Tennessee State to introduce college hockey (First HBCU school to do this)

[Armourboy]

I am not against growing hockey, especially in Tennessee and in Nashville. Let's make that clear. But, there are far better alternatives for accomplishing this.

However, I will play along with what you're getting at.

With enough backing, there is potentially the chance they can get a NCAA team. It would require an insane amount of financial backing on a long term basis. It would never be sustainable. Travel costs, inability to get into a conference, the same things that killed off Alabama-Huntsville. In addition, there is minimal regional recognition, a minimal finances available in the athletic department. So in the best case scenario, you've dumped huge sums of cash which will never be recouped into a program which is likely independent due to geography, noncompetitive due to their inability to get into a conference and because of the inherent travel, a horrible home schedule because of their geography and difficulty attracting opponents. Everything is present in these circumstances to have the venture fail, or at the very least be "not successful," and that is after huge financial investment.

Nashville could build four or five sheets of ice around the metro area instead , start full-fledged youth organizations in each one, provide free equipment for anyone who partakes in their presumably USA Hockey LTS/LTP programs, and have exponentially more people exposed to hockey and the goodwill of the organizations than what is happening with TSU.

Far too many people in the United States have gotten massive hard-ons about NCAA hockey expansion and how it grows the game. NCAA hockey does grow the game, but it isn't a cookie cutter solution suitable for every NHL team and a nearby college athletic program. The Predators organization doing this provides nothing other than temporary good will and provides zero long-term benefits to hockey in Nashville...

The ice thing is already happening along with the youth organizations, both in and around the Nashville area so....

 

[tucker3434]

Cool. My SEC alma mater only got their club team back about a decade ago. The more, the better.

 

[cynicalcitizen]

The ice thing is already happening along with the youth organizations, both in and around the Nashville area so....

One could argue that there is additional, reasonable investment to be made relative to this topic as presented by your counterpart in this conversation.

 

[cynicalcitizen]

I am not against growing hockey, especially in Tennessee and in Nashville. Let's make that clear. But, there are far better alternatives for accomplishing this.

However, I will play along with what you're getting at.

With enough backing, there is potentially the chance they can get a NCAA team. It would require an insane amount of financial backing on a long term basis. It would never be sustainable. Travel costs, inability to get into a conference, the same things that killed off Alabama-Huntsville. In addition, there is minimal regional recognition, a minimal finances available in the athletic department. So in the best case scenario, you've dumped huge sums of cash which will never be recouped into a program which is likely independent due to geography, noncompetitive due to their inability to get into a conference and because of the inherent travel, a horrible home schedule because of their geography and difficulty attracting opponents. Everything is present in these circumstances to have the venture fail, or at the very least be "not successful," and that is after huge financial investment.

Nashville could build four or five sheets of ice around the metro area instead , start full-fledged youth organizations in each one, provide free equipment for anyone who partakes in their presumably USA Hockey LTS/LTP programs, and have exponentially more people exposed to hockey and the goodwill of the organizations than what is happening with TSU.

Far too many people in the United States have gotten massive hard-ons about NCAA hockey expansion and how it grows the game. NCAA hockey does grow the game, but it isn't a cookie cutter solution suitable for every NHL team and a nearby college athletic program. The Predators organization doing this provides nothing other than temporary good will and provides zero long-term benefits to hockey in Nashville...

I would hate to be cynical, but one could interpret this as the easiest way to study the potential of this situation and exit most easily and gracefully when it does not pan out as positively as some would like. And, I just want to clarify that I am all for investing in college hockey in Nashville at an HBCU. I think it would be monumental if it came to be with a NCAA D1 program. I just believe this avenue does not allow for success to grow from club hockey to D1 under these circumstances. Unless there is more to be learned, TSU does not offer anything more enticing to a college student wanting to play club hockey than any of its neighbors offering the same. They need unparalleled success at ACHA D3 and then a jump to ACHA D1 with the same success to move to NCAA D1 in this scenario. I just can't see the jumpstart needed to get there.

 

[SI90]

This is awesome!!!

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

The ice thing is already happening along with the youth organizations, both in and around the Nashville area so....

The entire state of Tennessee has only 4,800 youth hockey players (edit: male players, 400 females. Taking into account the players of both genders from other states, my point still stands) in a handful of rinks. Those are exceptionally low numbers. That is lower than other non-traditional hockey states like Indianapolis and Utah, and has a painfully slow rate of growth. The low numbers and low rate of growth both indicate any statement like your "the ice thing is already happening along with the youth organizations" is foolhardy or misplaced trust.

Gifting a HBCU a NCAA D1 hockey team, and the immense amount of financial commitment required for what will almost certainly result in a low level program at both the men and women's level with minimal impact on hockey in Nashville, does nothing compared to what adding four or five more rinks in Metro Nashville, a similar financial commitment with tangible benefits and positive impacts on hockey in Nashville.

