|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jul 10, 2019 15:34:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by nhteamer on Jul 10, 2019 18:55:26 GMT -5
one NYC cocktail party
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jul 10, 2019 22:25:34 GMT -5
Any chance "Ivy League Hockey" gets created with seven members? Columbia would be only member without a team.
Ivy League track championships are referred to as "Heptagonals", a throwback term that dates back to when the conference had seven schools. Brown was the last to join in the 1950s. Maybe it could be called the Heptagonal Hockey League.
That would open a whole lot of spots in the ECAC....
|
|
|
Post by Crucis#1 on Jul 10, 2019 22:43:54 GMT -5
Without the Ivy schools, what would be the upside of playing in the new ECAC?
Seems like some of the cache of playing with the remaining 6 teams would have lost some of its lustre. Quinnipiac, Colgate, Union, St. Lawrence, Clarkson, Rensselaer. Granted, Union won a national championship a couple of years ago, and playing Colgate would extend the rivalry to all sports. Would these 6 provide the same excitement as a move to Hockey East?
|
|
|
Post by gks on Jul 11, 2019 6:48:24 GMT -5
Without the Ivy schools, what would be the upside of playing in the new ECAC? Seems like some of the cache of playing with the remaining 6 teams would have lost some of its lustre. Quinnipiac, Colgate, Union, St. Lawrence, Clarkson, Rensselaer. Granted, Union won a national championship a couple of years ago, and playing Colgate would extend the rivalry to all sports. Would these 6 provide the same excitement as a move to Hockey East? That's still a pretty good hockey league. I'd join it in a second.
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Jul 11, 2019 6:54:03 GMT -5
There is only one place for HC hockey, HOCKEY EAST.
|
|
|
Post by gks on Jul 11, 2019 6:55:21 GMT -5
There is only one place for HC hockey, HOCKEY EAST. Obviously that would be choice number 1, 2 and 3. ECAC wouldn't be a bad second place.
|
|
|
Post by nycrusader2010 on Jul 13, 2019 12:28:13 GMT -5
When is Navy going to get Division I hockey?
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jul 13, 2019 12:49:05 GMT -5
When an alumnus donates money for a rink? Roger Staubach is worth $600 million. How about "Captain America Rink"? That nickname is missing on the great nicknames thread. I had never heard it until I just googled Roger Staubach.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Jul 13, 2019 17:37:56 GMT -5
Seriously, amongst the general population, no one cares about college hockey across the country
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Jul 13, 2019 18:21:17 GMT -5
Seriously, we're beyond well aware of what you think.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jul 13, 2019 20:06:29 GMT -5
Seriously, UPenn Athletics Administration has said to the Penn Hockey Enthusiasts: raise a $50 million endowment and we will then let you know if the program can be upgraded.
Contrast that with Coach Peter Van Buskirk's story of how he was originally hired at Holy Cross as Men's hockey coach. Speaking to Dick Lutsk in a radio interview during his well deserved retirement victory lap, PVB said he was a teacher/coach at Hudson (MA) HS when he got a call from AD Ron Perry offering him the Head Coach position at HC.
PVB said his mother was a long term teacher in the system, so he was granted a little flexibility and kept his job teaching and started coaching at HC. I don't know what the stipend was to coach a sport at Hudson High at the time but maybe it could have been $1000 and perhaps HC was $1500 or something back in 1979. Despite inflation, that's a far cry from $50 million, and PVB had a good winning record as men's coach.
HC is one of the few schools with D-1 FB, BB and M&W Hockey. We are a long way ahead of Penn in this regard. Now we just have to win in the AHA.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Jul 14, 2019 6:15:42 GMT -5
I did a sort of the Title IX database to see whether a $50 million endowment would pay for M/W Div I ice hockey at UPenn. Probably comes close, at 4.5 - 5 percent payout a year. The UPenn endowment is not intended to pay for need-based fin aid for any hockey players.
I did the database sort for the PL and IL, as I wanted to see Colgate's ECAC ice hockey expenses.
M/W ice hockey $ in millions / (M/W hoops, $ in millions) Bost U 5.8 / (4.8) Brown 1.5 / (1.7) Colgate 4.1 / (3.6) HC 2.6 / (3.9) Cornell 2.8 ./ (2.0) Dartmouth 1.9 / (2.0) Harvard 2.1 / (2.2) Princeton 1.8 / (2.8) Yale 2.2 / (2.1)
None of the Ivy totals include any fin aid.
BostonU and Colgate and Cornell spend significantly more on ice hockey than they do on hoops. Reflection of athletic priorities?
Colgate, in the ECAC, may not be at the NCAA scollie cap. This may explain part of the difference between Colgate and BostonU.
