Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Back check
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by uaafanblog View Post
    OK ... so 10 minutes of thinking about it results in ...

    RWHA (Real West Hockey Association)
    UAA
    UAF
    Denver
    CC
    UND
    UAH
    This would work because of several factors. These schools all already fly well. There is an ability to schedule additional non-conference games at home for each team due to the exemptions from playing in Alaska (meaning as much as 22 games on the home schedule for UND, DU, CC and 14 on the road). A guaranteed good gross from the yearly RWHA conference tournament at the 11,000+ seat Ralph (many configurations possible there with UND getting all the "sweet" night games).

    UAA and UAF subsidize all travel for all members. Cooperative scheduling for Alaska trips ... i.e ... Sunday/Monday games at one school then Thursday/Friday games at the other .. teams would travel on Friday and return home on Saturday. Both UAA and UAF currently stay in the lower 48 for consecutive series at least once per year and both sets of student/athletes perform well in the classroom (technology also makes this very workable).

    WCHA
    UMD
    UNO
    SCSU
    Mankato
    Bemidji
    MTU
    This works because it eliminates pretty much all flights for the Minnesota schools and they maintain all their instate rivalries. They keep the pretty MTU Cup and can host their conference tournament at any number of rinks in the Minnesota (Xcel or Target for example depending on demand) area with lots of seats which would generate a nice tournament revenue. In-State fan interest would be maintained.

    CCHA
    Miami
    Notre Dame
    Ferris St.
    Northern Mich.
    Lake State
    BGSU
    Western
    This works because it already works now. Michigan and Michigan State were not some huge cash cow for these programs anyway. It's almost a maintains the status quo solution. One may argue that there is a revenue decrease from the Big10 schools departure but what can you do? Everyone has that issue. With 7 schools this conference has some small amount of breathing room should one go TU. And none of these whiners has to go to Alaska or Alabama.

    Other good reasons ...
    3 auto-bids that 20 schools compete for versus 2.
    Maintains geographic integrity.
    Saves UAH.
    Maintains and enhances "ACTUAL" rivalries.
    Keeps most of the schools that moan about travel to Alaska from "having" to go.

    Reasons it wouldn't work ...
    DU thinks they're something they aren't.
    DU is skerred to play other "real" western teams.
    DU thinks they can tell CC what to do.
    Thanks to uaafanblog and cooperalls for putting UAH in your conferences! Hope somebody in authority does the same. I think UAH only flew once last year - lots of long bus trips. The RWHA would be cause for more flights.

    Leave a comment:


  • davyd83
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by uaafanblog View Post
    OK ... so 10 minutes of thinking about it results in ...

    RWHA (Real West Hockey Association)
    UAA
    UAF
    Denver
    CC
    UND
    UAH
    This would work because of several factors. These schools all already fly well. There is an ability to schedule additional non-conference games at home for each team due to the exemptions from playing in Alaska (meaning as much as 22 games on the home schedule for UND, DU, CC and 14 on the road). A guaranteed good gross from the yearly RWHA conference tournament at the 11,000+ seat Ralph (many configurations possible there with UND getting all the "sweet" night games).

    UAA and UAF subsidize all travel for all members. Cooperative scheduling for Alaska trips ... i.e ... Sunday/Monday games at one school then Thursday/Friday games at the other .. teams would travel on Friday and return home on Saturday. Both UAA and UAF currently stay in the lower 48 for consecutive series at least once per year and both sets of student/athletes perform well in the classroom (technology also makes this very workable).

    WCHA
    UMD
    UNO
    SCSU
    Mankato
    Bemidji
    MTU
    This works because it eliminates pretty much all flights for the Minnesota schools and they maintain all their instate rivalries. They keep the pretty MTU Cup and can host their conference tournament at any number of rinks in the Minnesota (Xcel or Target for example depending on demand) area with lots of seats which would generate a nice tournament revenue. In-State fan interest would be maintained.

    CCHA
    Miami
    Notre Dame
    Ferris St.
    Northern Mich.
    Lake State
    BGSU
    Western
    This works because it already works now. Michigan and Michigan State were not some huge cash cow for these programs anyway. It's almost a maintains the status quo solution. One may argue that there is a revenue decrease from the Big10 schools departure but what can you do? Everyone has that issue. With 7 schools this conference has some small amount of breathing room should one go TU. And none of these whiners has to go to Alaska or Alabama.

