Big Ten Hockey Conference

[bronconick]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

I fail to see how this is going to improve the bottom line as far as TV goes. Minnesota has their own deal. Michigan and MSU get something out of the CCHA deal, I'd assume. And hockey ratings suck. What, so the BTN gets some nice .2 ratings on Friday and Saturday nights showing live hockey instead of reruns of volleyball or "on campus" or whatever. Hell, they're better off showing a studio show of "This Week in Big Ten Basketball." Probably triple the ratings.

If Alvarez is salivating over having 22 home games a year, that's one thing. Expecting some sort of massive influx of cash through TV or jacking ticket prices is probably going to make him look even more a dumbass then his hockey-ignorant tool self currently is.

Edit: What Almington said.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

Make no mistake. Wisconsin wants a BTHC. Maybe the fans don't, but the athletic department does.

What's interesting is why Penn State would be starting hockey now, in this economic climate. And why is the Big 10 so interested in hockey?

It must be because the WCHA Final Five and the NCAA Tourney are such money makers?

But, the Big 10 doesn't off what either of those offer. The WCHA Final Five is huge because it's in Minnesota's backyard and there are other schools in close proximity.

The Frozen Four is because you have a passionate rabid fanbase that will be eroded by the Big 10.

Not only that but I don't see Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, nor Michigan State getting more revenue out of hockey with a Big 10 conference. As many have stated they'll get less. And why? To boost up Penn State, Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa? Who will all start out losing money hand over fist just by jumping into hockey.

And is all this just so the Big 10 Network can show some live hockey on Friday nights in Jan. and Feb.? Cause that's about all they're interested in for programming. They wouldn't show a Michigan State/Minnesota game last year on their network.

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

It adds revenue because these schools produce those games anyway. UW essentially does it for their jumbotron as it is.

Since the conference owns the network, there is no middle man - costs are much lower.

There's also no guarantee that all local broadcasts will cease.

Bottom line is this - the BTN has been a smashing success, and I think the bigwigs there have more accurate numbers than you do.

And adding Penn State is a huge boost to the Big Ten brand - and the perception of college hockey. Penn State has a huge alumni base and is very popular in Pennsylvania and the Mid-Atlantic. This is a huge development. Huge, I say!

When the BTHC happens, I really hope the BTN has a doubleheader every friday night and I hope quite regularly those games involve non-conference games. You could also see a push for more Friday/Sunday series to allow both games to be on the BTN. In all honesty, if the bold part happens, it should be great for college hockey. Get more exposure for the sport, etc.

[blockski]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

What's interesting is why Penn State would be starting hockey now, in this economic climate. And why is the Big 10 so interested in hockey?

It must be because the WCHA Final Five and the NCAA Tourney are such money makers?

Why? Because a Penn State alum just got bought out by Shell Oil for a couple billion and the money is burning a hole in his pocket. That, and he probably wants to reduce his tax liability.

But, the Big 10 doesn't off what either of those offer. The WCHA Final Five is huge because it's in Minnesota's backyard and there are other schools in close proximity.

The Frozen Four is because you have a passionate rabid fanbase that will be eroded by the Big 10.

Not only that but I don't see Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, nor Michigan State getting more revenue out of hockey with a Big 10 conference. As many have stated they'll get less. And why? To boost up Penn State, Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa? Who will all start out losing money hand over fist just by jumping into hockey.

And is all this just so the Big 10 Network can show some live hockey on Friday nights in Jan. and Feb.? Cause that's about all they're interested in for programming. They wouldn't show a Michigan State/Minnesota game last year on their network.

It's a long term play. Just like starting the BTN was a long-term play.

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

It's a long term play. Just like starting the BTN was a long-term play.

That's true, look what BTN has done to cable, maybe the BTHC will do the same for college hockey yay

[4four4]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

Somewhere he's laughing at all of us. Me more than others I bet.

Talk about egg on face.

[bronconick]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

Why? Because a Penn State alum just got bought out by Shell Oil for a couple billion and the money is burning a hole in his pocket. That, and he probably wants to reduce his tax liability.



It's a long term play. Just like starting the BTN was a long-term play.

A long term play to make money on televised hockey?

Yeah, ask the NHL how that's working after 70 freaking years.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

Well, all I can say is they better be careful. The college hockey market is tenuous already and a 16 team NCAA format is existing on vapor. It goes down to 12 again and all the silliness starts back up again and hockey takes a big step back.

