigan and Michigan St in it's place. Denver and CC are cool, but not big time rivals. We'd gain more to be with 2 top schools than 1.6. Rivalries are infinitely more intense if they are within the conference. See what happened to the Nebraska-Oklahoma rivalry? and they are only in separate divisions now. Part of the intensity of the NoDak-Minn rivalry is that the conference title is often on the line when they play. Michigan and Ohio St. Football play each other once a year, right? Lets say Ohio St joins a different conference, but they still play their one game a year with Michigan. The rivalry would be very diminished, especially after a few years. This is how it is with NoDak and The U. It would be criminal to divide them.
I agree, I'm not saying this would happen soon. In our lifetime though? It could. I'm just speculating on how it'd shake down if it happened in the immediate future. My result is feasible, but hopefully something better happens.7. Your Big Ten conference is hardly the Big Ten, anyway. First of all it is less than half of the big10 schools. Second of all, you have to add a school just to have half as many schools as the WCHA currently wants to have. Six teams is not a conference, even if all the schools are huge.
This is the smartest thing you've said so far. I would scrap the Dodge Classic and Showcase to see this happen. I doubt they'd drop the Great Lakes Inv though.8. I think the Big Ten status of these schools should be acknowledged in College Hockey by having a mid-season tournament. Five teams: each team play the other four once. Four games. Two weekends. Shootouts after tie games. A bigten tournament champion trophy. There is your Big Ten Hockey champion. That way you dont have to sacrifice all of the points I made above and you have your Big Ten champion.
I think we just see college hockey in very different lights. I see your arguments, but I disagree that they would be better for college hockey as a whole. You think that a conference of the biggest power hockey schools (plus OSU), is good. I think that geography is much more important than school size.
Do you really think that all of those smaller schools (St. Cloud, Mankato, Duluth, CC, Denver, Bemidji, LSupSt, Bowling Green, Miami, etc) would agree to do this? This 'elite' conference totally shafts them.
Just wondering, and I'm not trying to judge you here, but have you been to a UMD-Gopher hockey game, or SCSU-Gopher game, or Mankato-Gopher game? Have you been to any of those schools' rinks when the gophers or wisconsin or north dakota comes to town? I was in Mankato the season before last when they beat us in double overtime 1-0 in the WCHA first round. It sucked as a gopher fan, but you could tell that this game meant everything to that school it was like they won the Super Bowl. But then I was there also for game three when we beat them in overtime to take the series, they were so dreadfully crushed in that arena. Don't take that away from them.
College hockey is NOT a national sport. It is a regional, cult sport. That is what is so beautiful about it. It is not even close to big enough to be put into tiers based on school size. It would hurt rivalries.
The rivalries are so damn intense because all of us minnesota hockey fans have friends who are st. cloud, duluth, mankato, UND and Wisconsin fans. We see people with those teams' logos on baseball caps and t-shirts at the grocery store and we want to body check them into a pile of frozen yogurt. I never see a Michigan St. hockey fan anywhere. OSU.... never. Michigan... never. I see fans of those football teams around, however. Why? because it is a sin in Minnesota to be a fan of a Non-WCHA team. A SIN. It is part of what makes people proud of being part of the Minnesota Hockey culture, and part of what makes us think that Massachusetts and Michigan Hockey cultures are crap compared to us.
It is great that only the best from each of the Western, Central, and Northeastern hockey cultures get to fight over the National Championship.... that is what makes it a national championship.
I grew up in Illinois and college hockey DOES NOT EXIST in illinois. I would say that nine out of ten people in ill. are not aware that it even exists. Yet this is Big Ten country, right? Hockey is not part of Big Ten culture. It is part of pieces of the Big Ten geography. A hockey team in Champaign competing in the Big Ten hockey conference would seem weak, and forced and lame, even though we play them in everything else.
So ...sure, I would rather play Michigan, Michigan St. and maybe OSU over Alaska anchorage and Michigan Tech. BUT... you would have to agree that the the same should be said for ANY of the other schools in the Big Ten, if they join before you formed a Big Ten hockey conference.
BIG TEN hockey should happen.
leave the others in the dust.
I thought Illinois had a hockey team in the past... Anyway, I agree that the WCHA should not be broken up. I don't mind that UAA and MI tech are in our conference. Regardless of who's in the conference, you're always going to have teams that are constantly at the bottom so that's not a good excuse to get rid of them.
In theory, I guess I like the idea of a big ten hockey conference. But with only 5 current teams and no hopes of the others (maybe PSU), it's not a good idea.
Colorado and Colorado State do not have hockey teams. You already have CC, Denver, and Air Force and this would seem to make sense.
Go Gophers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Big Ten is based on geography. The small schools have their own conferences which are also geographically based, but consist of schools on the same level. As I stated in the first reply to you, yes -- these small schools win some times, but Minnesota wins 66% of the time - or in some cases 90%.I think we just see college hockey in very different lights. I see your arguments, but I disagree that they would be better for college hockey as a whole. You think that a conference of the biggest power hockey schools (plus OSU), is good. I think that geography is much more important than school size.
Honestly, who cares? It's not their choice. They will still be Div-I, competing for the same National Title. I'd rather see the best of [Mankato, Bemidji, St Cloud, Duluth] each year, than to see them all and have 3 sweeps and 1 good weekend of hockey.Do you really think that all of those smaller schools (St. Cloud, Mankato, Duluth, CC, Denver, Bemidji, LSupSt, Bowling Green, Miami, etc) would agree to do this? This 'elite' conference totally shafts them.