    Other good reasons ...
    3 auto-bids that 20 schools compete for versus 2.
    Maintains geographic integrity.
    Saves UAH.
    Maintains and enhances "ACTUAL" rivalries.
    Keeps most of the schools that moan about travel to Alaska from "having" to go.

    Reasons it wouldn't work ...
    DU thinks they're something they aren't.
    DU is skerred to play other "real" western teams.
    DU thinks they can tell CC what to do.
    Something like this is far too rational and logical to ever happen. Great post. The only thing I might switch here is flipping North Dakota and UNO. With UNO in the west, it means bus trips for CC and Denver for meetings with UNO. North Dakota is also in a much better travel situation as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • moose97
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
    Great post Moose. It's nice to actually be able to discuss the sport, either agree or disagree, with logical, rational posters who make well thought out posts!
    The biggest problem, IMHO, is that 99.9% of even college hockey media (let alone fans) don't know the sport all that well outside their own conference. It's not like football or basketball where a fan can watch all the relevant teams every week (if they buy the respective TV package). I mean, I watch as much college hockey as anyone I know (if it's on TV, I DVR it and watch usually between 6-10 games a week), but even still - I've never seen several teams on TV let alone live.

    Now extrapolate that out to the "average" fan who only watches their own team and only when they are at home (not talking spoiled Gophers fans who see their team every week on TV). What does that fan know about a school they see once or twice a year, if that (let alone if they are OOC and they are grasping at straws that they Google)?

    The best example I have is SCSU. I was involved in a discussion about them maybe dropping football, and the topic came up - why don't they just increase ticket prices for hockey $5? That'll raise a half-million right there (~100,000 reported attendance for the season X $5)! Well, if you've been to a SCSU game lately, you know that the reported attendance is pure fantasy (sell-out? maybe half-full), and not only that, but people I've talked to down there say that they no longer buy season tickets since they know they can walk-up and buy for Gopher games. Plus, they don't think that they're getting their money worth as it is... So, while you can look on the internet and come up with this theory about raising ticket prices and solve SCSU's budget problem, unless you've been there and talked to people, you wouldn't know that it can't possibly work.

    My point? Folks get all fired up that they are an "expert" on everything (and this is the internet in general, not just college hockey) because they Googled it and read all about it on Wikipedia... Now, if you are and do know something? Great. But if not, shut up and listen to those that actually do (and no, Dave, that's not me telling you to shut up It's more directed towards those that **** us all off on here more often than not).

    Oh, and I agree with your main point (sorry for my rambling tonight). More folks need to realize that you can have an intelligent discussion where the sides disagree. And that goes for real life as well as the internet.

    Leave a comment:


  • uaafanblog
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    OK ... so 10 minutes of thinking about it results in ...

    RWHA (Real West Hockey Association)
    UAA
    UAF
    Denver
    CC
    UND
    UAH
    This would work because of several factors. These schools all already fly well. There is an ability to schedule additional non-conference games at home for each team due to the exemptions from playing in Alaska (meaning as much as 22 games on the home schedule for UND, DU, CC and 14 on the road). A guaranteed good gross from the yearly RWHA conference tournament at the 11,000+ seat Ralph (many configurations possible there with UND getting all the "sweet" night games).

    UAA and UAF subsidize all travel for all members. Cooperative scheduling for Alaska trips ... i.e ... Sunday/Monday games at one school then Thursday/Friday games at the other .. teams would travel on Friday and return home on Saturday. Both UAA and UAF currently stay in the lower 48 for consecutive series at least once per year and both sets of student/athletes perform well in the classroom (technology also makes this very workable).

    WCHA
    UMD
    UNO
    SCSU
    Mankato
    Bemidji
    MTU
    This works because it eliminates pretty much all flights for the Minnesota schools and they maintain all their instate rivalries. They keep the pretty MTU Cup and can host their conference tournament at any number of rinks in the Minnesota (Xcel or Target for example depending on demand) area with lots of seats which would generate a nice tournament revenue. In-State fan interest would be maintained.

    CCHA
    Miami
    Notre Dame
    Ferris St.
    Northern Mich.
    Lake State
    BGSU
    Western
    This works because it already works now. Michigan and Michigan State were not some huge cash cow for these programs anyway. It's almost a maintains the status quo solution. One may argue that there is a revenue decrease from the Big10 schools departure but what can you do? Everyone has that issue. With 7 schools this conference has some small amount of breathing room should one go TU. And none of these whiners has to go to Alaska or Alabama.

