(06-23-2018 10:05 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  Hockey had a spurt in the South in the 90s but that's about it. As attendance goes, Nashville and Tampa Bay do great now but they're also two of the best franchises in the NHL. Florida and Carolina are near the bottom, and Carolina will probably be the subject of relocation rumors until they finally move. Atlanta lost two teams. The AHL has two teams in Texas and one in North Carolina. Most of the South's presence in pro hockey is in the ECHL or lower leagues.

I guess I'm skeptical that even SEC hockey would generate the kind of interest that largely doesn't exist out of the 90s boom period.

It’s a very long term thing for sure. You think 20-30 years for any kind of SEC league to form and then 20 years or so for fans to get used to thinking about hockey during the winter and for SEC players to graduate to the NHL. Couple that with long term northern migration to the South and We’re talking 50-70 years.

As far as the Carolina Hurricanes, that team really needs to be in Charlotte, which is a much bigger area and could draw a lot more fans from SC and GA.

Raleigh is a fast growing market, but the Hurricanes are well down in the pecking order even in the Triangle, let alone the rest of the Carolinas. In the Triangle, it’s UNC, NC State, then probably the Panthers, Duke, then the Hurricanes. Not having made the playoffs since 2009 has stunted their fanbase growth.

I think they are the lowest-rated team in the NHL. Most of their games in the Raleigh market draw in the low few thousand households. When you add in Greensboro and Charlotte, you add a few thousand more, but it is still one of the lowest in the league.

The problem was Charlotte became an NBA market when they had just become a major city in the late 1980s, and they had such a huge fan base then. Even in the mid 90s, they had a radio and TV network throughout the Carolinas and even into Virginia and Tennessee. Charleston had 15 or 20 OTA games on TV until they moved to New Orleans.

The Bobcats and new Hornets never could replicate that.

(06-23-2018 10:05 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(06-23-2018 06:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 08:49 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 03:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Add men's soccer and Title IX kicks in to force yet another unprofitable female sport. That's why you don't see men's soccer in the SEC.

When I was a student back in the dark ages around the turn of the millennium, rumor on campus was Alabama was paying a $10,000 yearly fine rather than adding a women’s sport; I knew several women who rowed on the club level, and their hope was that they would be the next program up. It didn’t happen until well after my cohort graduated, but Alabama eventually elevated the program and spent $4 Million on a facility for their program.

It probably didn’t help that Auburn was sued in the mid 1990s over Title IX. My hunch is if Alabama takes the plunge on lacrosse or hockey, it will add teams for both genders, and add beach volleyball to chip away at the proportionality deficit.

The key incentive to add lacrosse at the Capstone is to do so before LSU. My high school in Mobile has a team now, and most of their games are in Louisiana and South Mississippi. New Orleans, Mobile, and Birmingham aren’t going to be recruiting hotbeds for lacrosse, but if any potential homegrown talent emerges, a school like Alabama needs those players to develop their program.

I’m not sure what the particular itch for hockey at Tuscaloosa is, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see another attempt to shut down Huntsville’s program again - which will be much more palatable when a true Division I program offers the UAH players a full ride with cost of attendance. Alabama is already outrecruiting public universities in the Midwest for students, so it’s not like hockey is necessary to land students from Illinois.

I think the difference will be that Hockey can make money. Lacrosse can attract donors. I would think Tulane would add lacrosse before L.S.U.. That would be a great way for Tulane to possibly land an ACC bid provided they pushed the football too.

Auburn had club hockey and they played in Columbus, Georgia, but I don't know that they are still active. Lacrosse would be the cheaper team to field, but as I said the number of native Alabamians that play is really low.

Now let me give you a great reason for the SEC to look into Hockey. It is mildly a revenue sport. But take the NBA, MLB, and the NFL to go with the NHL. What is one of their overhead expenses that college ball can replace? Lower tier farm clubs for the development of talent. I'm not talking AAA baseball, or upper tier hockey, but 5 of the first picked in the MLB draft this year were college players. Baseball is looking for more mature talent that has been tested against 18 to 23 year olds at a fairly high level. A few years ago some scouts stated that in their opinion college baseball would rank somewhere between AA and AAA farm leagues for producing talent.

So what I'm saying is that the college upper tier could one day essentially replace lower tier professional development leagues and help to form a healthy and more profitable symbiosis with the professional leagues. If Canadian and Northeastern and Northern Midwest hockey talent had the Big 10, the traditional hockey leagues and the SEC putting money into facilities, coaching, and development they could cut some overhead, let the colleges have the small revenue totals they would generate and both could have competitive talent an with a draft the professional leagues could cut some overhead and possibly expand their sport professionally into some regions they really don't reach that well yet.

It's there if they choose to encourage and utilize it.