I've been going to Gopher Hockey games since '82. I went to the U, I've skated at Mariucci, I have a bucket full of souvenir pucks from games... I remember when CC was the doormat of the WCHA the way Gopher Football was in the Big Ten. I was on campus the night that a guy named Don Lucia brought his surprise Tiger team into Mariucci to battle the Gophers for the lead, and ultimately the title, in the WCHA's final stretch. I remember the excitement of Crowley scoring the winning goal in that 2-1 game. Yet, it was CC - not Colorado (as a close friend asked). I know how exciting it is for them (small schools), but we don't play for them. We play for US. It's fun to sweep St Cloud 6/6 on the season, but it's more fun to beat Michigan (our western clone, it seems) more.Just wondering, and I'm not trying to judge you here, but have you been to a UMD-Gopher hockey game, or SCSU-Gopher game, or Mankato-Gopher game? Have you been to any of those schools' rinks when the gophers or wisconsin or north dakota comes to town? I was in Mankato the season before last when they beat us in double overtime 1-0 in the WCHA first round. It sucked as a gopher fan, but you could tell that this game meant everything to that school it was like they won the Super Bowl. But then I was there also for game three when we beat them in overtime to take the series, they were so dreadfully crushed in that arena. Don't take that away from them.
As I said earlier, yes, it's not national -- yet. 20 years ago there was a handful of schools and the deadweights local to them that they supported (by drawing fanbases in to that one big weekend a year). Today, college hockey is much, much larger. In 20 years, a Big Ten conference may be necessary.College hockey is NOT a national sport. It is a regional, cult sport. That is what is so beautiful about it. It is not even close to big enough to be put into tiers based on school size. It would hurt rivalries.
Yes, but there's nothing like an Ohio St fan mocking our football team - and us mocking their hockey team. We respect the sports, respect the conference rival. A localized fan may be proud to beat up on a school 1/10 our size. A national fan knows it counts in March, when we have to beat Michigan, Michigan State, Boston, Boston College, New Hampshire, etc to win a National Title. I'm not for being a bully. I'm for taking out the best the nation has to offer.The rivalries are so damn intense because all of us minnesota hockey fans have friends who are st. cloud, duluth, mankato, UND and Wisconsin fans. We see people with those teams' logos on baseball caps and t-shirts at the grocery store and we want to body check them into a pile of frozen yogurt. I never see a Michigan St. hockey fan anywhere. OSU.... never. Michigan... never. I see fans of those football teams around, however. Why? because it is a sin in Minnesota to be a fan of a Non-WCHA team. A SIN. It is part of what makes people proud of being part of the Minnesota Hockey culture, and part of what makes us think that Massachusetts and Michigan Hockey cultures are crap compared to us.
You like the fact that a National Title is won by beating northern regions? I like that the Gophers have 3 National BASEBALL Titles in a sport dominated by the south.It is great that only the best from each of the Western, Central, and Northeastern hockey cultures get to fight over the National Championship.... that is what makes it a national championship.
Indiana sucks in football, but they play. N'western sucks at basketball, but they play. Every conference has it's elite, it's 'sometimes', and it's weak. Illinois has had some great teams in the past (state, not the specific university). It can be done again. Where's the argument here?I grew up in Illinois and college hockey DOES NOT EXIST in illinois. I would say that nine out of ten people in ill. are not aware that it even exists. Yet this is Big Ten country, right? Hockey is not part of Big Ten culture. It is part of pieces of the Big Ten geography. A hockey team in Champaign competing in the Big Ten hockey conference would seem weak, and forced and lame, even though we play them in everything else.
The Big Ten is a conference consisting of various sports (where various schools dominate or are dominated), as well as academic and financial ties. It makes no sense for an exception -- especially when it comes with the 4th biggest sport in the country. I would maybe shrug off the argument if we were talking about rugby, rowing, etc.So ...sure, I would rather play Michigan, Michigan St. and maybe OSU over Alaska anchorage and Michigan Tech. BUT... you would have to agree that the the same should be said for ANY of the other schools in the Big Ten, if they join before you formed a Big Ten hockey conference.
Illinois-Chicago had a team for many years. That school was also one of the founding Big Ten schools waaay back.I thought Illinois had a hockey team in the past... Anyway, I agree that the WCHA should not be broken up. I don't mind that UAA and MI tech are in our conference. Regardless of who's in the conference, you're always going to have teams that are constantly at the bottom so that's not a good excuse to get rid of them.
Right, this is assuming Notre Dame joins, or other Big Ten schools take the next step.In theory, I guess I like the idea of a big ten hockey conference. But with only 5 current teams and no hopes of the others (maybe PSU), it's not a good idea.
Exactly!The prestige of the WCHA and CCHA are both getting watered down way too much with the recent additions of [small schools]. it is not good for college hockey's perception. as more and more of these no-name teams are added the national media just starts to think well this is rather bland, who are these schools?
This is all I'm saying. My argument is food for thought on this foreshadow of things to come, not for today.If college hockey were to become much more nationalized, then I would reconsider my loyalties to the WCHA as a conference. There would need to be schools with D1 hockey programs all around the country and at least eight big ten schools with hockey for me to consider the Big Ten as a hockey conference.
Interesting. Travel may be an issue, but then conferences would be regional.I do not want college hockey to make the same mistake that the NHL made in committing to southern states where hockey is not important. I think that having college hockey be a two-nation sport is something to at least look into.
I am running on three assumptions: 1. Canada has universities... 2. those universities have ice hockey teams....3. they would would be competitive with US college hockey.
So you want a watered down league to become more watered down?I worry that the WCHA is getting watered down with teams that will never be competitive. That being said, we need a 12th. It sounds like Northern Michigan looked into it but doesn't want to. Is the WCHA talking to UNO or UAF?