The Big Ten hockey conference is about the bigger long-term picture of overall power, branding and prestige that which will eventually rear its head over time. The fact that the New York Times would even have such a long college hockey article in the first place is only because it's the Big Ten involved. This is about taking what has largely been a regional curiosity and making it national.

At the same time, schools like Minnesota have long made waaaaaaaaaay more money off of the Ohio States and Penn States of the world from the Big Ten TV contracts than the other way around. I love hockey, but it's a rounding error by comparison to the obscene amount of dollars that is taken in by football. So, it would be great if Minnesota partisans would stop their whining at some point. They actually do owe a heck of a lot more from a financial perspective (AKA their entire athletic department) to Penn State than they do to North Dakota or the other Minnesota schools, so they should act accordingly and be thankful that they're a member of arguably the most powerful entity in college sports that can largely dictate the rules as opposed to having rules dictated to them.