On Notre Dame Hockey To The Big Ten
So this happened, and it's kind of a big deal if you like hockey:
OFFICIAL: @NDHockey will join #B1GHockey as a sport affiliate member beginning with the 2017-18 academic year. pic.twitter.com/Dfg1Z57ykY
— Big Ten Hockey (@B1GHockey) March 23, 2016
Assorted takes to follow.
Yes, it's a good idea
There's been a ton of bitching about this move on both sides, which I expect from NDNationers literally still upset about something that happened in 1910. I expected less of that from the Michigan side of things but our thread here is about 80% "f*** Notre Dame." I wish Bo had never said "to hell with Notre Dame." It is the crying Jordan of things Bo said.
I downvote all of you metaphorically. Michigan and Notre Dame should play. In hockey, in football, in whatever. Curling. Sure, curling. They have a strong AD and quality revenue programs, they are a historical rival, they are a geographic fit. Not playing them—not wanting to play them—is juvenile.
This goes double for hockey given the situation the Big Ten finds itself in. Simply put, the schedule is much better off with four games against the Irish than it is without those games. (Especially because those will be home-and-home weekends.) The league is much better off with Jeff Jackson in it than outside of it.
The downside is… what, exactly? Notre Dame will feel less pressure to join the Big Ten in all sports? If you think hockey factors into that decision one iota I have news for you.
No, don't add Arizona State
A seven team conference is a bit odd but is doable. The league schedule expands to 24 games, one team is on a bye they can fill with a nonconference series every week, it's fine. FWIW, Brad Traviola says an eighth team is not currently on the table:
Notre Dame makes seven, and Big Ten deputy commissioner Brad Traviolia said there are no current plans to expand to eight. Some Illinois and Nebraska fans wish their club team would upgrade to varsity, but such a move requires major funding and proper facilities.
Moving to eight gets tricky. Options:
- 28 game conference schedule. With 28 conference games your nonconference gets very restricted. Michigan and MSU are in the GLI every year and the cap is 34, leaving just four slots for new teams. This was the worst thing about the 12-team CCHA.
- 14 game conference schedule. Opposite problem, nowhere near enough.
- Two divisions of four, 20 game conference schedule. This was more or less the CCHA's solution after they went to 12. They rotated pairs of teams through groups of four so the schedule did change up.
- Play everyone three times, 21 game conference schedule. Logistically difficult. Some of the odd games could be taken care of in switch weekends like the old College Hockey Showcase. M would travel to Minnesota for Friday and head to Wisconsin on Saturday while MSU did the opposite, that sort of thing. The eighth team would probably have to be a geographic pair for Penn State, though, and there isn't one that makes sense. I mean, Robert Morris is in Pittsburgh but do we want to add Robert Morris?
All of these have costs in a way that adding team #7 does not, and so the hypothetical eighth team had better be worth it. A team in freakin' Arizona with zero history is not worth it, especially when the Big Ten does not need another RPI anchor. Arizona State doesn't have a name brand in any sport, let alone hockey.
Yes maybe add someone else
There are teams that would be worth it if they were amenable. Foremost is North Dakota, a fierce rival of Minnesota and Wisconsin who Michigan also has a ton of history with. North Dakota is an incredibly well-supported program that would bring a buzz to Yost every time they showed up.
As a Midwest-ish state flagship school, North Dakota fits the Big Ten reasonably well. Bringing them in would mitigate some of the Minnesota hate for the new arrangement. It would improve the overall quality of play. It avoids some of the optics problems with adding a school with a bunch of other D-I programs—North Dakota is D-II in everything else. [Update: this is no longer true.] If they want in the Big Ten would be dumb to say no.
Would they? I think they probably would. Despite being perennially one of college hockey's best teams, just four North Dakota games were on national TV this year. From the Big Ten's perspective you do get a small bump by adding North Dakota, the state, to the footprint. And as mentioned, UND-Minnesota was the fiercest rivalry in college hockey once Michigan State went into the crapper. (And probably before that.) NoDak is the easy #1 choice.
If the Artists Formerly Known As Sioux don't want to come, there are other programs that would be worth it:
- Miami. Quality program with a new rink. Hating on Enrico Blasi is great fun. Geographic fit makes three-game league configuration feasible.
- Whichever Minnesota program the Gophers want. St. Cloud, UMD, whatever. Good programs that will be good in the future. Mitigates Gopher hatred of new league. Geographic fit.
- Western or Ferris. Neither team is going to knock your socks off with their on-ice performance but they are a geographic fit and old CCHA rivals.