If one added 30 scollie M/W hockey players @ at $70K to the Ivies, that would increase the Ivy expenses by $2.1M per school. If one added 28 scollie M/W hoops players @ $70K to the Ivies, that would increase the Ivy expenses by <$2M per school. Other than Cornell, even with scollies, the Ivies would maintain funding parity between hoops and hockey.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jul 14, 2019 9:56:29 GMT -5
BU and Colgate spend more on hockey than BB. If it represents higher institutional priority, there is a logic to that. The ECAC and HE are "power" conferences and the PL is decidedly not. Membership in those leagues in a 61 team D-1 universe gives them a much higher chance of achieving a national championship than BB in the PL does.
'87 is correct that college hockey doesn't generate much national interest, but hockey attendance is higher than BB attendance at those two schools, so the spending matches the aggregate priority of the school community in both cases. I didn't check any stats, but am certain hockey attendance has to be much higher than the tiny turnout for BB at both urban BU and rural Colgate.
You have to tip your hockey/football helmut to Colgate. They currently exceed HC in both football (recent winning tradition) and hockey (higher league for MH) and in BB we aren't head and shoulders ahead of them like we traditionally have been. New HC leadership in Athletic Administration, M&W BB and football, new facilities, and an upgraded division and league in WH could change that.
|
|
|
Post by gks on Jul 14, 2019 14:43:14 GMT -5
BU and Colgate spend more on hockey than BB. If it represents higher institutional priority, there is a logic to that. The ECAC and HE are "power" conferences and the PL is decidedly not. Membership in those leagues in a 61 team D-1 universe gives them a much higher chance of achieving a national championship than BB in the PL does. '87 is correct that college hockey doesn't generate much national interest, but hockey attendance is higher than BB attendance at those two schools, so the spending matches the aggregate priority of the school community in both cases. I didn't check any stats, but am certain hockey attendance has to be much higher than the tiny turnout for BB at both urban BU and rural Colgate. You have to tip your hockey/football helmut to Colgate. They currently exceed HC in both football (recent winning tradition) and hockey (higher league for MH) and in BB we aren't head and shoulders ahead of them like we traditionally have been. New HC leadership in Athletic Administration, M&W BB and football, new facilities, and an upgraded division and league in WH could change that. Colgate is ahead of HC in hoops too. Their new rink is awesome.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jul 14, 2019 16:44:03 GMT -5
BU and Colgate spend more on hockey than BB. If it represents higher institutional priority, there is a logic to that. The ECAC and HE are "power" conferences and the PL is decidedly not. Membership in those leagues in a 61 team D-1 universe gives them a much higher chance of achieving a national championship than BB in the PL does. '87 is correct that college hockey doesn't generate much national interest, but hockey attendance is higher than BB attendance at those two schools, so the spending matches the aggregate priority of the school community in both cases. I didn't check any stats, but am certain hockey attendance has to be much higher than the tiny turnout for BB at both urban BU and rural Colgate. You have to tip your hockey/football helmut to Colgate. They currently exceed HC in both football (recent winning tradition) and hockey (higher league for MH) and in BB we aren't head and shoulders ahead of them like we traditionally have been. New HC leadership in Athletic Administration, M&W BB and football, new facilities, and an upgraded division and league in WH could change that. Colgate is ahead of HC in hoops too. Their new rink is awesome. Let's see, HC has a 60-25 lead in the men's hoop series. How is Holy Cross having 35 more wins in the series with Colgate "ahead" of HC? Can we please try to keep this real?
|
|
|
Post by gks on Jul 14, 2019 18:04:58 GMT -5
Colgate is ahead of HC in hoops too. Their new rink is awesome. Let's see, HC has a 60-25 lead in the men's hoop series. How is Holy Cross having 35 more wins in the series with Colgate "ahead" of HC? Can we please try to keep this real? I'm just going off of last couple of years.
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Jul 14, 2019 20:43:59 GMT -5
BU and Colgate spend more on hockey than BB. If it represents higher institutional priority, there is a logic to that. The ECAC and HE are "power" conferences and the PL is decidedly not. Membership in those leagues in a 61 team D-1 universe gives them a much higher chance of achieving a national championship than BB in the PL does. '87 is correct that college hockey doesn't generate much national interest, but hockey attendance is higher than BB attendance at those two schools, so the spending matches the aggregate priority of the school community in both cases. I didn't check any stats, but am certain hockey attendance has to be much higher than the tiny turnout for BB at both urban BU and rural Colgate. You have to tip your hockey/football helmut to Colgate. They currently exceed HC in both football (recent winning tradition) and hockey (higher league for MH) and in BB we aren't head and shoulders ahead of them like we traditionally have been. New HC leadership in Athletic Administration, M&W BB and football, new facilities, and an upgraded division and league in WH could change that. Women’s ice hockey at Colgate made the frozen four in 2018. I would put them ahead of many teams in Hockey East.