    Other good reasons ...
    3 auto-bids that 20 schools compete for versus 2.
    Maintains geographic integrity.
    Saves UAH.
    Maintains and enhances "ACTUAL" rivalries.
    Keeps most of the schools that moan about travel to Alaska from "having" to go.

    Reasons it wouldn't work ...
    DU thinks they're something they aren't.
    DU is skerred to play other "real" western teams.
    DU thinks they can tell CC what to do.
    Last edited by uaafanblog; 05-18-2011, 09:10 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • davyd83
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Great post Moose. It's nice to actually be able to discuss the sport, either agree or disagree, with logical, rational posters who make well thought out posts!

    Leave a comment:


  • moose97
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
    Several people from the CCHA stated travel concerns as a factor in their no votes.
    I don't recall any press release stating this. Maybe that's what all the teams were saying behind the scenes. And that's kind of my point - man up and say why the CCHA denied UAH. That cost savings of not traveling to UNO is more valuable than saving UAH.

    Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
    And when you look at CCHA revenues vs WCHA revenues, there is a big difference. Each school generates more in tournament revenue by a long shot. And when you talk ticket revenue, WCHA teams rank 1-3-4-5-6-8-9-12 in average tickets per game, while only Michigan and MSU are in the top 12. Now take the NMU's LSSU's and Ferris States, who are facing budget cuts in state aid and show them where an extra $10,000 for plane tickets comes from. Do you take it out of recruiting? Do you downgrade to staying at Motel 6 on your road trips?
    Let's not pretend that the CCHA schools are alone in these tough financial times. BSU faced a $5 million deficit (and cut men's track); MSUM had to cut $6-10 million and cut 3 sports; SCSU had to have a student vote to increase fees to save football from the chopping block. And that's with WCHA revenue...

    Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
    If you're so confident that adding UAH is a reasonable fiscal move, why won't the WCHA consider it?
    Why should they? And note, I never said that the CCHA should now either. Looking back at the summer of '09, it was a somewhat lateral move (sure, losing UNO hurt), but travel budget-wise, it would not have been any added expense (especially with the $10,000 per team subsidy from UAH). We can argue ad nausium the merits of the WCHA "going after" UNO, but it made sense. CCHA fans that were upset by it are just showing sour grapes.

    Like I have said before, at this point, UAH doesn't currently fit anywhere (unless someone else drops the sport). If the WCHA stands pat at 10 and the CCHA stays at 8, no - it makes no sense to add UAH. Even if we get some sort of "Super 6" I don't see a spot for them.

    HOWEVER, in the summer of 2009, there was a completely legitimate spot in a conference with an odd number of teams. PSU was still a year away from even thinking about adding hockey (seeing as Terry Pegulia didn't sell his land until ~May of 2010). So, that being said, all I wanted was for the CCHA to have said publicly that they'd rather save money on travel budgets than save UAH. Really - it's pretty simple.

    See? That way we could stop this charade about "UAH is too far away" and "what about the 48 hour rule?" The simple answer would be that the CCHA was more interested in saving itself than saving UAH. And if that's true, fine. At least own up to it.
    Last edited by moose97; 05-18-2011, 08:28 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • davyd83
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by moose97 View Post
    OMG... So they would have to fly? That would be terrible. MTU has to fly to CC and Denver - and pay for it. BSU this year has to fly to UAA, CC and DU (plus CHOSE to play @ Miami OOC).

    Please stop. It's fine if the CCHA wanted to save money by eliminating travel to UNO and not replace it with UAH, but then they should have had the balls to come out and say so. And to say that cost savings was more important than "saving" UAH. Instead, all we get is, "UAH is too far away" and "what about the 48 hour rule" when clearly none of that is true.
    Several people from the CCHA stated travel concerns as a factor in their no votes. And when you look at CCHA revenues vs WCHA revenues, there is a big difference. Each school generates more in tournament revenue by a long shot. And when you talk ticket revenue, WCHA teams rank 1-3-4-5-6-8-9-12 in average tickets per game, while only Michigan and MSU are in the top 12. Now take the NMU's LSSU's and Ferris States, who are facing budget cuts in state aid and show them where an extra $10,000 for plane tickets comes from. Do you take it out of recruiting? Do you downgrade to staying at Motel 6 on your road trips? If you're so confident that adding UAH is a reasonable fiscal move, why won't the WCHA consider it?