Let's Play Hockey suggested Miami along with Arizona State, UConn, and UNO. Only Miami should be a viable contender amongst those schools. UConn has most of the baggage ASU does and is already in Hockey East. The only reason they would join the Big Ten is in the faint hope that would be a prelude to joining in all sports, and see Notre-Dame-to-the-Big-Ten-in-all-sports above for my take on that. UNO is a good program vaguely in the footprint but it's not much better or worse than a lot of schools a lot closer.
Notre Dame keeping its NBC contract is good
This is not the right take at all:
Keeping the TV contract is what actually surprises me the most about Notre Dame to B1G in hockey. B1G flinched. https://t.co/cQ4i3ifJwG
— Matt Wellens (@mattwellens) March 22, 2016
This isn't basketball or football. The BTN cannot televise all of its hockey. Other channels pick up games for the rest of the league all the time; there is no reason not to allow Notre Dame to do the same. Meanwhile now I know two road games will definitely be on a channel I get. From a fan's perspective anything that gets a game on TV is good; the NBC contract takes pressure off the Big Ten Network's limited programming space.
Now we can definitely do the State Championship thing
Trophies are good [Patrick Barron]
Notre Dame now becomes an obvious choice to fill out the field for the Michigan hockey championship I've been advocating since the dissolution of the CCHA. There are seven hockey programs in Michigan spread across three conferences now; they should play each other, and they should give someone a trophy for it.
Add Notre Dame in now and divide the eight teams into groups of four that switch annually. Michigan and MSU are never in the same group. Two WCHA teams are in each group. Hypothetical groups:
| Group A | Group B |
|---|---|
| Michigan | Michigan State |
| Ferris State | Michigan Tech |
| Western Michigan | LSSU |
| Northern Michigan | Notre Dame |
Each team plays the others twice. Teams in the same conference have an early-season conference series that counts towards the standings without adding additional nonconference commitments. The top two in each group advance to the GLI. The bottom two play a consolation round at the Joe either a couple days before or at the same time. Hand out a big ass trophy to the winner.
This is a:
- Six-game commitment for the WCHA teams, ND, and one of M/MSU.
- Eight-game commitment for M/MSU every other year and WMU.
Michigan, MSU, and MTU have already committed two of those games with their annual participation in the GLI. With a 24 game conference schedule Michigan would have 2-4 dates to play with annually and could still go out to Boston, play a tomato can, that sort of thing.
It is doable, and it would make the GLI a bigger event. It would provide a semblance of the old CCHA and amp up early season nonconference games. It's more or less adding an FA Cup to the college hockey schedule. The state of Minnesota would probably follow suit in short order.
Maybe things can start making sense now
ND to the Big Ten makes sense. Could this be a new era of not shooting yourself in the foot in college hockey? Please Tiny Jesus make it so:
No regional sites have been selected past 2017. And, according to Kristin Fasbender, the NCAA’s director of championships and alliances, the committee and the college hockey body as a whole will explore whether a new structure to the regional portion of the tournament, which could include playing games at campus sites, is a more viable option.
“I think there is continued conversation about [changing the regionals],” said Fasbender. “The committee keeps talking about what [the tournament] looks like when we go forward.
“We’re in a year here where at our four regional sites, none of our host institutions are in them. So I think we’ll continue to have this conversation as we get into the championship in Tampa and at the coaches’ association meetings in April and the [NCAA Division I men's ice hockey] committee meetings in June and trying to talk more about what we want to continue to look at globally for the whole tournament as we go forward.”
It's long past time to move to campus sites. North Dakota earned the opportunity to host a regional. Instead they're in Cincinnati, playing in front of nobody. But I'm a broken record about neutral site college hockey.
Don't overlook this sick Rutgers burn
Red on the move:
“Expansion is brought up every time the Big Ten is mentioned so (the move) is a good step in the right direction,” Berenson said. “It makes sense geographically. It’s not like we’re going out to play Rutgers or something. We’re playing a team that is in the Big Ten footprint.”
Oh snap, Delany.
The CCHA had many teams that do not meet your criteria. No one was complaining then. Truth is, hockey is different.
Yeah, I kinda get this. The Big Ten name has some meaning that we would like to preserve. I still think some concessions have to be made here for the betterment of the sport and for the betterment of Michigan hockey. I have to agree though, I would rather add a somehow quality Illinois or Nebraska team than North Dakota. It's just not an option now.
March 23rd, 2016 at 10:10 PM ^
Division 1 football has like 130 teams, many of which are the premier state and private universities in the country. Division 1 basketball is the same plus another 200 mid-major types.