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Jul 15, 2019 0:39:55 GMT -5
Women’s ice hockey at Colgate made the frozen four in 2018. I would put them ahead of many teams in Hockey East. To put this in perspective, your data is dated and attempts o compare HC to schools that are not its peers looks idle chatter or wishful thinking to some.. 1, Let's start with leadership,,,,The President of Colgate for the past 3 years, Briian Casey,, JD, PhD was captain of the Notre Dame Swimming, graduated summa cim laude and was selected as the outstanding scholar-athlete in his N.D. graduating class. Throughout his JD at Stanford and his PhD at Harvard, he continued to train with the institutions swim teams, as he continues to do with the Colgate swim team. His commitment is to make Colgate's academics as well as its athletics rigorous is uniformly believed and respected throughout the Colgate community. "He walks it." Then there's the work that Colgate grad Vicky Chun did as AD preceding Casey before being recruited to be AD at Yale. There hasn't always been harmony within the University about athletics role at 'Gate. But it seems there has always bee strong athletic leadership on the BOT. 2. Let's be more precise about Colgate's WHOC program. In the '17-18 frozen 4, they beat Wisconsin in the semifinals and lost to Clarkson in OT in the Championship game. The highly regarded WHOC recruiting site www.neutralzone.net/womens/ regards the recruiting class coming in as the best in the country gocolgateraiders.com/news/2019/4/15/womens-ice-hockey-womens-hockey-welcomes-nations-top-recruiting-class.aspx?path=whock3. A piece of the Athletic component of the Plan for the 3rd century that 'Gate announced at the recent Bicentennial celebration updates the scholly-financial aid data referenced above: In the summary of the Plan, the "First Initiatives" identifies the initial athletic goals: one of which is additional schollies to bring 'Gate to NCAA limits and additonal financial aid. ( Initially 6 schoolies will be added, with AD Dr. Nicki Moore to decide which sports get the additions.) ( There's more....But, I need not preach to the choir about the veracity the data and comparisons presented on Crossports. I do however enjoy the narrative and opinions expressed. So, to bring balance to these remarks,...here's a semi-scoop: it's highly anticipated that MHOC needs a shake-up. What WHOC did was make MHOC seem like it's no no longer worthy of the new 45 mill hockey rink that rhey share with WHOC. More schoolies for MHOC is not the solution. Sound familiar ? ) I think Colgate men’s hockey is fully funded and has been for some time. Hockey East women’s hockey has not been anywhere near as dominant as the men’s league was when it started up. BU never brought home the hardware a few years ago and BC is the same way. Northeastern is probably the showcase team this upcoming season besides that not much national contenders
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Jul 15, 2019 11:08:57 GMT -5
Seriously, amongst the general population, no one cares about college hockey across the country Schools don't sponsor the vast majority of sports because of mainstream popularity. You know this, though.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Jul 15, 2019 15:38:22 GMT -5
It just seems that Men's Ice Hockey at the D1 level at HC hasn't given the school "the bang for the buck" it looked like it might at one point...NCAA win ovah Minnesota, win ovah BC etc....being in the AHA does very little for the school imo
|
|
|
Post by nhteamer on Jul 15, 2019 15:40:02 GMT -5
It just seems that Men's Ice Hockey at the D1 level at HC hasn't given the school "the bang for the buck" it looked like it might at one point...NCAA win ovah Minnesota, win ovah BC etc....being in the AHA does very little for the school imo sooooooo, you'd super psyched to see us in HE or ECAC..........awesome
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Jul 15, 2019 15:46:19 GMT -5
It would be much better in a host of ways...hockey in the AHA (and lately doing very poorly in it) is a waste of athletic resources imo.....go HE or ECAC or drop the men's program
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Jul 15, 2019 16:04:11 GMT -5
A logical case can be made for dropping one or more sports and the cost savings can be quantified to the penny, but how do you measure the disappointment and resentment of those involved in the program and the intangible cost of Holy Cross announcing to the world it has failed, it is retreating it is less than it was before? My High School failed last year, or as they said in the email, "completed it's mission." That was a kick in the gut.
If the next big recession knocks expensive private colleges for a loop, then be pragmatic and mark to the market, but unless it is necessary, why step backward. Winning the AHA and going to the NCAA isn't climbing Mt. Everest. It's doable.
|
|
|
Post by JRGNYR on Jul 15, 2019 20:00:43 GMT -5
It would be much better in a host of ways...hockey in the AHA (and lately doing very poorly in it) is a waste of athletic resources imo.....go HE or ECAC or drop the men's program I feel like you're arguing two things here. Yes, HC in HE or ECAC would be an upgrade for the program, but neither would "move the needle" nationally as you said in another post. Ice hockey, much like men's lacrosse and field hockey, is a niche sport in college athletics. Does that means HC shouldn't sponsor it? I struggle to identify what your argument is most of the time.
|
|