I would hate to be cynical, but one could interpret this as the easiest way to study the potential of this situation and exit most easily and gracefully when it does not pan out as positively as some would like. And, I just want to clarify that I am all for investing in college hockey in Nashville at an HBCU. I think it would be monumental if it came to be with a NCAA D1 program. I just believe this avenue does not allow for success to grow from club hockey to D1 under these circumstances. Unless there is more to be learned, TSU does not offer anything more enticing to a college student wanting to play club hockey than any of its neighbors offering the same. They need unparalleled success at ACHA D3 and then a jump to ACHA D1 with the same success to move to NCAA D1 in this scenario. I just can't see the jumpstart needed to get there.

The study of the potential gives them the perfect opportunity to back off gracefully when they realize how foolhardy the venture would be, you are 100% correct. ACHA D3 is lower level than most midget AAA programs. It gives the Predators organization some goodwill, which I doubt they really even needed that much to begin with

 

[x Tame Impala]

Just a baby step but this sort of thing is awesome to see for hockey fans. Making hockey cheaper and more inclusive is THE way to grow the game. Best of luck to this program.

 

[cynicalcitizen]

Just a baby step but this sort of thing is awesome to see for hockey fans. Making hockey cheaper and more inclusive is THE way to grow the game. Best of luck to this program.

There isn't much way to make hockey "cheaper". About the best you can do is make it subsidized, which is what most people mean when they say cheaper. Most municipalities will not do that with hockey, though. It is easier and involves less ongoing commitment to invest in gyms, baseball/softball/soccer fields; and even those find it difficult to get dollars allocated in many cases.

 

[x Tame Impala]

There isn't much way to make hockey "cheaper". About the best you can do is make it subsidized, which is what most people mean when they say cheaper. Most municipalities will not do that with hockey, though. It is easier and involves less ongoing commitment to invest in gyms, baseball/softball/soccer fields; and even those find it difficult to get dollars allocated in many cases.

Semantics. Have the cities and teams make ice time and equipment more abundant and available.

 

[cynicalcitizen]

Semantics. Have the cities and teams make ice time and equipment more abundant and available.

Politically, it will never happen. That would be seen first and foremost as a gift and benefit to the wealthy. It would always be seen as more of that than opening the game up to the less financially fortunate. Also, that investment would have opposition on both sides of the aisle for various reasons. Most rinks, public and private, operate at about the same costs to their customers. I just don't see that investment made anywhere. Some may be making it available, but it is more of an investment for financial return than opening up participation opportunities at a lower cost.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Politically, it will never happen. That would be seen first and foremost as a gift and benefit to the wealthy. It would always be seen as more of that than opening the game up to the less financially fortunate. Also, that investment would have opposition on both sides of the aisle for various reasons. Most rinks, public and private, operate at about the same costs to their customers. I just don't see that investment made anywhere. Some may be making it available, but it is more of an investment for financial return than opening up participation opportunities at a lower cost.

Benefit the wealthy how?

Also what’s more politically simple a suggestion in Tennessee? “Hey y’all (or whatever those loser Preds fans say )we all love the Predators and want to encourage more youth programs to get kids active, off the streets, and off their couches. We’re going to subsidize some rinks and reuse old equipment to let as many kids who want to play be able to play”

You’re being critical instead of optimistic is all. I’ll leave it at that.

 

[cynicalcitizen]

If you subsidize hockey and hockey rinks, everyone will assume that the wealthy will take advantage of that opportunity first and it would benefit them more than the lower to middle class that could then take advantage of a less costly sport. You would only get investment if there was differentiation in the customer base that is taking advantage of the subsidy, and I don't see how you could do that and still benefit anyone.

Also, I don't have to be critical or make assumptions. The evidence is already present. The Predators entered a public/private partnership with the Nashville Metro government to operate all of the Ford Ice Centers. Those are run purely as a business and do not lower the cost of hockey or ice skating at all. In addition, the city runs the Centennial facility with ice rinks. That does not run at any significant cost reduction either. I don't see evidence of it occurring in any other regional rinks either. The best comparison would be Huntsville that operates a municipally funded rink. Again, it operates primarily as a business and does not subsidize or lower the cost of the sport. It possibly exists in some markets with which I'm not familiar, but it does not seem that many entities have decided to do that much of anywhere regardless of what accent is utilized to start the phrasing of the conversation in one's own mind.

 

[oknazevad]

And every. Single. One of them. has the same "rowwwrrroorrrrrrr!!!!!" stock audio for their radio broadcasts.

Which is most likely not even a real tiger roar but an impression by legendary voice actor Frank Welker, who is well known for his rather authentic animal sounds. In addition to being Fred Jones from Scooby-Doo and the original Megatron.

 

[tornadowarning33]

It is cool that they're the first to do this, but I agree that I don't see a path forward to NCAA D1 status or anything near that just from this announcement.