College hockey is all of 10 FBS power 5 programs (B1G, ASU, UConn, BC), several other FBS mid-majors and another 40 or so mid-major types who reside in non-football DI down to DIII. You can't apply the same rules to college hockey that we apply to footballe
Come on, idiot. The CIC??? Really???
The Last Boy Scout. I'm sure the Big 10 would just turn all the CIC money over to North Dakota. OH yeah, THEY"RE NOT IN AND IT'S ONLY SPECULATION by Fan Boys on the messaage boards.
Besides, who says North Dakota isn't, or wouldn't be a good research partner? AND when the HELOL has ANY of this stuff been about "academics"???
You guys all need to get off the academics high horse. Please, that went out the window with Willie Heston. It's about national appeal. Televisions, increasing the "footprint"--taking over TV markets in all sports.
There are a few aces yet to be played by the NCAA. Obviously a larger playoff format for the football biggies, perhaps even enlarging the basketball tournament. And there is hockey.
Somehow I think the Big 10 and Jim Delaney know a HELL of alot more than bloggers aned fan boys.
and we should fuck them while we're at it.
Is someone going to tell Brian that Notre Dame is in Indiana?
I'm going to go with they're close enough. South Bend is, what, 4 miles from the Michigan border?
...and hasn't told us yet.
Key quote: "“This ain’t South Bend. It’s good ol’ Michigan. I’m a Michigan boy.”
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2016/03/04/border-…
a suburb of South Chicago?
I don't care about ND, but fuck B1G hockey. Bring back the CCHA!
so everyone beating that drum 3 years after that was already settled can stop it
North Dakota makes sense from a prestige and quality standpoint, of course.
They would salve the hurt feelings of Minnesota fans. They would be a great road trip (that I might even try). They would produce epic weekends of hockey.
It would also destabilize the NCHC, which the B1G isn't required to care about but does concern me a bit as a fan of the larger sport. They are the premier non-B1G program in the west.
My preference is UMD.
This preference is entirely geographical. UMD's home arena is maybe 5 minutes from my house.
UMD is a solid hockey program with a consistent fanbase that would be an asset as an associate member. They are D-II in everything but hockey, so there would be no singed feelings in that regard. They have a very nice new arena on the shores of Lake Superior. They would work.
They are also basically a directional school, on the scale of Western or someone like that. They have absolutely nothing to offer the B1G that NoDak does not.
I would go completely bananas if UMD joined the B1G in hockey only. The idea of Michigan actually coming here to play is beyond my wildest dreams. But there is no way it is happening.
"This preference is entirely geographical. UMD's home arena is maybe 5 minutes from my house. "
Replace UMD with "Rutgers" and you have me, a few years ago.
As I allude to elsewhere in the thread, I don't pretend that my position is any more than base short-sighted self-interest.
What's ironic about Berenson's comments is that the old CCHA used to include Alaska-Fairbanks, which isn't exactly located in the Big Ten's georgraphic footprint and is also much farther away from Ann Arbor than Piscatawy, New Jersey (2,895 miles by air compared to 503 miles).
It's also ironic that Brian is taking a shot at Jim Delany (and by extension, all the Big Ten presidents) for admitting Rutgers into the Big Ten. We all realize one of the primary reasons was to enhance the distribution of Delany's creation, i.e., the Big Ten Network. That's the same network which those of us out of state and in Michigan get to watch more of UM's hockey games (and football games and basketball games, etc). It's also one of the vehicles which funds the athletic department--and whose contribution should increase with the new media contract that's being negotiated.
I do applaud the move to add Notre Dame to the conference, and if a program like North Dakota or Miami (Ohio) were to become the eighth member of the Big Ten Hockey family, then all the better. That said, anyone who thinks ND will add more of its teams to the B1G in lieu ot the ACC at this point is getting way ahead of themselves. Unless there's some major conference realignment taking place, it's not on the near horizon.
As far as Michigan and Notre Dame playing football again, I wouldn't like to see it on an annual basis. With the conference schedule expanding to nine games, there's really only room for one major non-conference home-and-home opponent. After attending the Rose Bowl game from about a dozen years ago against the Texas Longhorns, I came away with the thought that U-M should rotate its major non-conference opponents (like Ohio State was doing) rather than play Notre Dame every year. I was honestly glad that ND broke the scheduling agreement a few years ago.
