B10 OOC Record
by ndmd99 (2024-01-16 16:46:08)
Post Reply Return to Lefty's Rink


CHN has inter-conference records going back to 2005-06. A conference has had an inter-conference record over 0.700 twice. B10 in 22-23 (0.715) and B10 this season (0.750). 21-22 B10 was 0.696. I'm still at a loss trying to figure out why B10 is looking like it might only get 3 teams in the tourney.

HE (0.683) and NCHC (0.694) are darn close to 0.700 this season as well which are their best marks by a decent margin. It looks like the 3 conferences are further separating themselves from the competition.

It'll be interesting to see if B10 does anything to address tourney bids for future seasons.

Buccigross is calling to expand the tourney to 24 teams (w/ on-campus venues). At this point, I think it might gain some traction (for sure from B10 & ESPN but also probably HE and NCHC).

The number of elite NHL prospects choosing the USHL/NCAA development path is increasing. Historically, NCAA has a ton of local/regional fanbases. There's momentum to broaden that audience. ESPN with a big chunk of the NHL broadcast rights for sure would love anything that drives national interest in the sport. And NCAA would be wise to feed off the cross-promotion ESPN can provide with NHL viewers.

ESPN certainly doesn't want a repeat of the same nightmare 1st round from last year (with only 1 game decided by less than 4 goals). And ESPN wants as many name-brand, 1st round, blue chip prospects in the tourney. Which makes UM (with McGroarty/Brindley/Casey/Nazar/etc) as a bubble team a very bad problem this year. Which 1st round tourney matchup does the audience want with the current PWR standings? BC vs RIT? Or BC vs UM?

I don't see the automatic qualifier getting pulled from lesser conferences. Expansion to 20-24 teams (with essentially a play-in round for the #3/#4 regional seeds) seems like a possible solution.

Attached a CHN article about B10 hockey. And one of the take-home messages is B10 is the only power-5 hockey conference and it may start being less "deferential" to the other conferences' interests. Given how the PWR is playing out this year, I think there will be a push from B10 for something to change.

Somewhat related, I think it was also a mistake for ND to keep hockey in the NBC contract. It was probably done out of convenience. But we probably have one of the larger national fanbases . . . but virtually no national network presence for hockey. NBC only has streaming for our home games. BTN has pretty much given us the middle finger for most away broadcasts (esp the higher profile games vs the UMs). ESPN would be the ideal partner. ESPN+ has the NHL contract rights already (so a ton of hockey fans) and some of our games would likely be attractive content for a national broadcast on ESPNU. I wonder if it was ever explored.

JJ should probably talk to Corrigan about the exposure benefits of ND lacrosse on ESPNU/ESPN+.



When it comes to the TV platform,
by wearendhockey  (2024-01-17 11:36:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I think there will always be arguments for or against one outlet or another. Is it better for the die-hards to have access to lots of games, or the casuals to see the occasional game but maybe a little more often than now? I think too, as long as we are connected at the hip to NBC via football Peacock may be the unfortunate reality. I also think one streaming service is probably as good as any other. Again, the diehards will seek it out and the casuals will find something else to do.

Curious too, what are the ratings for ANY college hockey game anymore? At one point, the Notre Dame/UM game in the 2008 FF was one of the highest rated college games televised, but the last few times I paid attention to ratings, they were horrible for the FF, and virtually unmeasurable for the regional games. I wonder if the days of using TV to help build an audience for your sport are done? I think the only thing that will actually build the overall audience for college hockey would be big time, name brand schools starting programs.

Who are the schools that you have in mind?
by usaf_irish  (2024-01-19 07:49:17)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I'd say that the majority of the SEC is probably out. Outside of Florida and Georgia, it would be too cost prohibitive. Florida could probably swing a program. The Lightning are popular and seem to have built a pretty good fan base. Texas and USC could as well capitalizing off of the Kings/Ducks and Stars.


Cost prohibitive would be the buzz phrase at nearly every
by wearendhockey  (2024-01-19 13:44:36)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

school that thinks about this. Without the big dollar donor (like Pegula at Penn State) it would be highly unlikely to see a school add hockey.

But if we're dreaming, another Big Ten school would be nice, especially one of the Illinois schools, although that would likely have a negative impact on our recruiting since historically we have mined that market well. But if we're talking about what's best for the sport, it isn't necessarily gonna be good for one individual program. Navy also always seems like a good fit to go along with Army and the Air Force. At one point people thought Syracuse was tinkering with starting a program.

I'd tend to think shying away from far-flung locations south and west would be best. Arizona State has a nice little thing going, but I am thinking of schools that are to the east of the NCHC footprint for the most part. Any school with a well-known name due to football or basketball success. While I am not opposed to schools like Long Island, Lindenwood or any of the other newer programs venturing into D1 hockey, it has done nothing to "grow" the sport in the way we usually think of that term. You could see how interest lagged pretty significantly in South Bend when Notre Dame was in Hockey East and playing schools with a good hockey pedigree like Maine virtually every other HE program without the words "Boston College" on their jerseys. No one who thinks about buying a ticket to watch Notre Dame at the CFIA will ever care about Augustana or Stonehill.

But I'm also not certain that growth in programs is necessary. When I got into this sport there were fewer than half as many teams who were able to compete for an NCAA title. I don't mean realistically having a chance at winning, I simply mean the teams from the old WCHA that we were a part of and the old ECAC teams. 10 in the WCHA and I believe 17 in the old ECAC, and every year it was 2 from each. Even in 1985, with the tournament expanded to 8 teams and the first season of Hockey East wrapped up, there were only 36 teams total in the 4 real conferences. Right now with auto bids going to all conferences there are 58 teams with a chance at an NCAA bid, 59 if you throw in Arizona State.

I think something that growth would help with would be maintaining the current in-flux of highly touted NHL prospects coming into NCAA hockey. If some high profile, name-brand schools were added to the mix, it might be the thing that would draw even more of these players to the NCAA and away from the major juniors. When a kid tells people he's going to Minnesota or Michigan or Notre Dame to play hockey, hockey fans and casual sports fans take note. When he says he's going to play hockey for the Soo (Sault Ste. Marie) Greyhounds of the Ontario Hockey League, it doesn't matter that Wayne Gretzky played there, his casual sports fan friends say "what the heck is that?"