It will somewhat fill in the ACHA donut hole that is the Southern United States (ACHA Teams Map) but that will also make it difficult for them to play ACHA D1 right off the bat, let alone have aspirations for NCAA play. The nearest D1 teams are Alabama-Tuscaloosa and two teams in suburban St. Louis. The Tide have been independent since they went D1 in 2015 since they're on such an island. D2 and D3 is a lot of the same, so bus time won't be in short supply regardless. The downside to starting below the D1 level is that everything below D1 in ACHA is basically glorified pick-up games.

Like others have said, funding (and lots of it) is always the differentiator when trying to move up to NCAA, not on-ice success at the ACHA level. ASU and PSU were good programs but it was the money that got them across the finish line. Illinois just said they couldn't make the NCAA work. Oklahoma has had strong ACHA D1 teams and allegedly had a Texas-based alumnus willing to be the benefactor for a move to the NCAA several years ago, but it fell through and its been crickets ever since. UT-Austin has more money than God and the best they've every been able to ice is a shitty ACHA D2 team.

 

[BMN]

Like others have said, funding (and lots of it) is always the differentiator when trying to move up to NCAA, not on-ice success at the ACHA level. ASU and PSU were good programs but it was the money that got them across the finish line. Illinois just said they couldn't make the NCAA work. Oklahoma has had strong ACHA D1 teams and allegedly had a Texas-based alumnus willing to be the benefactor for a move to the NCAA several years ago, but it fell through and its been crickets ever since. UT-Austin has more money than God and the best they've every been able to ice is a shitty ACHA D2 team.
But the big thing for schools with "more money than God" like UT-Austin is that they usually have success and identification with one of the two revenue sports on a D1/FBS level (football or men's basketball) and thus the idea of "we need to improve our involvement in <insert sport>" is already a tenuous proposition and if they decide to take it on, hockey is probably seen as much more cost-prohibitive than other sports (which runs completely counter to the fact that, yes, they have more money that God but whatever...).

I've always felt the missed opportunity for hockey development from the NCAA in the south has been more urban universities that are likely located near AHL/NHL arenas (thus at least reducing albeit not eliminating) the associated costs, but don't have a marquee football/basketball program or even football at all (and thus can at least stand a chance of being "the cool thing about our non-cool university"). Why can't there be more Omaha Chargers in this joint?......

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

I've always felt the missed opportunity for hockey development from the NCAA in the south has been more urban universities that are likely located near AHL/NHL arenas (thus at least reducing albeit not eliminating) the associated costs, but don't have a marquee football/basketball program or even football at all (and thus can at least stand a chance of being "the cool thing about our non-cool university"). Why can't there be more Omaha Chargers in this joint?......

Multiple reasons.

Sharing facilities with minor league hockey teams is not feasible. Those facilities are typically not owned by the minor league team, so the minor league team is fighting for dates to begin with. There are countless concerts, conventions, non-hockey sporting events, etc. they fight with. Adding another team that is fighting for dates, let alone practice times, is not feasible in the slightest. And if you do manage to dump a lot of money into a program in that situation, that program isn't making any money in those circumstances.

Geography. Doesn't need much more explanation than that. Can't attract students because no one wants to go to a school because of the travel (UAH was losing out on recruits to NCAA D3 teams). Can't attract opponents of any note to play you because of the travel. Can't make any money because of the travel. Morons like to go out and say if you add four or five at once that eliminates that problem, anyone with half a brain knows if the solution was that easy it would have been solved by now.

Who the heck are the Omaha Chargers? Do you mean UNO Mavericks? If you mean them, they had geography, the ability to fit seamlessly into a two conferences, 6.400 season tickets sold before a puck was dropped and a coach was hired, a facility nearby to play at which so disadvantageous they jumped at the opportunity to build an on campus arena at the cost of +$80M which was roughly split between donors and a sponsorship deal.

For marquee programs, that is a huge investment regardless or it is going to be unsuccessful. UAH was a good model. Great facility with a working setup that sort of worked, fantastic support in the community, but geography and all that comes with it killed them off.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Politically, it will never happen. That would be seen first and foremost as a gift and benefit to the wealthy. It would always be seen as more of that than opening the game up to the less financially fortunate. Also, that investment would have opposition on both sides of the aisle for various reasons. Most rinks, public and private, operate at about the same costs to their customers. I just don't see that investment made anywhere. Some may be making it available, but it is more of an investment for financial return than opening up participation opportunities at a lower cost.

It's the Canadian model though. Large majority of rinks are publicly owned by the local municipality and don't generate a profit. As such ice time is affordable-ish. I mean for men's league a few times we've just gone out and rented ice to practice of shinny and everybody just throws in $20 to cover the cost.

And it's not like the US is opposed to spending money on youth athletics. I don't know Tennessee, but I'm just googling Tennessee high school football stadiums - those things cost some significant money to build.

Will it happen? Probably not. Hockey has a special place in Canada, while football does in the US. But the precedent is there.

 

[Jeremy Hronek]

Will they be recruiting mostly black players?