I generally approve of the opponents David Brandon set up to take ND's spot--Texas (2024/7), Oklahoma (2025/6), UCLA (2022/3), Arkansas (2018/9), Florida (2017), and Washington/Virginia Tech (2020/1). Having UM play ND twice every six to eight years is fine, but Warde Manuel should get schools like Georgia or Louisiana State or Florida State into the mix as well. Under Coach Harbaugh, Michigan is recruiting nationally and really hitting the more fertile regions in the country--so why not play the name teams located there as well?
Why is it ironic that people are taking shots at the B1G expansion? Rutgers has been thoroughly embarrassing for the conference since they were admitted. Bad enough that they are a disaster on the field; off the field they have been a non-stop catastrophe.
Yeah, BTN might be available in more places, and it might help the bottom line (though there is some debate about how much the new tv contract will produce with the coming crash in rights fees--look at what's been going on at ESPN). But for fans sports is followed for personal enjoyment and satisfaction, and thus all opinions are inherently subjective.
I have gone on record saying that I totally favor B1G hockey over the CCHA, for reasons that are 100% personal. I live in Minnesota, and I like that Michigan comes here every February. A Michigan fan who lives in New Jersey will naturally like the availability of Michigan football on BTN that comes from having a local team in the conference.
It's all subjective. There's no irony and no subtext here.
Has Rutgers had problems on and off the field? Absolutely. Have RU's football and men's basketball teams been bad these last two years? On the whole, yes. Does Rutgers have a big financial hole in their athletic department they need to shore up? Yes. Is Rutgers the most embarassing program in the Big Ten? No, that honor is reserved for the conference's 11th member, Penn State. Are we in what is essentially Year 3 of the latest expansion decision? Yes. Is that too short a time frame to judge whether or not it was a good decision to have them join the Big Ten in terms of athletics (and not academics or CIC-related matters) alone? Yes.
Time will tell whether or not adding Rutgers along with Maryland were positives or negatives to the conference and to Michigan as a whole. As you point out, we're still waiting to see what sort of deal the Big Ten (and Jim Delany) will work out with the networks. I fully expect we'll continue to see a multi-network deal with ESPN, Fox Sports and CBS handling a mix of football and basketball games. If the initial projections are correct, then wer're looking at B1G schools getting someting in the low $40M mark in conference distributions. But if cord cutting and cost reductions at the networks become more important than what they're willing to pay for content, then it might go another way (including paying to watch games streamed online).
While there's a tendency to demonize Delany on this board, the decisions to add Rutgers, Maryland, Nebraska and Penn State were all made in accordance with the wishes of the conference's university presidents. While I"m sure they rely upon his advice and direction, they're the ones who also vote yes or no on the matter.
On a final note, let me say that I have had the Big Ten Network at my home when I lived in Phoenix, AZ and now in suburban Washington, DC. Not only am I glad that Delany had the vision to set up the Big Ten Network (and compared to the Pac 12 and Longhorn Networks, it's a huge success), but to add teams on the east coast so U-M alums like myself don't get to see a whole host of Michigan teams (not just football or men's basketball) in person.
Another thread has data that Rutgers is currently ahead of 6 big ten schools in the Directors Cup. So, some of their non revenue sports are doing well. I also live in NoVa and lived for many years in NJ. Expansion was a necessary step.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Agreed, fuck Notre Dame.
Why would North Dakota leave the NCHC? North Dakota isn't hurting for money, facilities, recruits, competitive competition. I would think a move to the B10 would be a couple steps backwards. Just look at the NCAA tournament this year, one B10 school and the regular season champion didn't get in. While the NCHC had 4 teams get in. And the same thing last season only one B10 school got in while 6 NCHC teams got in. The NCHC has a great thig going, I can only hope none of those AD's/schools are dumb enough to mess it up.
If the B10 wants to expand the hockey conference I think schools like Air Force, Mankato State, Michigan Tech should be looked at...The B10 isn't going to get your North Dakotas, Boston College ect.. Romantic idea but not logical.
Why would they leave?
1. B1G Money.
2. They would be on TV more often.
3. Restore rivalry with Minnesota and Wisconsin.
I ask you, why would they stay in the NCHC?
A Big Ten with ND and ND has three bids this year to the NCHC's 3. And it's not like Minnesota is going to stay down. It's not like Wisconsin is going to stay down. MSU I don't know any more, but that is also one of the top programs in the history of college hockey. And PSU is pretty legit already.
The formation of the Big Ten came at an unfortunate time but it's correlation, not causation. Going forward the Big Ten is going to be very good. With NoDak, ridiculous. And the Big Ten comes with cachet--and TV exposure--the NCHC cannot match.
