The problems UIC seems to have attracting students and others to their
games is similar to what our arch rival, the university of toledo (sic)
has.  (You may have heard of UT.  A couple of days ago, their mascot got
drunk, and fell off a Carnival Cruise ship while relieving himself
overboard, and had to swim 10 miles to shore).
 
UT is a commuter campus, and one third of their students are
"non-traditional."  They had a football team win the MAC, break the Top
25 and go unbeaten this past season, and they had only 5,000 at each of
their last two home games.  Their basketball team plays in a great
facility, and until the mid-season when they choked, they could barely
pull in more than a few thousand people in.  Even for the BG-UT game, and
for Eastern Michigan which was in the top 25 at the time.  Their team
upset Western Mich. and advanced to the finals of the MAC tourney, held
IN Toledo, and they could even fill the place playing Eastern Mich.
 
This is a school in the middle of 500,000 people, and their own largest
alumni base.
 
My point being, that UT tries everything it can think of, and it still
can't get people to show up.  Getting people out to games is a mystery
for the ages.  As it relates to UIC, you have a hockey program that
loses, and badly, yet outdraws a rubber ball team that does well, and
gets slightly fewer people.  Considering that hockey is not considered as
being as big a draw nationally, that UIC can get 2,500 for a loosing
hockey team, should indicate that if they worked on building a better
program, they'd draw even more.
 
They are probably looking at being able to draw more students to enroll
if they had a better basketball program.  Maybe they think they will get
more attention, but I think this will backfire.
 
I think it will backfire because it will be very hard to attract players
to that setting.  You have Northern Ill. dumping the Big West in favor of
the far better MAC.  That means more attention to that college in the
mid-west.  NI made it to the NCAA's this year.  Being in the MAC means
more games locally than bouncing all over the far west in the Big West.
That will hurt any smaller program trying to recruit.  Dumping hockey
will leave a bitter taste in the mouths of many people.  It will leave
them without the sport they have the best chance of doing something with.
 
It is a shortsighted move.  And from what I can see from here, they are
so blinded by the allure of "hoop dreams," they would do about anything
right now.  As it is, it looks like they are not handling the elimination
of hockey very well.  They won't comment on it, almost ignoring that they
even have a team.  They are leaving their players, who gave a lot for
that school, hanging.  They are embarrassing their school nationally by
not being quick to either confirm or deny the programs status, and
showing a lack of respect to those who are part of it.
 
In the end, they might get people in the door because of the excitement
of a new B-ball coach and such.  But it should not be seen as a cure-all
for poor attendance.  As we see at UT and elsewhere, people may well not
attend, preferring to wait until some good results are turned in.  If he
doesn't make a major impact and doesn't have a good first season, than he
may well wind up doing absolutely no good to the program.  If a program
is enough trouble (perceived or real), that an athletic department will
allow an untested coach to dictate university policy on sports (before
playing game one), then something is very wrong.
 
You can only whip a dead horse so hard, and in the end the horse is still
dead, and you have an even bigger mess to clean up.
 
The ultimate irony is that I had my camcorder with me at UIC's last visit
to BG.  Looks like I may have captured the last meeting of BGSU and UIC.
 
I hope that UIC chooses not to end it's hockey program.
 
Nathan W.L. Boyle
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.