Save Uah Hockey!

[BlueDevil98]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

From what I've read, the CCHA people were upset at the WCHA - not for doing what they did in taking UNO -- but by doing so and claiming that it was for the "good of college hockey" -- while really, it was just to make their own league stronger. It wasn't for the "good of college hockey" to take UNO. Sure, it helped Bemidji out - but if the WCHA were purely just trying to help college hockey, there were numerous other things it could've done that wouldn't have been as damaging to the CCHA.

The bottom line again is, the WCHA, UNO, CCHA, etc... all did what was best for them at the time they did it. Or at least what they think is sincerely best for them. Let's not try to make ANYONE seem more noble than anyone else. This is where the defense of the CCHA comes in. Me, and lots of other people, wished the CCHA would take UAH - and don't want to see UAH disappear ... we are merely defending the CCHA from attacks that aren't fair.


I don't see it that way at all. I don't think anyone I saw has shifted blame to the WCHA. I think it was made pretty clear that there is no bad guy at all. The decision just is what it is. Please show me where blame was attempted to be shifted to anyone else? Defending the CCHA from being attacked for acting in its own best interests, by pointing out how others have done the same, is NOT a "shifting of blame."

First, I'd ask you to reread what I wrote. I expect schools to act in their best interests. Like I said, that's fine and to be expected, and it's fine if the UAH decision was in the CCHA's best interest. You may find it a fake excuse in believing that the WCHA was only acting in its best interests, but for many UAH fans, and college hockey fans in general, saving BSU's program was also in the "best interest of college hockey." We're sorry if the CCHA feels that it was hurt in the process, but many of us do not find this to be a zero-sum event. Even if UAH folds, we believe that BSU is worth saving and that the cost to CCHA (in losing a member who was all-too-willing to leave) was not high in the process.

In the meantime, feel free to protect CCHA from "unfair" attacks. In response, I will feel free to criticize the CCHA for its decision because I think that the only team that's getting the "unfair" treatment to me is UAH. So, I'm sorry if I didn't find the CCHA's public-stated reasons to be legitimate (as countless articles and posts have debunked these reasons). And as for the reasons given by Weston, I apologize if I don't find her tin-foil hat BTHC excuse to be legitimate. And please forgive us if we don't buy her argument that accepting UAH would lead to the death of countless small school programs.

But just look at what I asked the CCHA to do. I asked for transparency and honesty. That's it. If they can't drop the BS (such as ridiculously vague and rather insulting comments about UAH's "lack of commitment" to hockey) and start giving some honest answers, they deserve to be attacked. And that's what I call, "fair."

[unwicurnirm]

Last Page

Glad they won their last game. However, one has to do a lot of twisting and turning to say they went out winners. Appears about 46 of those that took the poll on the home page knew what they were talking about. I was not one of them.
_________________
Auto Europe

[wsp67326]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

It totally sucks for UAH, and I and everyone I know sympathizes with them wholeheartedly. I wish they were playing in the CCHA next season. But that does not mean I will attack the CCHA as villains for their decision.

Hmm, so if there are two people drowning, and two possible lifeguards out there to save them both, and one lifeguard saves the first person, albeit upsetting his standard routine and getting himself wet, yet the other lifeguard decides that upsetting the status quo and the cost of him getting wet is too high, even though he's been getting wet for years, the first lifeguard is not to be looked upon as a savior, and the second is not to be looked upon as a villain? Oh, but we supporters of the second drowning person are all conspiracy theorists; my bad.

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

Hmm, so if there are two people drowning, and two possible lifeguards out there to save them both, and one lifeguard saves the first person, albeit upsetting his standard routine and getting himself wet, yet the other lifeguard decides that upsetting the status quo and the cost of him getting wet is too high, even though he's been getting wet for years, the first lifeguard is not to be looked upon as a savior, and the second is not to be looked upon as a villain? Oh, but we supporters of the second drowning person are all conspiracy theorists; my bad.

The problem with analogies like this is that they're rarely "apples to apples". You haven't considered the fact that lifeguard #2 might be losing a limb or two in the near future, and he doesn't want to jump in just yet until he knows that he'll actually be able to save the drowning person when he jumps in.

[Larch]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

The problem with analogies like this is that they're rarely "apples to apples". You haven't considered the fact that lifeguard #2 might be losing a limb or two in the near future, and he doesn't want to jump in just yet until he knows that he'll actually be able to save the drowning person when he jumps in.

So person number two dies because lifeguard #2 might lose a limb? Also, I willing to be that since lifeguard #2 is...well a lifeguard, they can swim better with one arm than the person who is currently drowning.

The problem with using analogies to explain is analogies is that it can be full of holes...which may have lead to the two potential drownings.