March 23rd, 2016 at 10:15 PM ^
Notably, the six team Big Ten has 23 national titles to the NCHC's 17. The Big Ten is basically in an unforunate spot at the moment in that three of the Big Ten's strongest programs (MSU, Wisconsin, Minnesota) are all in a low point at the same time. This will be a non-issue over the next few years or so
I agree, UND was a driving force behind the formation of the NCHC so I really don't see them leaving it so soon. Minnesota and Wisconsin are way more interested in restarting the rivalry than UND is.
The TV exposure is the only real appeal for them I can see, and I'm not sure it's enough. I thought NCHC was carried by CBS Sports, at least their tournament was, so how much more money can BTN really offer? I can't imagine the contracts for college hockey are all that lucrative.
To me it's far more realistic for UNO or Ferris to join as an 8th team.
adding North Dakota and Notre Dame adds a lot more excitement to the Big Ten schedule and brings back an old rival to everyone whose hockey program is older than 5.
I am also fully on board with the Michigan Cup thing. Would love to see it happen but I don't know how pissed off every other team in Michigan is with Michigan at this point.
That's the only place where I say f*** Notre Dame. They're not in the state and it would burn me to see them with a Michigan state championship trophy, even if it's ugly like the Iron D trophy. Making a special exception for them feeds that whole entitlement crap of theirs. I'd rather let Wayne State's club team play.
Also, ND needs to share their TV revenue with the other conference members if they get to keep NBCSN contract. Equal shares has been the guiding principle in revenue sharing in the Big Ten.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Yeah, I wonder how that works. Does ND get a share of the revenues from games on BTN or games that BTN sells to other networks?
March 23rd, 2016 at 10:38 PM ^
I'm all for letting Wayne State playing, the only problem is that WSU doesn't even have a club team anymore.
March 24th, 2016 at 10:22 AM ^
I drive past what I thought was still their hockey facility near on the east side of Detroit, near MLK high school.
CMU still has a club hockey program according to their website. Any program in the state over ND.
Yeah, apparently there was a start up for the club hockey here in 2013, but there isn't any hockey listed under club sports.
I would rather have the other ND.
Notre Dame is historically a shit program in hockey. How confident are we that they won't return to shit in 5 years when Jeff Jackson retires (he's 60 years old)?
March 23rd, 2016 at 10:18 PM ^
it didnt seem to happen this year
You say that it's good, but then you list the benefits for Michigan to PLAY them. Fine, let's do that. Let's schedule them every year.
I would much rather add N. Dakota than the other ND.
I have no doubt schools like Iowa, Illinois and/or Northwestern could find a donation to address the financial hurdle mentioned many times about becoming a varsity sport in hockey (and one other Title IX balancing sport). There is always someone with money who loves their alma mater or sport in general who would be willing to get their name on something. One or all three of the schools make it happen!!!
I added to the snark with ND joining the B1G. Only because it's ND.
This makes sense. ND games are on NBCSN witch is a good thing to see more games. Those games in the CCHA days where good games.
Michigan vs. Nortre Dame is never a bad thing.
Adding the real ND would be awesome.
THE TEMPE MARKET FOR BTN!
/sarcasm
ND is ok. The other ND is better but Id be ok with Miami or Duluth. No to UConn, ASU, Robert Morris or anything of that type. And anything to make the GLI special Im good with. Some of my best hockey memories are racing from mine and my brothers holiday tourneys to the GLI back in the early 70s so we wouldnt miss the drop of the puck. Christmas/New Years was hockey. It was a family affair here.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Fielding Yost is turning over in his grave at the fact that we have an African-American athletic director, so as important as Yost is to our history, let's not lose any sleep over what he might think of how Michigan and the Big Ten have changed since his time.
Totally not getting North Dakota. Maybe Miami or Nebraska Omaha.
Adding North Dakota would be a dream scenario.
Never mind the public relations baggage (which is significant and from what I can tell is deserved), what's the commonality? They're practically as far away again as Minnesota, and nobody, as far as I can tell, likes them.
Do we really want them around just to have them on the scheduleregularly on the assumption we'll win most of the time?
Also Brian made a pretty convincing argument that the 7-team conference is a good idea. If we're adding anybody else, it should be because a current conference member picks up the sport.
Yeah, yeah, they travel well and they've got fans. Maybe that's paramount in people's minds after the B1G tournament disaster. But the first gif to hand, even for Brian trying to make the case, is one of mutual bird-flipping. What about this suggests conference mates?
March 24th, 2016 at 12:10 AM ^
Passion.
It's why we pay atention to this stuff.
Comments