CSNbbs

From StarTribune today:

Quote:First, North Dakota cut women’s hockey. Now, the top college conference in the sport has gone public, asking for money.

In another sign of the financial concerns gripping women’s college hockey, the WCHA Women’s League on Thursday announced the launch of a RallyMe crowdfunding page.

The goal is to offset membership costs for the league’s seven remaining teams: the Gophers, Bemidji State, St. Cloud State, Minnesota State Mankato, Minnesota Duluth, Ohio State and Wisconsin.

The league has produced 15 of the 17 national titles — six for the Gophers — since the NCAA began crowning a women’s hockey champion in 2001.

“We’re not in a dire financial situation,” said Katie Million, the WCHA women’s commissioner. “We’re just trying to be proactive. As schools get less funding, their budgets are tightening. We just want to do everything we can in our power to lessen the burden of what they need to pay us financially.”

Coaches such as the Gophers’ Brad Frost and Bemidji State’s Jim Scanlan were quick to say their individual programs aren’t on the chopping block. But both supported the WCHA’s decision to make an unprecedented public plea to help lower league dues, which were $87,000 per school in 2015-16 and will increase now that North Dakota is out of the league.

“We’re on very solid footing at the University of Minnesota,” said Frost, who has won four NCAA titles in nine seasons at the Gophers helm. “But there are a lot of athletic departments throughout the country that are not as secure as we are.”

The Gophers, Wisconsin and Ohio State programs are all part of hulking athletic departments, each projected to receive more than $50 million in annual Big Ten revenue sharing next year.

That makes it easier to pay the nonrevenue sports bills. In 2015-16, when the Gophers women’s hockey team won another NCAA title, the program produced $350,586 in revenue and had $2,368,675 in expenses, for a net loss of about $2.02 million, according to their NCAA Financial Report.

...

Without North Dakota, the NCAA is down to 34 women’s hockey teams.

“If it can happen there, I think people are concerned it can happen anywhere,” Frost said.

Scanlan said North Dakota’s decision to cut women’s hockey back in March “opened up a lot of eyes. I don’t think any of us are naive enough to think it couldn’t happen somewhere else.”

So let me get this straight: The WHCA is launching a 'crowd funding' campaign to get the mass general public to help pay for its (the conferences) administrative costs?

Seriously?

I hate to sound sexist, but Women's College Hockey sounds like a Men's cookie baking contest.

Seriously?

(07-21-2017 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]So let me get this straight: The WHCA is launching a 'crowd funding' campaign to get the mass general public to help pay for its (the conferences) administrative costs?

Seriously?

Hockey is a hugely expensive sport, perhaps one of the most expensive. And the crowds just aren't there to offset those costs. That's pretty much the bottom line.

Huge depts like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio St ... can essentially just write off the costs.

(07-21-2017 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]So let me get this straight: The WHCA is launching a 'crowd funding' campaign to get the mass general public to help pay for its (the conferences) administrative costs?

Seriously?

Hockey is a hugely expensive sport, perhaps one of the most expensive. And the crowds just aren't there to offset those costs. That's pretty much the bottom line.

Huge depts like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio St ... can essentially just write off the costs.

While they can do a crowdsourcing campaign, it looks as if the effort is an attempt to not charge or increase student fees to cover the budget hole.

Title IX has been both the best and worst thing for college sports. If it were applied with common sense it would be great. However, having government beuracrats makes it insane. I am sorry, I rather have my teeth drilled than watch women's basketball. However, I will say I enjoy watching womens volleyball or soccer more than I do mens in college if it is on TV. As in life, not everyone is going to get a trophy. Something the lastest generations sadly have not been taught to deal with.

(07-21-2017 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]So let me get this straight: The WHCA is launching a 'crowd funding' campaign to get the mass general public to help pay for its (the conferences) administrative costs?

Seriously?

Hockey is a hugely expensive sport, perhaps one of the most expensive. And the crowds just aren't there to offset those costs. That's pretty much the bottom line.

Huge depts like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio St ... can essentially just write off the costs.

On top of that, the ticket revenue and consequently related concessions, etc... just aren't there. Wisconsin was #1 last year at 2,911 per game, next closest was 1000 behind (the Gophers at 1,953).

In all, last season, 27 of the 37 D1 teams averaged less than 500 per game.

(07-21-2017 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]So let me get this straight: The WHCA is launching a 'crowd funding' campaign to get the mass general public to help pay for its (the conferences) administrative costs?

Seriously?

Hockey is a hugely expensive sport, perhaps one of the most expensive. And the crowds just aren't there to offset those costs. That's pretty much the bottom line.

Huge dept hus like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio St ... can essentially just write off the costs.

Everyone knew those costs going in.

If the NHL really wants to grow the sport, keep parents involved and support both genders.

Womens hockey doesn't work at non east coast locales unless a school has a massive endowment. The east coast works better because of cheaper bus trips.

But of course this is all North Dakota's fault.

(07-21-2017 12:56 PM)tcufrog86 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]So let me get this straight: The WHCA is launching a 'crowd funding' campaign to get the mass general public to help pay for its (the conferences) administrative costs?

Seriously?

Hockey is a hugely expensive sport, perhaps one of the most expensive. And the crowds just aren't there to offset those costs. That's pretty much the bottom line.

Huge depts like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio St ... can essentially just write off the costs.

On top of that, the ticket revenue and consequently related concessions, etc... just aren't there. Wisconsin was #1 last year at 2,911 per game, next closest was 1000 behind (the Gophers at 1,953).

