Reaction to Coach Eaves and Alvarez's Comments

Lord knows that I've never been afraid to call out Barry Alvarez or otherwise claim that he's the puppet-master trying to mess with hockey for his own amusement. Sometimes I've done so fairly. Sometimes quite unreasonably and childishly. And sometimes to portray him as the Frankenstein about to turn the freshly deceased College Hockey Showcase into the lumbering reanimated undead corpse that we will soon call the Big Ten Hockey Conference.

The bottom line with Barry is the bottom line. He's the athletic director at our school, and if he wants to make his first priority to be to make sure that UW still manages to have an athletic department that stays in the black, then I don't know that any of us can really argue with that.

And if you were to get in touch with the cold, hard capitalist inside of you, it would only be fair to ask if it really is UWs job to prop up the smaller schools, or if it is Michigan's job to do the same to the CCHA schools. If the BTHC ends up destroying a program like Bowling Green, Minnesota State or Lake Superior State... well... who's to say that they were on stable enough grounds to last anyway? It's a harsh question, and it does divert our attention away from what a landscape-changer the BTHC will be, but isn't that a fair question to ask?

But even with that in mind, there are some things Barry says that probably reinforce the image many non-UW people have of Barry The Dictator Who Hates Hockey And Wants To Anally Rape It Whilst Pouring Sugar In Its Gas Tank.

Looking at his comments from the On Wisconsin show with Brian Posick, I end up with more questions than answers:

• When you say that our fans will "recognize" teams like Ohio State and Penn State in hockey... are you aware that we don't have a rivalry with one and that the other doesn't exist yet?
• When you say that "our fans" will choose that over WCHA rivals like Denver and North Dakota, are you talking about Badger Hockey fans or Badger Football fans?
• What exactly do you mean by "regionalizing" hockey? You said it to Posick and to Baggot. Did you know that it's roughly the same amount of time to drive to Denver as it is to Happy Valley? That drives to Ann Arbor and Grand Forks are quite comparable? That its quicker to drive to Bemidji or Omaha than it is to go to Columbus?
• The only travel distance that exists in the WCHA and not in the B1G Ten is Anchorage, Alaska, and UAA pays for part/most of that PLUS we get two extra home games out of that deal. Is that really an issue for us?
• Let's assume that your comments about "regionalization" have more to do with college hockey as a whole. How does the BTHC help the WCHA and CCHA schools deal with it? Don't they now have more frequent trips to Colorado and Alaska? How are we helping them, if this is truly a move that is good for "all of college hockey"?

Honestly, I feel like Alvarez is just giving us the run around when he tries to explain how this is good for college hockey as a whole. I'm not buying this trumped up excuse that the travel budget is better off in the BTHC, and I don't believe a word that he's saying about "regionalization". Sure, his principle is correct: bus rides are cheaper than flights, but that doesn't really come into play when we start talking WCHA vs. Big Ten. He's better off being honest with us and just saying that its about money, because at least I can believe him when he says that.

When Alvarez talks about B1G Ten rivalries, I don't think he's talking about hockey at all. He's talking about the kind of fan who doesn't go to hockey games, specifically the kind of ignorant fool that would list the WCHA as the reason he doesn't go to hockey games. (How do you spot this person? They might think that Ohio State hockey is more important and relevant than Denver hockey)

To this end, I have to admit that Alvarez is most likely right: there are probably more people that will come to Badger hockey games because it's a Big Ten thing than there are hockey fans who will stop coming to games because they hate this move. In that regard, we might see even better attendance figures in the B1G Ten. Sure, that's speculative drivel, but it wouldn't surprise me.

And then there's this:

"Plus the BTN has committed to about 40 games right off the bat. so i think that it sells and it promotes college hockey and maybe educates a lot of people in areas where there isn't hockey about college hockey"

It is here that I can't argue with the man. For a network that once pre-empted a Minnesota-Wisconsin game with a press conference for Indiana basketball, the BTN is showing a commitment to put more eggs into hockey's basket. That specific element of the BTHC can do nothing but good for college hockey. No one should be complaining about being on TV more.

As for Mike Eaves' comments on the issue? I was mostly amused by them. Mike Eaves has that weird way about him where he just sort of rambles on and on. I still have no idea what he meant by "speak the same language". You can tell that he never rehearses what he's going to say, and even though it makes his comments harder to understand and not very well thought out, I like how honest he comes off when he does it. If you boil down the rambling to two thoughts, it's this: This was inevitable, and we really don't have any idea how this will turn out.

For all the questions that Barry Alvarez makes me wonder about, perhaps Coach Eaves is right. It's going to happen, we can't change it, and we can't possibly predict what will happen.

But it's not too early for us to lobby the Big Ten to make sure that they don't do shootouts, right?

Some BTHC Talk (and more) From Coach Eaves and Barry Alvarez

For those of you who live in Madison, the On Wisconsin radio show/podcast featuring Brian "The Voice of Badger Hockey" Posick from The Big 1070 (Madison) might be a major part of your sports radio experience*.

Last Wednesday's edition of On Wisconsin featured some quality discussion about the two biggest stories to strike Badger Hockey in the last few weeks: the Big Ten Hockey Conference and the Lady Badgers' newest title. Coach Mike Eaves and Athletic Director Barry Alvarez both had some chances to comment on those stories.

