PDA

View Full Version : Womens Big Ten???



Pages : [1] 2 3

FRICKER
02-19-2013, 02:45 AM
As the CCHA transitions to the Big Ten, isn't about time it's teams establish women's teams? I was disappointed that in light of his daughter being a prospective student/athelete, that Tom Anaatos didin't lead an effort to develop women's teams. The mid-west colleges & universities are years behind the rest of D1 women's hockey. how many even have club teams?

pgb-ohio
02-19-2013, 03:11 AM
As the CCHA transitions to the Big Ten, isn't about time it's teams establish women's teams? I was disappointed that in light of his daughter being a prospective student/athelete, that Tom Anaatos didin't lead an effort to develop women's teams. Michigan and Michigan State are years behind the rest of D1 women's hockey, though both have club teams.Fixed your post.;)

The teams from the Upper Midwest have been a spectacular success, winning one national title after another. We have a solid program here in Columbus. BT member Penn State is on the way. Regulars on this board are acutely aware of the absence of the Wolverines and Spartans from D-1 Women's Hockey, and have been conversing about it for years. With all due respect, you need to get more up to speed on this subject before purporting to "start" a conversation on it.


VERY LATE EDIT: My initial reply was uncharacteristically blunt. For the bluntness, I apologize. While I fully stand behind the accuracy of the comment, there are times when diplomacy should take priority over the unvarnished truth. On reflection, this was one of those times.

FRICKER
02-19-2013, 08:36 AM
pgb-ohio..................thanks for throwing me under the bus. I apologize for not being imnpotent like Your Hiughness. Sorry, chum, I've forgotten more than you'll ever know about hockey. Obviously, you're totally clueless about who you are talking to!!! (must be why you live in "that" state.....BTW, any idea when you're gonna get electricity & running water?)

OnMAA
02-19-2013, 09:12 AM
pgb-ohio..................thanks for throwing me under the bus. I apologize for not being imnpotent like Your Hiughness. Sorry, chum, I've forgotten more than you'll ever know about hockey. Obviously, you're totally clueless about who you are talking to!!! (must be why you live in "that" state.....BTW, any idea when you're gonna get electricity & running water?)

In defense of pgb-ohio....The Michigian and Michigan State womens hockey issue has been discussed many times over the years on this board, including the fact they have club teams. Recently, two club teams, Penn State and Lindenwood, made the move to D1, so there is a chance some in the mid west will follow.

There are plenty of college club teams in the Mid West. A quick count at the top club tier D1 reveals five in Michigan and ten overall in the mid-west.

http://achahockey.org/page.php?page_id=5073&league_id=1064

pgb-ohio
02-19-2013, 12:41 PM
pgb-ohio..................thanks for throwing me under the bus. I apologize for not being imnpotent like Your Hiughness. Sorry, chum, I've forgotten more than you'll ever know about hockey. Obviously, you're totally clueless about who you are talking to!!! (must be why you live in "that" state.....BTW, any idea when you're gonna get electricity & running water?)You may very well have a great deal of hockey knowledge, but your initial post was totally out-of-the-loop for this board. I had assumed you were new to the Women's Board, and that's why I posted the way I did. However, your ridiculously defensive response shows that there was another possibility: You were simply trolling. Don't know if that's true, don't care that much. But if you want to prove the trolling theory wrong, go ahead and post some serious, informed comments on the subject. I'll stay 100% out of the way and let you prove yourself or hang yourself, as the case may be.

OnMAA
02-19-2013, 01:15 PM
The mid-west colleges & universities are years behind the rest of D1 women's hockey. how many even have club teams?

Answer is 20.

10 of 18 clubteams in D1 and 10 of 30 club teams in D2 are from the Mid West.

brookyone
02-19-2013, 01:50 PM
Spartans...Wolverines, Soo Lakers, Wildcats, Huskies...Broncos? If any of them ever get on the stick I think the CHA may be a better fit. It would be great IMO to have an expanded CHA comprised of such natural rivals and great competition. May qualify as a far fetched fantasy at this stage.

Last thing I'd ever want to see is UND, SCSU, BSU, UMD and MSU being handed their hats on the women's side.

Is someone going to insist once again that's merely because I like having them to beat up on?

sbkbghockey
02-19-2013, 02:44 PM
Spartans...Wolverines, Soo Lakers, Wildcats, Huskies...Broncos? If any of them ever get on the stick I think the CHA may be a better fit. It would be great IMO to have an expanded CHA comprised of such natural rivals and great competition. May qualify as a far fetched fantasy at this stage.

Last thing I'd ever want to see is UND, SCSU, BSU, UMD and MSU being handed their hats on the women's side.

Is someone going to insist once again that's merely because I like having them to beat up on?