In all, last season, 27 of the 37 D1 teams averaged less than 500 per game.

Our attendance was massively inflated by $1 tickets for the Gophers series, which people would attend. But losing $2 million on the sport wasn't maintainable, as we wanted to be good like Minnie and Wisconsin in the sport. The Euro Olympians were just too expensive.

(07-21-2017 12:55 PM)msm96wolf Wrote: [ -> ]Title IX has been both the best and worst thing for college sports. If it were applied with common sense it would be great. However, having government beuracrats makes it insane. I am sorry, I rather have my teeth drilled than watch women's basketball. However, I will say I enjoy watching womens volleyball or soccer more than I do mens in college if it is on TV. As in life, not everyone is going to get a trophy. Something the lastest generations sadly have not been taught to deal with.

If I were to modify Title IX I would do this. I would keep the requirement of having x amount of women's sports per men's sports. But I would remove the requirement for athletic scholarships and make.

(07-21-2017 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]So let me get this straight: The WHCA is launching a 'crowd funding' campaign to get the mass general public to help pay for its (the conferences) administrative costs?

Seriously?

Hockey is a hugely expensive sport, perhaps one of the most expensive. And the crowds just aren't there to offset those costs. That's pretty much the bottom line.

Huge depts like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio St ... can essentially just write off the costs.

I get that, but what is bizarro to me is that this isn't a case of a program trying to raise funds, it's an entire conference, and the money isn't going to the schools to defray costs of uniforms, equipment, or travel, it's going to the conference administrative apparatus.

(07-21-2017 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017 11:01 AM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]So let me get this straight: The WHCA is launching a 'crowd funding' campaign to get the mass general public to help pay for its (the conferences) administrative costs?

Seriously?

Hockey is a hugely expensive sport, perhaps one of the most expensive. And the crowds just aren't there to offset those costs. That's pretty much the bottom line.

Huge depts like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio St ... can essentially just write off the costs.

I imagine it's a lot cheaper if you're committed to having a men's team and/or otherwise already have the facilities.

(07-21-2017 02:44 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]I get that, but what is bizarro to me is that this isn't a case of a program trying to raise funds, it's an entire conference, and the money isn't going to the schools to defray costs of uniforms, equipment, or travel, it's going to the conference administrative apparatus.

Now I see what you're saying.

The second line in the OP says "membership costs", so I guess being in the WCHA women's league costs each school $X per year or some such, and this is to help with that. So you're right, in a sense, but it is being marketed as helping the schools avoid a cost.

(07-21-2017 02:58 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ]I imagine it's a lot cheaper if you're committed to having a men's team and/or otherwise already have the facilities.

This gets into the all the BS accounting that goes on in college athletics. But I'm certain no school is paying the cost of hockey just to have women's hockey, with no men's team. That would be incredible.

(07-21-2017 03:09 PM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-21-2017 02:44 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]I get that, but what is bizarro to me is that this isn't a case of a program trying to raise funds, it's an entire conference, and the money isn't going to the schools to defray costs of uniforms, equipment, or travel, it's going to the conference administrative apparatus.

Now I see what you're saying.

The second line in the OP says "membership costs", so I guess being in the WCHA women's league costs each school $X per year or some such, and this is to help with that. So you're right, in a sense, but it is being marketed as helping the schools avoid a cost.

(07-21-2017 02:58 PM)nzmorange Wrote: [ -> ]I imagine it's a lot cheaper if you're committed to having a men's team and/or otherwise already have the facilities.

This gets into the all the BS accounting that goes on in college athletics. But I'm certain no school is paying the cost of hockey just to have women's hockey, with no men's team. That would be incredible.

Syracuse is one that I can think of that has varsity women's hockey but doesn't have varsity men's hockey. Not sure if there are any others.

However, I am guessing that Syracuse probably had some sort of ice facility already on campus for student/intramural, etc... and thus didn't build something specific for women's hockey.

Wisconsin and Minnesota actually have separate arena's for their women's programs.

Hat's off to Syracuse. Never heard of having women's hockey only. I'm sure you're right, they must have some deal to use the ice.

D1 should merge with the D3 women's hockey to help offset the travel costs. It is expensive for the west coast and central plains to sponsor hockey when there is not enough schools to help ease the cost on travel.

At the same time, the PAC is planning to create an ACHA women's conference for the 2018 season. Some schools are dropping, but I suspect that others may be filling the void.

(07-21-2017 11:05 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote: [ -> ]I hate to sound sexist, but Women's College Hockey sounds like a Men's cookie baking contest.

Seriously?

I've watched a few ncaa women's games and they were bad. Olympic women's hockey is good but nothing below it.

I remember reading years ago a college women's team tied a AA Midget team.

Men's college hockey is hard enough to break even. Women's must be a money drain.

(07-21-2017 04:47 PM)DavidSt Wrote: [ -> ]D1 should merge with the D3 women's hockey to help offset the travel costs. It is expensive for the west coast and central plains to sponsor hockey when there is not enough schools to help ease the cost on travel.

What does this do? This is just you wanting everybody in D1. There are no NCAA women's teams west of Minnesota. All the D1 western teams (MN, OH, WI) are in one conference. There is high travel involved in this sport regardless of the school's location. It's just expensive to sponsor the sport, period; especially since it does not generate revenue at almost all schools. You only created a problem between scholarship vs. non-scholarship.