Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

[SCSU Euro]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

Allowed? .... Really? Wait Whut? -- ROFLMAO

Hey tool, wanna pull yourself off the floor and explain what's so funny?

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

Allowed? .... Really? Wait Whut? -- ROFLMAO

Seriously... I didn't even see the word "allowed" the first time I read through it... those Governor's Cup matches must have been forfeits.

[uaafanblog]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

Plus, why woudl the realignment be needed for 2012-2013?

Agreed ... It woudln't.

[uaafanblog]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

Why so much disdain for the Pioneers?

Their pomposity.

[uaafanblog]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

I still don't see UAA and UAF being allowed to play with each other, ...

Allowed? .... Really? Wait Whut? -- ROFLMAO

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

In that vein, any of the 3 of these divisions (west, Minnesota, and east) could be the 7-team member. I still don't see UAA and UAF being allowed to play with each other, so I think if one would be seven and people really wanna see NMU and MTU together, have them move to the central, (unfortunately) send UND west and give the MN division one of the Alaska teams, and it really doesn't matter which.

I don't see it either; I'm merely playing along with the strategies.

Plus, why woudl the realignment be needed for 2012-2013? I thought Penn State was independent in that season, and then forming Big Ten the next year.

[7&7]

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.

Why so much disdain for the Pioneers? Covered wagons never even made it to your state.

[SCSU Euro]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

Why not make this RWHA a 7-team league and include UNO? 24 league game schedule, and 10 or 14 NC games.

In that vein, any of the 3 of these divisions (west, Minnesota, and east) could be the 7-team member. I still don't see UAA and UAF being allowed to play with each other, so I think if one would be seven and people really wanna see NMU and MTU together, have them move to the central, (unfortunately) send UND west and give the MN division one of the Alaska teams, and it really doesn't matter which.

[SCSU Euro]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

Why do people think that much time on a cramped bus is better than flying?

$$$$$

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

DU and CC will have bus trips ... to each other. And if I'm the A.D. at either of those schools, my guys are flying to Omaha ... not riding on a bus for 9 or 10 hours. Why do people think that much time on a cramped bus is better than flying? UND is the attractive member for any potential conference due to their ability to host a sold-out conference tournament. The WCHA won't need UND to accomplish good revenue from a conference tourny; the instate pride of Minnesota hockey in general will do the trick for that. The RWHA on the other hand will depend on two things to make it go; the largess UAA and UAF will be willing to provide to cover travel costs and the revenues from the conference tournament. UNO cannot begin to offer anything like that. Being in the proposed new WCHA wouldn't "do anything" really for UND. Do you think the Minnesota schools would be willing to let UND host the conference tournament every year? Hells no they wouldn't. The RWHA schools on the other hand won't mind a bit; they're all used to going to a dedicated away site for their tourney. UND also will want the extra home game revenue that seating an additional 22,000 people for a home series provides. UAH gets slotted into the RWHA because nobody else wants them and because the only two other schools in college hockey that understand the need to save them (UAA and UAF) are members. If anything, I'd trade UNO with NMU in order to put the NMU/MTU rivalry in a conference but I doubt the other Michigan schools would really want to see that happen. In all scenarios, UNO is pretty much just "leftovers" and will just have to take what they get.

Anyway, like I said the major impediment to any logical realignment is the level of butthurt from DU. Regardless of that though they really don't have the clout to pull off the imaginary BHHC. One can yap all day about UND, ND and Miami joining DU and CC for that pipe dream but as been pointed out ad infinitum on this board there is no real benefit for ND or Miami to align themselves in such a way. Not to mention that CC doesn't see itself in the same overinflated vain as the DU fan cabal who invented, spread and continue to support the rumor of the "super-six" BHHC as if it is some sort of real possibility.

Why not make this RWHA a 7-team league and include UNO? 24 league game schedule, and 10 or 14 NC games.

[uaafanblog]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

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.

DU and CC will have bus trips ... to each other. And if I'm the A.D. at either of those schools, my guys are flying to Omaha ... not riding on a bus for 9 or 10 hours. Why do people think that much time on a cramped bus is better than flying? UND is the attractive member for any potential conference due to their ability to host a sold-out conference tournament. The WCHA won't need UND to accomplish good revenue from a conference tourny; the instate pride of Minnesota hockey in general will do the trick for that. The RWHA on the other hand will depend on two things to make it go; the largess UAA and UAF will be willing to provide to cover travel costs and the revenues from the conference tournament. UNO cannot begin to offer anything like that. Being in the proposed new WCHA wouldn't "do anything" really for UND. Do you think the Minnesota schools would be willing to let UND host the conference tournament every year? Hells no they wouldn't. The RWHA schools on the other hand won't mind a bit; they're all used to going to a dedicated away site for their tourney. UND also will want the extra home game revenue that seating an additional 22,000 people for a home series provides. UAH gets slotted into the RWHA because nobody else wants them and because the only two other schools in college hockey that understand the need to save them (UAA and UAF) are members. If anything, I'd trade UNO with NMU in order to put the NMU/MTU rivalry in a conference but I doubt the other Michigan schools would really want to see that happen. In all scenarios, UNO is pretty much just "leftovers" and will just have to take what they get.

Anyway, like I said the major impediment to any logical realignment is the level of butthurt from DU. Regardless of that though they really don't have the clout to pull off the imaginary BHHC. One can yap all day about UND, ND and Miami joining DU and CC for that pipe dream but as been pointed out ad infinitum on this board there is no real benefit for ND or Miami to align themselves in such a way. Not to mention that CC doesn't see itself in the same overinflated vain as the DU fan cabal who invented, spread and continue to support the rumor of the "super-six" BHHC as if it is some sort of real possibility.

[Back check]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

You're right - someone will have to go out of their way to help out UAH.

Doesn't look good.

[moose97]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

Moose - couldn't an uneven # of teams in a conference be overcome in order to help save a program?

Well, sure. But that's the problem at this point - someone basically has to go out of their way to "save" UAH. In 2009, there was a logical spot. Now, not so much.

Where do you propose UAH goes at this point? CCHA post BTHC? A cost containment league struggling to keep teams from dropping the sport. WCHA post BTHC? More western-based than before, but concerned about future upheaval. "Super 6" college hockey? Where exactly would UAH fit in then? Not in the Super 6. And not in any of the remnant conferences that would be more cost containment type leagues. If one of these conferences went out and decided to be proactive and "get" UAH, then there's a spot. But the more I talk to people and the more I think on the subject, the more I think UAH missed their chance in 2009. Which is what makes me more frustrated at the CCHA and their stance (lack of transparency) from that time.

[joecct]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

Suffice to say that there is a high degree of probability that there will be some realignment after this season, but what it will be is unknown at this time. However, we need to thank each other for saving the various presidents, conference commissioners, and athletic directors hours of work in coming up with the best fit conference for their college.

[Back check]

Re: Conference Realignment needed for 2012-13 season?

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.



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...



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.

Moose - couldn't an uneven # of teams in a conference be overcome in order to help save a program?