Adding more Big10 schools might be good for women's college hockey in the long term but likely not great for other conferences, especially the CHA. If more Big10 schools (specifically Michigan State and Michigan) add NCAA women's hockey, their membership in the CHA would likely only be temporary. They might not even join and choose to stay independent for a season or two while they transition from club to varsity like PSU's men's program is doing now and Lindenwood's women's did last year. The Big10 would likely sponsor the sport and Penn State, Ohio State, Minnesota, and Wisconsin would leave their conferences.

To expand the CHA, the best options would be schools like Davenport (MI), Grand Valley State, Miami (OH). Another good option, although not sure they even have a club program, is Notre Dame, Big name but not a Big10 school right in the middle of the CHA footprint.

Watson Rink
02-19-2013, 02:54 PM
If we'd like to make this thread into something more positive, it raises some general issues about what factors go into making a good, or ideal, athletic conference. Factors that would apply to the WCHA and CHA, on the one hand, and HE and the ECACHL, on the other.

I was joking over at the ECAC board today about the current 12-team composition of the ECACHL, six Ivies and six other teams mostly in New York State plus (once) Vermont and (now) Quinnipiac, and how the re-alignment severed Harvard from its Beanpot buddies in exchange for some very very long bus rides.

Some of the factors that make for a good conference:

Similarity of the constituent schools
Proximity
Parity in athletic prowess
Rivalry in other sports
Funny mascots(LOL)

Obviously, you can't have a perfect solution. But if it hasn't already been flogged to death in prior threads, I'd be interested in knowing how people see the ideal configuration for the current and future West of Cornell teams.

Eeyore
02-19-2013, 04:00 PM
The Big10 would likely sponsor the sport and Penn State, Ohio State, Minnesota, and Wisconsin would leave their conferences.

I'm not sure that this would be all that likely a result. Contrary to what rumors about Big 10 schools adding hockey often entail it is not mandatory that a sport with six Big 10 teams must become a conference sport. That's the point at which it is allowed but it is not required.

With men's hockey the Big 10 jumped when Penn State added a varsity team because the Big 10 Network wanted more programming and would rather feature two Big 10 teams playing each other than games against out-of-conference opponents. I don't see any indication that BTN is hungry to add more women's hockey to their lineup, so that pressure doesn't exist. It would strictly be a question of the prestige of adding the sport versus the additional travel costs that would be incurred. I think there's a pretty good chance, though not a certainty, that the latter would prevail and the existing leagues would continue.

Take the scenario that the rumored upgrade of Michigan's club team to varsity status comes to pass. I'd bet money that any such announcement would be followed by Michigan State doing the same; if one adds it, the other will, too. That would mean that there are six Big 10 teams and the league could add the sport. Equally likely, I think, is that Michigan and Michigan State would just join the CHA, bringing it to eight teams. If so, Ohio State would probably leave the WCHA to play teams that are closer as well as its most natural rivals. Perhaps there would be a trade and Lindenwood would move to the WCHA, as that makes more geographic sense.

Hammer
02-19-2013, 06:52 PM
You may very well have a great deal of hockey knowledge, but your initial post was totally out-of-the-loop for this board. I had assumed you were new to the Women's Board, and that's why I posted the way I did. However, your ridiculously defensive response shows that there was another possibility: You were simply trolling. Don't know if that's true, don't care that much. But if you want to prove the trolling theory wrong, go ahead and post some serious, informed comments on the subject. I'll stay 100% out of the way and let you prove yourself or hang yourself, as the case may be.

Having read enough of Fricker over the years, I would bet a beer or three that he's not trolling. Now, unfamiliar with the women's forum, maybe.

As for the topic at hand, I do not have sufficient knowledge to comment, so at this point I get out of the way.

ManBehindTheCurtain
02-19-2013, 08:15 PM
As long as the subject is here again, how about Rutgers?

And Nebraska?

That would make six, autobid territory if all of the Big10ers formed a women's conference.

At that point it seems like Michigan and Michigan State would HAVE to come along.

And along the lines of expansion of women's hockey in general, I saw somebody on some other thread discussing UMass was it Lowell?

How about Nebraska-Omaha?

pgb-ohio
02-20-2013, 12:00 AM
Having read enough of Fricker over the years, I would bet a beer or three that he's not trolling. Now, unfamiliar with the women's forum, maybe.I've always respected you as a poster. So based on your recommendation, I browsed through a few of Fricker's posts. I saw that you're right, he's not a troll. If he knows the territory, he posts good stuff. But on this thread and others, not so much. Mixed reviews, FWIW.

HockeyEast33
02-22-2013, 09:59 AM
I'm not sure that this would be all that likely a result. Contrary to what rumors about Big 10 schools adding hockey often entail it is not mandatory that a sport with six Big 10 teams must become a conference sport. That's the point at which it is allowed but it is not required.

With men's hockey the Big 10 jumped when Penn State added a varsity team because the Big 10 Network wanted more programming and would rather feature two Big 10 teams playing each other than games against out-of-conference opponents. I don't see any indication that BTN is hungry to add more women's hockey to their lineup, so that pressure doesn't exist. It would strictly be a question of the prestige of adding the sport versus the additional travel costs that would be incurred. I think there's a pretty good chance, though not a certainty, that the latter would prevail and the existing leagues would continue.