I agree I think one day (20-30 years from now) it could happen. Having major college hockey in the south would generate a ton of interest for a mostly regional sport

Hockey had a spurt in the South in the 90s but that's about it. As attendance goes, Nashville and Tampa Bay do great now but they're also two of the best franchises in the NHL. Florida and Carolina are near the bottom, and Carolina will probably be the subject of relocation rumors until they finally move. Atlanta lost two teams. The AHL has two teams in Texas and one in North Carolina. Most of the South's presence in pro hockey is in the ECHL or lower leagues.

I guess I'm skeptical that even SEC hockey would generate the kind of interest that largely doesn't exist out of the 90s boom period.

I feel like it's hard to generate a fanbase for a sport that no one in the are grows up playing. I might watch part of a hockey game on TV if it's on at the bar or something but I and most people in Texas and the southeast never have played it and dont know the rules, strategy, or players.

Here in Texas we have the Stars and I don't know if I've ever met someone who claimed to be a fan, and I have a large amount of family in DFW.

I think the same can be said for soccer. I know it has higher participation numbers but still way less than the main stream sports.

(06-23-2018 12:08 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  

(06-23-2018 10:05 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(06-23-2018 06:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 08:49 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  When I was a student back in the dark ages around the turn of the millennium, rumor on campus was Alabama was paying a $10,000 yearly fine rather than adding a women’s sport; I knew several women who rowed on the club level, and their hope was that they would be the next program up. It didn’t happen until well after my cohort graduated, but Alabama eventually elevated the program and spent $4 Million on a facility for their program.

It probably didn’t help that Auburn was sued in the mid 1990s over Title IX. My hunch is if Alabama takes the plunge on lacrosse or hockey, it will add teams for both genders, and add beach volleyball to chip away at the proportionality deficit.

The key incentive to add lacrosse at the Capstone is to do so before LSU. My high school in Mobile has a team now, and most of their games are in Louisiana and South Mississippi. New Orleans, Mobile, and Birmingham aren’t going to be recruiting hotbeds for lacrosse, but if any potential homegrown talent emerges, a school like Alabama needs those players to develop their program.

I’m not sure what the particular itch for hockey at Tuscaloosa is, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see another attempt to shut down Huntsville’s program again - which will be much more palatable when a true Division I program offers the UAH players a full ride with cost of attendance. Alabama is already outrecruiting public universities in the Midwest for students, so it’s not like hockey is necessary to land students from Illinois.

I think the difference will be that Hockey can make money. Lacrosse can attract donors. I would think Tulane would add lacrosse before L.S.U.. That would be a great way for Tulane to possibly land an ACC bid provided they pushed the football too.

Auburn had club hockey and they played in Columbus, Georgia, but I don't know that they are still active. Lacrosse would be the cheaper team to field, but as I said the number of native Alabamians that play is really low.

Now let me give you a great reason for the SEC to look into Hockey. It is mildly a revenue sport. But take the NBA, MLB, and the NFL to go with the NHL. What is one of their overhead expenses that college ball can replace? Lower tier farm clubs for the development of talent. I'm not talking AAA baseball, or upper tier hockey, but 5 of the first picked in the MLB draft this year were college players. Baseball is looking for more mature talent that has been tested against 18 to 23 year olds at a fairly high level. A few years ago some scouts stated that in their opinion college baseball would rank somewhere between AA and AAA farm leagues for producing talent.

So what I'm saying is that the college upper tier could one day essentially replace lower tier professional development leagues and help to form a healthy and more profitable symbiosis with the professional leagues. If Canadian and Northeastern and Northern Midwest hockey talent had the Big 10, the traditional hockey leagues and the SEC putting money into facilities, coaching, and development they could cut some overhead, let the colleges have the small revenue totals they would generate and both could have competitive talent an with a draft the professional leagues could cut some overhead and possibly expand their sport professionally into some regions they really don't reach that well yet.

It's there if they choose to encourage and utilize it.

I agree I think one day (20-30 years from now) it could happen. Having major college hockey in the south would generate a ton of interest for a mostly regional sport

Hockey had a spurt in the South in the 90s but that's about it. As attendance goes, Nashville and Tampa Bay do great now but they're also two of the best franchises in the NHL. Florida and Carolina are near the bottom, and Carolina will probably be the subject of relocation rumors until they finally move. Atlanta lost two teams. The AHL has two teams in Texas and one in North Carolina. Most of the South's presence in pro hockey is in the ECHL or lower leagues.

I guess I'm skeptical that even SEC hockey would generate the kind of interest that largely doesn't exist out of the 90s boom period.

I feel like it's hard to generate a fanbase for a sport that no one in the are grows up playing. I might watch part of a hockey game on TV if it's on at the bar or something but I and most people in Texas and the southeast never have played it and dont know the rules, strategy, or players.

Here in Texas we have the Stars and I don't know if I've ever met someone who claimed to be a fan, and I have a large amount of family in DFW.

I think the same can be said for soccer. I know it has higher participation numbers but still way less than the main stream sports.

