I honestly could see hockey working at ISU. Obviously not at the levels of football or basketball, but if it went to D1 level I think the interest would be there. Always loved going to the club games during my time at ISU.
IOWA STATE TO BIG TEN?!? Dave Wannstedt thinks so.
- Thread starter cyclone4L
- Start date
I honestly could see hockey working at ISU. Obviously not at the levels of football or basketball, but if it went to D1 level I think the interest would be there. Always loved going to the club games during my time at ISU.
Not with that attitude it’s not - lol. Regardless, I agree, it’s an expensive add and would only ever be a consideration if we did land in the Big 10.
I should have noted Penn State had a successful club hockey before starting the D1 program. D1 is a whole other level. I think only one of the "Icers" club team members made the D1 roster. Unless there is a motivated donor, it's a lot of money that I would image ISU's athletic department can put to use elsewhere.
Bloated bovines urinating. Combine the 3 words and you pretty much have bloviating.
I think most of us realize ISU Hockey is a pipe dream, but as it stands our minds are kind of already in “go big or go home” mode as is.
I think they'll say both.
"We have no intention of expanding at this time but we're currently exploring our options for future expansion."
We have two club teams actually D1 club and D3 club. Don't ask me the difference though. They have something crazy like 18 final fours in hockey.
I can confirm that the AD has a contingent plan for D1 hockey (however, they are in zero rush to add hockey). JP meets with the club teams every year and I was friends with the president and vice president of the club baseball team. They ask JP if Iowa State ever thought about bringing back baseball and JP said other sports were more likely(hockey).
i know someone involved with youth hockey in Ames and they told me Iowa State actually has plans to expand the Ames hockey arena if they ever got D1 hockey. The plans include expanding the lookerrooms, adding a practice rink to the others side and adding more seating. The original building was built with the bones to be expanded.
i don't think hockey is likely, but if there was ever a sport added hockey makes the most sense. Right next to to richest recruiting ground in the US and the club fan base is loyal. Iowa State was the first club hockey team to ever appear on ESPN 3.
Couldn't Hockey be at minimum a break even revenue sport? Popular with fans. (Especially if they sell beer) Recruiting, they are basically in the middle of a Jr. A league. (USHL)
If we get a huge windfall, we should add sports if we have to for Title IX or B1G rules, but otherwise just add baseball, and then pump the money into football, MBB/WBB, wrestling, maybe volleyball. The sports that already attract fans at JTS and Hilton. Adding a new sport that will be a money pit like hockey seems foolish, since we don't have a hockey fan base at the moment. And since our budgets have been lower than our peers for decades, surely there are projects to do at JTS and Hilton to get those facilities up to state of the art anyway.
When I was in college, the hockey matches were packed. Baseball was pretty thin and it was free unlike hockey. Did hockey fall off that much?
Just don't misstype it as "blowviating". That might get you some other sorta links.
Here's the problem with a guy like Thamel jumping to conclusions based on the "Alliance" statement that the conferences aren't expanding and the Big 12 is going to be on the outside looking in. In addition to being some hardcore confirmation bias, his scenario he expects doesn't solve the two massive problems that absolutely will and must come to a head soon. That is the terrible ACC deal and the dire financial situation of the PAC. He just says, this all sounds like these will be the power conferences and the Big 12 will be left out, and here's a scheduling alliance.
First, the PAC 12 absolutely must do something or they are as good as dead. The Big 10 can commit to not poaching the top of the PAC, but it does nothing to solve their financial problem. This scheduling does very little, if anything. USC, Oregon, and to an extent Washington and UCLA get big non-con games as it is. Maybe it helps a bit in the mid-tier teams, but we're talking about minimal impact on a per team basis.
Second, and probably more importantly, the ACC (or at least the top teams in the conference) absolutely have to get out of their terrible media deal. Basically they need to have whatever level of change occur that will allow them to get out of that deal. It's a financial disaster. Not that ACC teams need to match the SEC or Big 10, but Clemson isn't going to live with getting 1/4 of the money or so of a bunch of these SEC teams.
So Thamel can say, nobody's expanding, they're just doing this alliance, but that's pretty idiotic. Two of the three alliance conferences are in deep **** and are unstable. And there's nothing in this alliance that provides any stability or a fix for the PAC and ACCs incredible financial disadvantage. The PAC and ACC need some extent of organized chaos to reset their media deals within a couple of years, or they are going to be as good as dead.
First, the PAC 12 absolutely must do something or they are as good as dead. The Big 10 can commit to not poaching the top of the PAC, but it does nothing to solve their financial problem. This scheduling does very little, if anything. USC, Oregon, and to an extent Washington and UCLA get big non-con games as it is. Maybe it helps a bit in the mid-tier teams, but we're talking about minimal impact on a per team basis.
Second, and probably more importantly, the ACC (or at least the top teams in the conference) absolutely have to get out of their terrible media deal. Basically they need to have whatever level of change occur that will allow them to get out of that deal. It's a financial disaster. Not that ACC teams need to match the SEC or Big 10, but Clemson isn't going to live with getting 1/4 of the money or so of a bunch of these SEC teams.
So Thamel can say, nobody's expanding, they're just doing this alliance, but that's pretty idiotic. Two of the three alliance conferences are in deep **** and are unstable. And there's nothing in this alliance that provides any stability or a fix for the PAC and ACCs incredible financial disadvantage. The PAC and ACC need some extent of organized chaos to reset their media deals within a couple of years, or they are going to be as good as dead.
we actually have a pretty decent fanbase for hockey. The big games sellout, games were on ESPN3 (first club team to ever have that happen) and there is even tailgating in the lots. Of course i haven't been in college for a few years but whenever i went it was a packed house. Lots of Minnesotan cyclones need their fix.
I will say that the PAC is in better shape than the ACC most likely. Shorter time period until their deal is up. With ESPN wanting the B12 blown up, I can see the ACC being pushed to take WV. Also makes me slightly nervous about WV. Hope they are smart and understand that their only path to the ACC is still bending OU and UT over for some money to allow everyone out in a more timely manner.
