HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Bob Griebel <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 30 Oct 2013 23:10:47 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines)
On 10/30/2013 10:04 PM, John Edwards wrote:
>  and I think Chicago is likely - particularly if the B1G 10* is behind it.
>
> *-calculations made using Base 6.
>

Hmmm, but by the time a potential Chicago Frozen Four rolls around, the 
Big 6/14ths Hockey Conference may be obsolete.  When Penn State's 
upgrade to varsity hockey satisfied the Big 10's own rule that a Big Ten 
Conference must be created for any sport in which half the Big Ten 
schools participate, 6/12 = 50%.  But after Maryland and Rutgers come 
aboard, 6/14 will equal 42.8571429%.

And who knows who's yet to come aboard.  There are schools in other time 
zones where broadcast sponsors would be delighted to benefit from 
expanding market coverage.  Does the Big Ten have a minimum threshold 
dissolution rule?

Bob

ATOM RSS1 RSS2