    Leave a comment:


  • SCSU Euro
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
    Buffalo, Orchard Park specifically, is at least 6 hours from New England, and that's just the border, we're not talking about Foxboro. But, seeing as how you've already ticked off not only me, but most of the RIT fans as well...
    You come up with a proposal then, mine was based mostly on geography but I factored in rivalries. I wanted to keep the Cincinnati-Cleveland, Baltimore-Washington and Pittsburgh-Philadelphia rivalries together. So you're suggesting we just swap Philly and Buffalo. (SIGH) I GUESS Philly fans hate New Yorkers too

    Leave a comment:


  • FlagDUDE08
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by SCSU Euro View Post
    Finally, somebody who is talking about something important in this thread.

    I meant New York in name, plus, people from New York CHEER for the Jets and Giants. Nobody cheers for the Bills, and they'll soon be in Toronto, so that's fixed. Besides, how could you not want Philly and Pittsburgh playing each other twice a year? And I wasn't suggesting CALLING it the New England division, just pointing out where everyone is.
    Buffalo, Orchard Park specifically, is at least 6 hours from New England, and that's just the border, we're not talking about Foxboro. But, seeing as how you've already ticked off not only me, but most of the RIT fans as well...

    Plus, New York in name only. They're still not from New York. So much for the New Jersey Giants and the New Jersey Jets.
    Last edited by FlagDUDE08; 05-18-2011, 07:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • SCSU Euro
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by FlagDUDE08 View Post
    I'm sorry, but there is only ONE New York team there. The Giants and the Jets play in New Jersey!! And if there's only one New England team, how in the heck can you call it a New England conference? Not to mention, if you're doing it geographically, putting Philly in the NE conference and Buffalo in the Rust Belt conference makes a heck of a lot more sense.
    Finally, somebody who is talking about something important in this thread.

    I meant New York in name, plus, people from New York CHEER for the Jets and Giants. Nobody cheers for the Bills, and they'll soon be in Toronto, so that's fixed. Besides, how could you not want Philly and Pittsburgh playing each other twice a year? And I wasn't suggesting CALLING it the New England division, just pointing out where everyone is.

    Leave a comment:


  • moose97
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
    One other thing to take into account, especially for Ferris, NMU and LSSU, is the 48 hour rule. You cannot leave more than 48 hours prior to the start of the first game, with travel to Alaska and Hawaii being the exception. So for an NMU series at Huntsville with a 7:05 CT Friday start in Huntsville, NMU couldn't leave Marquette prior to 8:05 ET on Wednesday. Even Ferris, leaving Big Rapids at 8:05 on a Wednesday and going as far as Indy, getting in around 12:30 am, then up and on the road by 8 am the next morning, they still have another 12 hours to go.
    OMG... So they would have to fly? That would be terrible. MTU has to fly to CC and Denver - and pay for it. BSU this year has to fly to UAA, CC and DU (plus CHOSE to play @ Miami OOC).

    Please stop. It's fine if the CCHA wanted to save money by eliminating travel to UNO and not replace it with UAH, but then they should have had the balls to come out and say so. And to say that cost savings was more important than "saving" UAH. Instead, all we get is, "UAH is too far away" and "what about the 48 hour rule" when clearly none of that is true.

    Leave a comment:


  • davyd83
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    One other thing to take into account, especially for Ferris, NMU and LSSU, is the 48 hour rule. You cannot leave more than 48 hours prior to the start of the first game, with travel to Alaska and Hawaii being the exception. So for an NMU series at Huntsville with a 7:05 CT Friday start in Huntsville, NMU couldn't leave Marquette prior to 8:05 ET on Wednesday. Even Ferris, leaving Big Rapids at 8:05 on a Wednesday and going as far as Indy, getting in around 12:30 am, then up and on the road by 8 am the next morning, they still have another 12 hours to go.