[streaker]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

First, I'd ask you to reread what I wrote. I expect schools to act in their best interests. Like I said, that's fine and to be expected, and it's fine if the UAH decision was in the CCHA's best interest. You may find it a fake excuse in believing that the WCHA was only acting in its best interests, but for many UAH fans, and college hockey fans in general, saving BSU's program was also in the "best interest of college hockey." We're sorry if the CCHA feels that it was hurt in the process, but many of us do not find this to be a zero-sum event. Even if UAH folds, we believe that BSU is worth saving and that the cost to CCHA (in losing a member who was all-too-willing to leave) was not high in the process.

In the meantime, feel free to protect CCHA from "unfair" attacks. In response, I will feel free to criticize the CCHA for its decision because I think that the only team that's getting the "unfair" treatment to me is UAH. So, I'm sorry if I didn't find the CCHA's public-stated reasons to be legitimate (as countless articles and posts have debunked these reasons). And as for the reasons given by Weston, I apologize if I don't find her tin-foil hat BTHC excuse to be legitimate. And please forgive us if we don't buy her argument that accepting UAH would lead to the death of countless small school programs.

But just look at what I asked the CCHA to do. I asked for transparency and honesty. That's it. If they can't drop the BS (such as ridiculously vague and rather insulting comments about UAH's "lack of commitment" to hockey) and start giving some honest answers, they deserve to be attacked. And that's what I call, "fair."

So this has now become a circular argument. W fans claim that taking on UNO and BSU was not necessarily in their best interests, but in the best interests of college hockey, where the CCHA is purely being self serving and ignorant in their reason spin for rejecting UAH. I get it now.

This has evolved to Howard Dean versus Sarah Palin.

[tnlong]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

....This has evolved to Howard Dean versus Sarah Palin.

Note that evolution doesn't exist in a Palin world.

[streaker]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

Note that evolution doesn't exist in a Palin world.

That's true. On both accounts.

[wnickelson]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

Not that there are many (if any) here, but there are now women's shirts available, as well as the other buttons, in the saveuahhockey.com shop available via the link on saveuahhockey.com.

[BlueDevil98]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

So this has now become a circular argument. W fans claim that taking on UNO and BSU was not necessarily in their best interests, but in the best interests of college hockey, where the CCHA is purely being self serving and ignorant in their reason spin for rejecting UAH. I get it now.

This has evolved to Howard Dean versus Sarah Palin.

Again, I didn't say that. I said that they acted in their own best interests, and in the eyes of many fans, ALSO in the best interests of college hockey. And I didn't say that the CCHA was being self-serving and ignorant--I only requested a little transparency in the process. If the decision were a little more transparent and honest, then by nature, we would know exactly what is going on, instead of the endless speculation that we've had on message boards and in the press.

I mean, what the hell?!? I didn't even require that the CCHA accept UAH to do the "right thing," I only asked them to be more transparent and honest with them. When it comes to the death of a program, I didn't realize that this transparency and honesty was costing the CCHA that much.

Ugh, I'm done with this.

[BlueDevil98]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

This has evolved to Howard Dean versus Sarah Palin.

When it comes to two people who completely don't understand where the other is coming from, I'll have to agree.

[streaker]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

Again, I didn't say that. I said that they acted in their own best interests, and in the eyes of many fans, ALSO in the best interests of college hockey. And I didn't say that the CCHA was being self-serving and ignorant--I only requested a little transparency in the process. If the decision were a little more transparent and honest, then by nature, we would know exactly what is going on, instead of the endless speculation that we've had on message boards and in the press.

I mean, what the hell?!? I didn't even require that the CCHA accept UAH to do the "right thing," I only asked them to be more transparent and honest with them. When it comes to the death of a program, I didn't realize that this transparency and honesty was costing the CCHA that much.

Ugh, I'm done with this.

I didn't target my comments specifically to you.

Maybe that is because the assumption is, the CCHA owes everybody a valid explanation as to why they rejected UAH at this time, instead of the vague mumbling coming out of certain pockets of the CCHA. The only one they owe anything to is the UAH administration.

[streaker]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

When it comes to two people who completely don't understand where the other is coming from, I'll have to agree.

Maybe. But it would be good to wait until all of the dust settles before jumping to a conclusion.

In reference to my example, there are people on two polar opposites of this argument, maybe out of misunderstanding and maybe just out of spite.

[gfmorris]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

Point of fact: if you're presuming that there's been no contact between UAH and the CCHA since the initial round of quotes after the rejection, you're wrong. I am not at liberty to elaborate more, but know that dialogue has continued...

GFM

[cooperalls]

Re: Save Uah Hockey!

Dialogue like???

CCHA Commish: We will reconsider UAH if they would play all CCHA games on the road until your rink is completed?

UAH AD: Yup!

CCHA Commish: Let me check with the AD's and coaches in the CCHA and see if that would be acceptable, I'll get back to you.

Click

Point of fact: if you're presuming that there's been no contact between UAH and the CCHA since the initial round of quotes after the rejection, you're wrong. I am not at liberty to elaborate more, but know that dialogue has continued...

GFM