If they really bull rush things they might turn D1 hockey into a sport where one conference tourney overshadows the NCAA altogether.

EDIT: What bronconick just said.

[blockski]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

When the BTHC happens, I really hope the BTN has a doubleheader every friday night and I hope quite regularly those games involve non-conference games. You could also see a push for more Friday/Sunday series to allow both games to be on the BTN. In all honesty, if the bold part happens, it should be great for college hockey. Get more exposure for the sport, etc.

Just looking at UW's basketball schedule, almost all of their Saturday games are in the afternoon. I can easily see where the BTN could have both Friday and Saturday night games of the week.

They also have a strong webcast presence.

Doubleheaders on Friday would be tricky - you'd have to have a late local start. I can't see a team wanting to drop the puck any earlier than 7pm local time, so you'd have to have a 7pm game on Eastern time and then an 9:30pm Eastern start for another (8:30 Central) - that might be too late for some schools - but it's a cool idea. Would be easier to do a doubleheader like that on a Saturday where you could slide a game start up to 6 pm...

[blockski]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

A long term play to make money on televised hockey?

Yeah, ask the NHL how that's working after 70 freaking years.

A long term play to add value to the Big Ten brand.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

A long term play to add value to the Big Ten brand.

The amount of value this will add to the Big 10 brand: .0000000000001%
The amount of value adding Nebraska: 35%

Sounds like a good play to me.

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

Just looking at UW's basketball schedule, almost all of their Saturday games are in the afternoon. I can easily see where the BTN could have both Friday and Saturday night games of the week.

They also have a strong webcast presence.

Doubleheaders on Friday would be tricky - you'd have to have a late local start. I can't see a team wanting to drop the puck any earlier than 7pm local time, so you'd have to have a 7pm game on Eastern time and then an 9:30pm Eastern start for another (8:30 Central) - that might be too late for some schools - but it's a cool idea. Would be easier to do a doubleheader like that on a Saturday where you could slide a game start up to 6 pm...

You have to remember that Wisconsin share's its facility with hockey and that I'm pretty sure that the Big Ten as a whole is trying to stagger college basketball throughout Saturday to get as many live games as possible. I had the sports pack for dish network last season and every friday night there were a half dozen college hockey games and every saturday you were lucky to find 1.

[blockski]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

The amount of value this will add to the Big 10 brand: .0000000000001%
The amount of value adding Nebraska: 35%

Sounds like a good play to me.

Well, Penn State adding hockey is a very good thing.

If you think the BTHC is a bad thing - and you think so not just for the little schools, but for the Big Ten schools too - you've got two years to convince them of that.

Suffice it to say - everything that the Big Ten has done of late, whether adding Nebraska or launching their own TV network, has substantially increased the value of the conference/network/brand etc. If they see an opportunity in hockey, I'm inclined to believe it.

[4four4]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

Well, Penn State adding hockey is a very good thing.

If you think the BTHC is a bad thing - and you think so not just for the little schools, but for the Big Ten schools too - you've got two years to convince them of that.

Suffice it to say - everything that the Big Ten has done of late, whether adding Nebraska or launching their own TV network, has substantially increased the value of the conference/network/brand etc. If they see an opportunity in hockey, I'm inclined to believe it.

With the PSU addition it makes me wonder if the rest of the non-hockey BT schools take notice. For example, Indiana?

[bronconick]

Re: Big Ten Hockey Conference

A long term play to add value to the Big Ten brand.

Hockey adds little to no value. In fact, no sport outside of football and occasionally men's basketball adds value. As Priceless' signature shows, less than 60,000 people watched the regionals. It's of no interest to 297 million Americans outside of the rare Olympic event, and as this country turns more and more hispanic, its unlikely to be any more popular in 2050 than it is now, and probably will long since have been passed by soccer.

The NHL has spent 20 years (since the creation of the San Jose franchise) trying to grow the game in non-interested portions of the country, and outside of San Jose and Dallas, has failed miserably, and Dallas is currently owned by a bankrupt owner. Despite Stanley Cups, Tampa Bay and Carolina remain failures. Phoenix, Florida and Atlanta speak for themselves. For that matter, no American city handles a losing hockey team well. Chicago's recent history and Detroit in the 70's and 80's show that.

They're better off adding a cricket league and trying to sell the BTN in India.