* Disclaimer: OR if you live in the suburbs of Milwaukee, have a normal 9-5 type job, and are an amateur blogger (in more ways than one), then you might find out about Coach Eaves and Alvarez's comments when you ask someone from the athletic department if they have made any formal statements about the BTHC, and he kindly respond to you with an e-mail linking to this podcast...

The link to the audio is here, you can also access the podcast for download here.

A general timeline for those who want to skim the podcast:

00:56-2:32 Brian Posick mentions the women's hockey title.
2:46 - 3:17 BP introduces the BTHC news
3:17 - 5:43 Coach Eaves' comments on the BTHC
18:03 BP's interview with Barry Alvarez begins
19:33 - 22:05 They discuss the women's hockey team, Megan Duggan, and Coach Johnson
22:06 - 24:18 They discuss the BTHC
26:02 - 28:26 The issue of the facility improvements at Camp Randall

Now, I'm a total hack of a journalist (you know... because I'm not one and this is an occasional hobby for me), but here's my lame-duck attempt at transcribing the comments:

Mike Eaves on the BTHC:

"In the first place, Brian, it needs to be said there's a lot of work to be done. This is just the first step ... getting the presidents and the ADs to get on board and back this. This thought process is real powerful. And I think that... in lieu of the BTN going into effect... it was just a matter of time before this type of thing happened.

"In my mind, a lot of things in our society are driven by dollars and cents and this is one of those things. The Big Ten, once they got up and running and the money they are providing to each institution... the Big Ten is big time bucks. And once they got football and basketball going, the next revenue or income sport is hockey, men's ice hockey. And I think it was just a matter of time before they were looking to get them on there. And with that being the case right now, and Penn State getting finances to get the men's and women's program there, this was a natural progression in my mind, it was just a matter of time.

"The positives of it I think are the fact that you are going to create an unbelievable conference in men's ice hockey. It's going to be on TV. People, if they want to watch college hockey, are going to know where to go to watch it on a regular basis so i think that exposure to college hockey will be tremendous. I think that will be a great thing.

"I think the conference itself, having at our league meetings everybody speaking the same language in terms of what their needs are, and the things they have to deal with i think will be very much a positive because we all speak the same language.

"The negatives... you know, people can speculate as to what some of those might be, they could say that its either going to hurt college hockey and that we're gonna lose some programs, or because of the stimulation of what's going could create some programs. So i only think that time will tell if that's going to become an issue and *laughs* time will tell what other positives and what other negatives are going to come up."

Barry Alvarez on Mark Johnson:

"Well Mark, what a... just a tremendous leader he is. Just the way he manages his team, how he builds the team. And how... you know, he's so consistent. And that's the thing I see about him. His players know exactly what he wants. He's never too high, never too low. The consistency that he shows and the great job that he does teaching and building a team is very impressive"

Barry on Meghan Duggan:

"There are certain people that have a presence, and she's one of them. She walks into a room, and she has a presence. She steps on the ice, she has a presence. Every great team has a leader, someone just like her. And you can just sense that and you can feel that. When she speaks... you can look at the people in the crowd last night and everyone listened to her and every one of her teammates that spoke mentioned her by name. And [she's a] very impressive lady"

Barry after Brian Posick noted that some places, like Penn State for their men's program, might be interested in Coach Johnson:

"Absolutely. You've got the best women's coach in the country. What he's accomplished speaks for itself. You certainly don't want to lose him. But anytime you have a successful coach, there are always people that are looking at him, you know, and people that will try to get them to move and come and run their program. that's part of the business that we're in."

Barry when asked if he thinks Coach Johnson could have the same level of success in men's hockey:

"You know Brian, I'm not a hockey guy. But I mean... I'm sure the fundamentals... he coached men's hockey before he took over the head job at the women's program." (BP: "Assistant with Jeff Sauer, yeah...") "Absolutely. And I don't see why he wouldn't be successful."

Barry on the BTHC:

"I think everyone looks at their own situation. Everyone is concerned about their own situation. I think for a number of years now, people have been concerned by us having a league it will hurt college hockey. I don't agree with that.

"I think hockey needs to be regionalized. Hockey is a very expensive sport, and when you're traveling, criss-crossing the country playing your schedule, it gets more expensive and it limits how many people can play. You take a look at the east coast schools, it's basically a bus league, they can bus to everything they don't have to fly so its less expensive.

"What the Big Ten will do for our fans... it's name recognition now. You're playing teams that you recognize. You're more aware of a Michigan, Ohio State, you have a built in tradition and rivalry already. Plus the BTN has committed to about 40 games right off the bat. so i think that it sells and it promotes college hockey and maybe educates a lot of people in areas where there isn't hockey about college hockey"

(Brian Posick: And, no disrespect to other schools in the WCHA or the CCHA, but it also, these six schools in the Big Ten, it puts them on the same academic standing as the other schools. There's no doubt that theres a disparity in the WCHA.)

Barry Alvarez's response:

"There's no question.. You're dealing with DIII schools in some cases and some DI schools and standards are a little bit different, what you're accustomed to is a little bit different, I sensed that in the meetings that i've gone to that its much different than sitting in a Big Ten meeting."