Image via WikipediaTom Oats has a really good article on Madison.com that has been floating around the internet this past week about the issues surrounding the formation of the Big Ten Hockey I think I have brought up some of the same issues about the Big Ten Hockey Conference and that there was a very good possibility that the BTHC formation would have a negative effect on the other schools left behind in the CCHA and the WCHA.
It almost appears as if no one from the Big Ten thought about these ramifications until after they went to the NCAA meetings last April and heard from the other conference representatives from the CCHA and the WCHA... In my opinion, this has nothing to do about whats good for college hockey going forward, this is a lot to do about maximizing profits for six teams and they could give a rip about the other conferences and teams they've left behind. You can call me a hater, I don't care, I am calling it as I see it.
Nationally, however, the perception of the conference is a bit different. Many in the tight-knit hockey community believe the Big Ten, led by UW, has trampled on tradition and jeopardized the future of the sport by barging ahead without regard to potential ramifications for the programs at many smaller, hockey-first schools.No one has any idea how the dominos are going to fall after the formation of the Big Ten Hockey Conference. I don't think it's formation is going to be as good for college hockey as some have suggested, there are probably better ways to add college hockey teams without blowing up an existing structure that has worked for a very long time and has been successful.
The Big Ten’s announcement definitely put college hockey in a state of flux, with schools and conferences trying to position themselves in the new landscape. But no matter how it all washes out, there will be consequences — some unexpected, some potentially serious — both in Madison and across the country.
• Much like in football and basketball, non-conference schedules will get weaker.
Word is the Big Ten will backload the schedule with conference games, which means the league slate — 20 games per team — won’t begin until the football season is over in December. That would leave each team to find 14 non-conference games in the first two months of the season.
It appears the Big Ten will reach a scheduling agreement with the WCHA that will account for perhaps eight of those games. However, the remaining six dates could be difficult to fill with quality opponents since other conferences will already be involved in league play.
Even if the Big Ten and WCHA do hook up for four non-conference series per year, established rivalries will take a hit because UW’s opponents won’t always be North Dakota, Denver, Colorado College and Minnesota-Duluth.
Here is some good advice for the Big Ten as they go into unchartered waters.
Fallout from the Big Ten’s move is being discussed in the back rooms as we speak. Will the WCHA be a 10-team league when UW and Minnesota leave? Will it expand back to 12? Or will it form a six or eight-team “superleague” with its highest-profile teams and maybe two from the outside? All have been discussed.
With Michigan, Michigan State and Ohio State leaving the CCHA, word is Notre Dame is quietly looking at a move to the WCHA or Hockey East. Should Notre Dame and, say, Miami (Ohio) join the WCHA, the CCHA would be decimated. Without name schools as lucrative draws, its remaining schools could struggle to field competitive teams and some of them eventually could eliminate hockey. That would be a huge hit for the sport, which is low on numbers as it is.
No one knows if the Big Ten will be good or bad for college hockey in the long run, but it is clear so far that the conference is stepping on some toes. It would behoove the leaders of the Big Ten — and especially UW — to tread a little more lightly during this process.
