It's good on one hand to get an extra school added to our diminutive ranks but I have mixed feelings on schools who are in the conference for ONE sport only.
When we were both CCHA members that was an entirely different situation.
Logic would seem to dictate that if you aren't in for ALL sports you shouldn't be considered a conference member.
Notre Dame is the one that got away for the Big Ten.
Theyíre a quintessential big ten school. Miswesr, good academics, rife with cash, and name recognition. Notre Dame isnít a research powerhouse like the rest of the big ten schools though.
How so? Granted, it's not an identical situation. But since we're talking feelings: I thought it was great that Notre Dame was a CCHA member. Losing the hockey partnership with the Fighting Irish was one of the downsides of forming the B1G Hockey Conference. Then, when the deal was reached for Notre Dame to rejoin us in hockey, my honest reaction was "Welcome Home."When we were both CCHA members that was an entirely different situation.
So you're prepared to kick out Wisconsin for not having a baseball team?Logic would seem to dictate that if you aren't in for ALL sports you shouldn't be considered a conference member.
How about the five schools where Men's Soccer isn't a Varsity sport. Bye-Bye?
By the time we get done with all of the expulsions, we might be competing as an independent!
Bad argument. Those sports donít exist at those schools.
The original point is that those sports DO exist at Notre Dame and we donít force them in for all.
Setting aside the question of who's been "bad," let's deal with the disagreement. If I understand it correctly, your position is that as long as a member school participates in most Big Ten sports, but has no program at all in the rest, that's OK. Apparently I'm also to assume that Club Sports "don't exist." But letting a school participate in B1G Varsity sports is unacceptable -- if they offer one or more Varsity sports in another league.
Whatever the merits, that's not the current rule. As others have pointed out, the inclusion of Johns Hopkins in the Lacrosse league set a precedent that one sport membership is OK. Still want to outlaw the practice? Go for it. Work through the system. Try to get a new rule passed. State your case!
Beyond "mixed feelings," what specific problems do you see with single sport membership? I look at the two deals that have been struck, and see a win-win situation for all concerned. Maybe I'm wrong to support those deals. But those wanting a ban need to tell me why. My feeling is that such a ban is a solution in search of a problem.
Interesting subject and we all know that ND always does what's best for ND and that's fine.
Notre Dame's primary sports affiliation is with the ACC where they are a full member for all sports except football. In football, they are required to schedule 5 ACC teams each year and every ACC team every five year interval.
As we all know, no hockey in the ACC except BC.
ACC should claim national titles in hockey
a legend and an out of work bum look a lot alike, daddy.
The way I see it Notre Dame is as good as they are due to having spent their formative years in Hockey East. Without that, theyíd be like Michigan State. Stuck in the BIG cellar.
Perhaps my perspective on this is simply the traditional view. Colleges & Universities were one of two things, either an independent or a conference school. We didn't used to have we'll be in this conference for this sport and another conference for these sports and this one we'll still be independent. The latter is how I perceive Notre Dame.
Now don't get me wrong, I don't have any real problem with their hockey team being in but as another stated they're a quintessential big ten school and I don't think it's good for college sports and conferences overall to allow such a patchwork of competition to exist.
Their desire to keep what control they have keeps them from being a full fledged member of the B1G which I think should have happened a LONG time ago.
Truth be told, Notre Dame is actually a member of the WCHA and we've had them participating in a trial "loan-a-team" program since 1981. (This special program is current scheduled to end following the 2030-2031 season.) Once the Title IX crowd gets their way in North Dakota, and the men's team folds as well, we'll be moving Notre Dame into the NCHC for a two-year stint, 2021-2023.
After that is completed, they will become one of the charter teams of the PAC10 hockey conference along with ASU. There will be 20 conference games scheduled per season with Notre Dame and ASU each listed as the home team for 10 games. However since ASU still won't have a rink by then, all games will actually be played at Notre Dame. The teams will simply swap jersey colors home/road for each game. The 20 game conference schedule of the PAC10 hockey conference also allows for ample non-conference games to be scheduled.
Following the 2030-31 season, Notre Dame will be released from the WCHA to play as an independent, but in an ironic twist will only play intra-squad games going forward. All games will be covered lived in prime time on NBC in 3D ultra-vision with NBCSN simulcast proving additional camera angles, color commentary and running "Rudy" via picture-in-picture during all games.
Preserving Michigan Tech's Hockey History
Frozen Four: '96, '09
NCAA Tournament: '88, '96, '97, '09, '10, '14
UVM record in games I've attended as a student:
Fan of the UVM Catamounts, Charlotte Hornets, Oakland A's, and Philadelphia Union
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)