Hockey got fairly popular in the Columbus Georgia area for a while from the 90's to the mid 2000's. It seems Southern Rednecks loved watching Northern Rednecks whack each other with the sticks, or fight. It's a novelty to be sure, but for a way to escape the heat of the day to watch an event in a cooler venue it's fine.

(06-23-2018 12:08 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  

(06-23-2018 10:05 AM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(06-23-2018 06:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 09:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-22-2018 08:49 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  When I was a student back in the dark ages around the turn of the millennium, rumor on campus was Alabama was paying a $10,000 yearly fine rather than adding a women’s sport; I knew several women who rowed on the club level, and their hope was that they would be the next program up. It didn’t happen until well after my cohort graduated, but Alabama eventually elevated the program and spent $4 Million on a facility for their program.

It probably didn’t help that Auburn was sued in the mid 1990s over Title IX. My hunch is if Alabama takes the plunge on lacrosse or hockey, it will add teams for both genders, and add beach volleyball to chip away at the proportionality deficit.

The key incentive to add lacrosse at the Capstone is to do so before LSU. My high school in Mobile has a team now, and most of their games are in Louisiana and South Mississippi. New Orleans, Mobile, and Birmingham aren’t going to be recruiting hotbeds for lacrosse, but if any potential homegrown talent emerges, a school like Alabama needs those players to develop their program.

I’m not sure what the particular itch for hockey at Tuscaloosa is, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see another attempt to shut down Huntsville’s program again - which will be much more palatable when a true Division I program offers the UAH players a full ride with cost of attendance. Alabama is already outrecruiting public universities in the Midwest for students, so it’s not like hockey is necessary to land students from Illinois.

I think the difference will be that Hockey can make money. Lacrosse can attract donors. I would think Tulane would add lacrosse before L.S.U.. That would be a great way for Tulane to possibly land an ACC bid provided they pushed the football too.

Auburn had club hockey and they played in Columbus, Georgia, but I don't know that they are still active. Lacrosse would be the cheaper team to field, but as I said the number of native Alabamians that play is really low.

Now let me give you a great reason for the SEC to look into Hockey. It is mildly a revenue sport. But take the NBA, MLB, and the NFL to go with the NHL. What is one of their overhead expenses that college ball can replace? Lower tier farm clubs for the development of talent. I'm not talking AAA baseball, or upper tier hockey, but 5 of the first picked in the MLB draft this year were college players. Baseball is looking for more mature talent that has been tested against 18 to 23 year olds at a fairly high level. A few years ago some scouts stated that in their opinion college baseball would rank somewhere between AA and AAA farm leagues for producing talent.

So what I'm saying is that the college upper tier could one day essentially replace lower tier professional development leagues and help to form a healthy and more profitable symbiosis with the professional leagues. If Canadian and Northeastern and Northern Midwest hockey talent had the Big 10, the traditional hockey leagues and the SEC putting money into facilities, coaching, and development they could cut some overhead, let the colleges have the small revenue totals they would generate and both could have competitive talent an with a draft the professional leagues could cut some overhead and possibly expand their sport professionally into some regions they really don't reach that well yet.

It's there if they choose to encourage and utilize it.

I agree I think one day (20-30 years from now) it could happen. Having major college hockey in the south would generate a ton of interest for a mostly regional sport

Hockey had a spurt in the South in the 90s but that's about it. As attendance goes, Nashville and Tampa Bay do great now but they're also two of the best franchises in the NHL. Florida and Carolina are near the bottom, and Carolina will probably be the subject of relocation rumors until they finally move. Atlanta lost two teams. The AHL has two teams in Texas and one in North Carolina. Most of the South's presence in pro hockey is in the ECHL or lower leagues.

I guess I'm skeptical that even SEC hockey would generate the kind of interest that largely doesn't exist out of the 90s boom period.

I feel like it's hard to generate a fanbase for a sport that no one in the are grows up playing. I might watch part of a hockey game on TV if it's on at the bar or something but I and most people in Texas and the southeast never have played it and dont know the rules, strategy, or players.

Here in Texas we have the Stars and I don't know if I've ever met someone who claimed to be a fan, and I have a large amount of family in DFW.

I think the same can be said for soccer. I know it has higher participation numbers but still way less than the main stream sports.

I know some Stars fans, they go to games pretty often. They’re all in their early twenties, so maybe they have a young audience?

As a fan of the University of Denver, a school with both top 5 NCAA Hockey and Lacrosse teams, I can tell you that having players that grew up in Colorado on the roster is a marginal-at-best factor here, with no more than 1/3 of either team's roster growing up here, yet both sports play to 95-100% of capacity here. Both teams generate revenue here, and men's hockey generates a $1 million in profit (despite having to fly to 90% of its away games) and both sports are on regional cable TV.

My point is that you don't need a big native in-state talent pool to generate strong results nor to generate local interest in either hockey or lacrosse. You just need to win. People will come out cheer whomever is wearing the jersey, as long as you keep winning. SEC schools have a great chance will do fine in either sport, should they adopt it.