Take the scenario that the rumored upgrade of Michigan's club team to varsity status comes to pass. I'd bet money that any such announcement would be followed by Michigan State doing the same; if one adds it, the other will, too. That would mean that there are six Big 10 teams and the league could add the sport. Equally likely, I think, is that Michigan and Michigan State would just join the CHA, bringing it to eight teams. If so, Ohio State would probably leave the WCHA to play teams that are closer as well as its most natural rivals. Perhaps there would be a trade and Lindenwood would move to the WCHA, as that makes more geographic sense.

Regardless of it not being mandatory to form a conference, the Big Ten lives and dies together in pretty much all sports of even the slightest significance where there is enough participation by its members to form their own conference - it's in their blood. It's all about power and money - when they band together they have both. The CHA has neither power nor money and is largely made up of low-visibility schools on a national level (not hockey-wise, but general athletics wise) - Syracuse would be the exception otehr than Penn State. Why would a team stay in the CHA with no power, money, or visibility when they can form a Big Ten conference with everything. If the Big Ten members get to the point where they have enough members playing hockey for an autobid (currently 6), they will form a conference either immediately or shortly thereafter. No question about it.

HockeyEast33
02-22-2013, 10:08 AM
To expand the CHA, the best options would be schools like Davenport (MI), Grand Valley State, Miami (OH). Another good option, although not sure they even have a club program, is Notre Dame, Big name but not a Big10 school right in the middle of the CHA footprint.

CHA is a Division 1 conference. Notre Dame and Miami of Ohio of course are Division 1 programs and would be great adds to the CHA if they decided to field a team (ND has a small women's club hockey program). Grand Valley State is a Division 2 school and that has all sorts of eligibility issues. Davenport is an NAIA school and is not eligible for any NCAA play.

Hux
02-22-2013, 10:23 AM
Regardless of it not being mandatory to form a conference, the Big Ten lives and dies together in pretty much all sports of even the slightest significance where there is enough participation by its members to form their own conference - it's in their blood. It's all about power and money - when they band together they have both. The CHA has neither power nor money and is largely made up of low-visibility schools on a national level (not hockey-wise, but general athletics wise) - Syracuse would be the exception other than Penn State. Why would a team stay in the CHA with no power, money, or visibility when they can form a Big Ten conference with everything. If the Big Ten members get to the point where they have enough members playing hockey for an autobid (currently 6), they will form a conference either immediately or shortly thereafter. No question about it.

Agree. No way Penn State remains in the CHA if/when the Big Ten is in position to have its own conference. Should two more Big Ten schools add women's hockey I think you will see a realignment of the WCHA, CHA and ECAC.

pakidnyc
02-22-2013, 10:38 AM
Mich, Mich State, Miami of Ohio, Notre Dame could all add womens hockey relatively easy (notwithstanding the $$). I really would like to think it will happen when Red leaves Michigan. PSU was basically "forced" to include women when they added D1 men. They get ALOT of money from the state govt, more than any other school in PA -- and they have a lot of political appointees on their board so the pressure would've been too hot if they just did the men's team.

But if the above mentioned teams do join the ranks of womens hockey, I could see a league including them, OSU, PSU, Mercyhurst and RMU. 8 teams with an auto-bid. Lindenwood could join the WCHA in OSU's place. And RIT and Syracuse could join the ECAC which is more their geographic footprint anyway. Or for kicks we could have an all NY league - Clarkson, Cornell, St Lawrence, Colgate, Syracuse and RIT with an autobid. (That is really just kidding!)

brookyone
02-22-2013, 10:46 AM
Does the fact that UND, UMD, SCSU, BSU and MSU women's varsity programs have fewer alternative options in maintaining a conference with an auto-bid per a realignment...than their counterparts on the men's side give anyone grave concern for their survival in that scenario? Anyone besides me?

frozenfeet
02-22-2013, 11:11 AM
Does the fact that UND, UMD, SCSU, BSU and MSU women's varsity programs have fewer alternative options in maintaining a conference with an auto-bid per a realignment...than their counterparts on the men's side give anyone grave concern for their survival in that scenario? Anyone besides me?

I would think you may be alone in your concern since this discussion is based on weak speculation and wishful thinking at best. However, if anyone can join in this hallucination then no there would be little concern since Denver, CC, etc. may just as likely produce programs as would Michigan and State ;)

brookyone
02-22-2013, 11:46 AM
I would think you may be alone in your concern since this discussion is based on weak speculation and wishful thinking at best. However, if anyone can join in this hallucination then no there would be little concern since Denver, CC, etc. may just as likely produce programs as would Michigan and State ;)
The Lindenwood shift for a sixth member of a "new" WCHA would make most sense...since they already have a program. ;)

Not wishful thinking for me. I don't like the Big Ten idea. ;)