    Leave a comment:


  • fangers
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
    Really? Here are the mileages: NMU 933 (18 1/2 hrs), LSSU 932 (18 1/2 hrs), Ferris 744 (16 hrs), Western Mich 640 (13 1/2), Bowling Green 564 (11), Notre Dame 541 (11), Miami 414 (8). Now, if you've ever been on one of these trips on the bus, you know that teams very rarely will spend more than 9 hours in a day in transit. So only Miami falls under that number and Bowling Green and Notre Dame are a stretch there. So yes, second day travel or flying are pretty much the only options for all but 3 of the CCHA schools which will remain.
    Well, FSU did it last year, wonder how they broke it up. UAH bussed to FSU, MSU, BGSU, OSU last season, typically leaving on Wednesday evening.

    Leave a comment:


  • FlagDUDE08
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    Originally posted by SCSU Euro View Post
    I too feel that geography should dictate all, so let me derail this conversation with my proposed NFL realignment divisions

    Midwest: Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota (keeps Black and Blue Division intact)
    Southeast: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa Bay (3 Florida teams lumped with Georgia's sole team)
    West Coast: Oakland, San Diego, San Fransisco, Seattle (3 Cali teams with Seattle; like this more than giving them Arizona and putting Seattle in with DEN, DAL and HOU)
    Southwest: Arizona, Dallas, Houston, New Orleans (Two Texas teams in same division, all warmer weather teams keeps things pretty fair come winter and I hear Texas and Louisiana don't like each other)
    Central: Denver, Indianapolis, Kansas City, St. Louis (Puts Missouri teams together, wouldn't be horribly upset to swap New Orleans with Denver but I prefer keeping Bronco-Chief rivalry in tact)
    New England: Buffalo, New England, New York Giants, New York Jets (3 New York teams and Boston are most the four teams all in one corner, pretty easy)
    Atlantic: Baltimore, Carolina, Tennessee, Washington (Maryland teams together, basically the other two were remainders)
    Rust Belt: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh (Has AFC North gain Philly, and people from Philly hate everyone, but particularly people from these three cities. Added bonus: someone gets a rusty belt and its kept by the division winner each year)

    You may say "Euro, why are you wasting our time with this?" but I say anyone who starts threads based on what they're crossing their fingers and hoping for's time is pretty worthless to begin with. Also, Goodell doesn't have to deal with any team's gaining extra game exemptions due to being non-continental, the McNaughton owners, or a Southern school nobody seems to want, so I'd say that this has a better chance of passing than the proposed alignment that started this thread.
    I'm sorry, but there is only ONE New York team there. The Giants and the Jets play in New Jersey!! And if there's only one New England team, how in the heck can you call it a New England conference? Not to mention, if you're doing it geographically, putting Philly in the NE conference and Buffalo in the Rust Belt conference makes a heck of a lot more sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • SCSU Euro
    replied
    Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

    I too feel that geography should dictate all, so let me derail this conversation with my proposed NFL realignment divisions

    Midwest: Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota (keeps Black and Blue Division intact)
    Southeast: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa Bay (3 Florida teams lumped with Georgia's sole team)
    West Coast: Oakland, San Diego, San Fransisco, Seattle (3 Cali teams with Seattle; like this more than giving them Arizona and putting Seattle in with DEN, DAL and HOU)
    Southwest: Arizona, Dallas, Houston, New Orleans (Two Texas teams in same division, all warmer weather teams keeps things pretty fair come winter and I hear Texas and Louisiana don't like each other)
    Central: Denver, Indianapolis, Kansas City, St. Louis (Puts Missouri teams together, wouldn't be horribly upset to swap New Orleans with Denver but I prefer keeping Bronco-Chief rivalry in tact)
    New England: Buffalo, New England, New York Giants, New York Jets (3 New York teams and Boston are most the four teams all in one corner, pretty easy)
    Atlantic: Baltimore, Carolina, Tennessee, Washington (Maryland teams together, basically the other two were remainders)
    Rust Belt: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh (Has AFC North gain Philly, and people from Philly hate everyone, but particularly people from these three cities. Added bonus: someone gets a rusty belt and its kept by the division winner each year)

    You may say "Euro, why are you wasting our time with this?" but I say anyone who starts threads based on what they're crossing their fingers and hoping for's time is pretty worthless to begin with. Also, Goodell doesn't have to deal with any team's gaining extra game exemptions due to being non-continental, the McNaughton owners, or a Southern school nobody seems to want, so I'd say that this has a better chance of passing than the proposed alignment that started this thread.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X