People will talk of a "Big Ten" hockey conference like people talk of Notre Dame joining the "Big Ten" football conference. It sounds nice, but will not happen. They (the purposed "elite" league teams) would collectively shoot themselves in the foot by trying to form on big conference. If you are "Team A" would you rather play and win a title every couple of years, or wind up losing more often than not, to one of the other "elite" teams in the conference? These people are not dumb. Granted there must be a great temptation to merge into a league that fits what they know in other sports. After all "thar be money in them there hills!" This attitude is easier to understand if you look at the growing number of "new" hockey fans, and the increasing base of casual hockey observers. If "Fan A" from "Big # Conference A" is used to seeing the same teams playing football, it is natural to wonder why the school isn't playing the same teams in hockey. IF they think highly of the football setup, of the league they belong to, it becomes instinct to believe that setup, in another sport would be better, or as great as what they know. I can understand that point of view. Among long term fans of college hockey, I can understand the variety of views on the subject. Some I agree with, some I do not. I think that the best arrangement for college hockey is what we have now, with or without minor changes. If you are the "Elite schools", and these teams are spread among the western conferences. You could potentially have two automatic bids in each of the two conferences out west, and maybe two or three other teams with at-large bids, why screw it up and join one big conference, and most likely limit yourself to two spots (four in a very good year, but typically less). Even if such an "Elite League" were to be formed, would schools like LSSU, CC, BU, BGSU, Maine, Vermont, NMU, etc, etc, etc, let such a league romp through the college hockey world? Nahhhhhhh. That is the wonderful thing about college hockey. Schools of all types can compete against each other successfully. And the reason why big schools aren't automatically going to suck all the top recruits in, is simple. It was once said while he was here at BG, that if Ron Mason were at Notre Dame, he'd never lose. He disagreed. If it were true, Michigan and MSU, among others, would already dominate hockey. While damn good, and perhaps among the best over the long term, they share that status along with LSSU, BU, and many others who are NOT household names in other sports. Why this is, and will remain true even in this era of growth, and increased publicity, is due to just what hockey is about. It is a old, but new world in sports. It is tradition, people, personalities, desire, and most of all, it is not baseball, basketball, or football. It is a different sport, with a different culture, that is I think closer to it's roots than the other sports. It is closer and more keenly aware of where it came from. As it moves into this new stage of growth and popularity, it is aware of the risks, and has seen the problems other sports have had. It should benefit from the fact that hockey is a smaller sport than football and others nationally. Will things change? Yes, just as things have changed the NHL. But that does not also mean the destruction of the college hockey world. The NHL is more available to "walk on" fans. That is to say people who are checking out the sport, and just starting to explore the game. They don't know the ins and outs of game yet. These are the people that are fueling the exodus of NHL teams from Canada. These are the people that make NHL hockey possible in such bastions of the sport like Florida (sarcasm)! The problem with these people, is that lacking knowledge of tradition, they develop their own. Being that this is America, home of Basketball, Football, and Baseball, these fans import what they can from what they know of the other sports. That is were the threat to the college hockey culture comes from. But the college game has a lot going for it, which I think will help protect and preserve what we have. When ESPN was airing the NCAAs, what did you hear during the Mich. games? You heard the staple of college hockey: The cheers, and the crowd participation. If you are a "walk on fan," and you go to your first college hockey game, you get that in your face, and in your ears. I think it was great that you could hear all that over the TV. Because it tells a new fan, watching on TV, or actually at a game that "There is something to this I don't know about, that everybody else does." And that in turn tells these people: "OK, so how do I get with the program?" That isn't universally true, but it tells them that they have just stepped into something bigger than they are. Growth of the sport in terms of teams will have an impact, but more in terms of how many places the game is played, and the development of a domestic player base, than the culture of the game. This is simply because growth isn't as fast, and any new teams must go through the established programs, and all that goes with them. The fans of new programs learn what their team is a part of. As an example of sorts, I would point out to Ohio State. It is rediscovering itself. They don't have the cheers like Michigan, MSU, BGSU, and others do. You can see their fans trying. There new fans figure out what all the fuss is about when BGSU's fans can do their paper thing, or Michigan does that blasted cow bell thing (that we can do this in as great numbers on road games as at home is moot). The point being is that we have a measure of control over this, more than we might have if this were the NHL. There will be new faces in the stands. New teams on the ice. Lots more broad based coverage of the game. But it is still college hockey. Should we worry about things changing? Not really. Should we be concerned about protecting the culture of the game? Yes, just as we would anything we value and enjoy. And the way we protect that is simply being the fans we are. We wear our jerseys, team pins, and hats. When people ask us about our game, we take pride being college hockey fans, we tell them about it, and why we like it. You exemplify what you like best about the game, promote it, and demand it in the league, university, or whatever level of the game you enjoy. So if you hear mublings and rumblings about "Big Elite Leagues," or expansion, or big TV contracts, don't worry about it. That's the sound of new fans coming into the fold. Welcome them aboard but don't forget to explain and show these new fans why we don't have Elite leagues either! Nathan W.L. Boyle BGSU HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.