PDA

View Full Version : New Conference Idea



Pages : [1] 2 3

davyd83
01-21-2013, 11:48 AM
Why don't we take the #8 team from the WCHA, #7, #10 & #11 from the CCHA, add an expansion team and one major marquee team from the WCHA and form a new conference. It should give those schools an easier route to the NCAA tourney.

What??? You mean they've already done that????:eek:

ScoobyDoo
01-21-2013, 11:56 AM
Why don't we take the #8 team from the WCHA, #7, #10 & #11 from the CCHA, add an expansion team and one major marquee team from the WCHA and form a new conference. It should give those schools an easier route to the NCAA tourney.

What??? You mean they've already done that????:eek:

Not only that but they did it for TV, and no one watches hockey on TV.

Direct all questions for an explanation here: http://www.uwathletics.com/phone/

ExileOnDaytonStreet
01-21-2013, 12:05 PM
Direct all questions for an explanation here: http://www.uwathletics.com/phone/The conversation will go something like this:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GO0JaecRWy0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Red Cows
01-21-2013, 12:14 PM
Not only that but they did it for TV, and no one watches hockey on TV.

If this is true, why are there so many college hockey games on TV now, an unprecedented number, and more coming?

ScoobyDoo
01-21-2013, 01:09 PM
If this is true, why are there so many college hockey games on TV now, an unprecedented number, and more coming?

Too many stations desperate for programming.

SCSU Euro
01-21-2013, 01:15 PM
If this is true, why are there so many college hockey games on TV now, an unprecedented number, and more coming?

The National Scrabble Championships pull in better ratings

Red Cows
01-21-2013, 01:51 PM
The National Scrabble Championships pull in better ratings

LOL.

Yeah, except the BIG 10 will give the sport a lot more pub (particularly if they add a couple teams, which I think is inevitable for the conference to truly survive and flourish) as will NBC and I think the ratings will improve some over the next few years.

Whatever anybody says or thinks, it's undeniable that there are more viewing options for college hockey than ever before and the situation is getting better, not worse. That's more eyes and more exposure.

The glass is half full, not half empty, in my book.

ExileOnDaytonStreet
01-21-2013, 02:13 PM
The glass is half full, not half empty, in my book.[Nerd Alert]
Technically, the glass is completely full of both air and water.
[/Nerd Alert]

Red Cows
01-21-2013, 02:17 PM
[Nerd Alert]
Technically, the glass is completely full of both air and water.
[/Nerd Alert]

O.K. you got me, Mr. Wizard. You are correct.

Spiral
01-21-2013, 04:19 PM
Why don't we take the #8 team from the WCHA, #7, #10 & #11 from the CCHA, add an expansion team and one major marquee team from the WCHA and form a new conference. It should give those schools an easier route to the NCAA tourney.

What??? You mean they've already done that????:eek:

I guess those same teams could have just merged with the Atlantic Hockey Conference and had the same result. At least as far as the easier route to the tourney.

mcfarljd
01-21-2013, 05:51 PM
http://t.qkme.me/3sno0e.jpg

kingdobbs
01-21-2013, 06:28 PM
The National Scrabble Championships pull in better ratings

And the fact that networks are throwing money at college hockey should be telling you just how desperate they are for programming that people actually watch live.

Osorojo
01-21-2013, 06:42 PM
I would like to know the demographics of fans who watch college hockey on T.V.. I suspect they comprise a desirable market. However, pay-per-view and subscription coverage of college hockey is unlikely to recruit more fans or further popularize college hockey, big ten not withstanding.

FlagDUDE08
01-21-2013, 06:44 PM
I would like to know the demographics of fans who watch college hockey on T.V.. I suspect they comprise a desirable market. However, pay-per-view and subscription coverage of college hockey is unlikely to recruit more fans or further popularize college hockey, big ten not withstanding.

You have to get people to actually cover the games before you can have that. ;)

uaafanblog
01-21-2013, 06:44 PM
And the fact that networks are throwing money at college hockey should be telling you just how desperate they are for programming that people actually watch live.
Um ... that isn't happening.

manurespreader
01-21-2013, 06:54 PM
I would like to know the demographics of fans who watch college hockey on T.V.. I suspect they comprise a desirable market. However, pay-per-view and subscription coverage of college hockey is unlikely to recruit more fans or further popularize college hockey, big ten not withstanding.
the only people watching are the ones who can't afford to go to the rink for the game, so tell me how that is a desirable group? UNO has a total of 85k people watch a national network show? You could put on the shopping channel or deputy dawg re runs, which have production costs 1/10 the size of hockey and make triple the money.

kingdobbs
01-21-2013, 10:49 PM
Um ... that isn't happening.

The networks are not putting the games on TV for free. Money is changing hands; it may not be a lot of money, but it is money.

Gurtholfin
01-21-2013, 11:33 PM
the only people watching are the ones who can't afford to go to the rink for the game, so tell me how that is a desirable group? UNO has a total of 85k people watch a national network show? You could put on the shopping channel or deputy dawg re runs, which have production costs 1/10 the size of hockey and make triple the money.


What? I usually only go to Friday Badger games and watch Saturday whenever they are on TV.

I also watch whatever game is on NBCSN, Sioux games and Gopher games when I'm home and there isn't a Badger game on.

I realize that I make up a small group, but there are plenty of people in home markets who watch at home and could still afford to go to the game.

I work in advertising and if Badger hockey games made up a good demo for us, I could hit those viewers with a nice frequency at a decent price. Not every advertiser is trying to hit 100,000 people at time.

The Rube
01-22-2013, 12:13 AM
the only people watching are the ones who can't afford to go to the rink for the game, so tell me how that is a desirable group? UNO has a total of 85k people watch a national network show? You could put on the shopping channel or deputy dawg re runs, which have production costs 1/10 the size of hockey and make triple the money.

I can afford to go to Gophers' games, who charge some of the highest prices in the college hockey world. I choose not to. I prefer to get more value from my dollar on road trips to see college hockey (about half are Gopher games in my road tripping history). Does it help that MN is always on tv, so I know I don't have to buy tickets to see my team? Yes, most definitely. But I might see 2-3 games in person in that case, which is hardly a big difference in my viewing habits for my team.

Back2BackU-MnPride2002
01-22-2013, 12:30 AM
I can easily afford to go to Hockey games, but I live 2 hours away from the Twin Cities, an hour away from St Cloud St, and its friggin cold outside, so I choose to stay at home and watch my hockey. When I lived in Alexandria, I would occasionally go to Blizzard hockey games, but ONLY when the Gophers weren't playing on TV. I'd consider going to a game when I visit the Twin Cities, but my brother-in-law has a big screen tv and its fun to sit around with the whole family and watch the game. And when I go down to the Cities for a reason other than visiting family, its summer time and well, college hockey doesn't play games in the summer, but if they did, I'd go to those games instead of watching them on TV. Why would I want to be inside watching tv in the summer time? And why would I want to go outside during the winter?!