Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

WCHA offseason thread 2017.

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

  • giwan
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    Originally posted by Revs89.2 View Post
    If this were to happen and you are an 11 team league, it opens many additional opportunities. Are there 3-game series and some 2? A bunch of 4's (home and home) and a mix of 2 games series? Do the playoffs stay at 8? Although I guess the Alaska situation plays into it as well. Naples will be interesting to see what comes out of there.
    Playoff should stay at 8, you get home ice, you want in earn it. The mix of games can vary as need be

    Leave a comment:


  • John J. MacInnes
    replied
    Originally posted by Shirtless Guy View Post
    Miami, North Dakota, Penn State, NMU, BC, Lowell, Quinnipiac?
    You left out UNH, Vermont, and (if you combine the two) Canisius.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squarebanks
    replied
    Originally posted by net presence View Post
    It's my understanding that ASU has applied to the WCHA and, will present a proposal that includes a fairly significant travel cost coverage -- similar to what the Alaska's and Huntsville currently provide to the league -- at the meetings in Naples later this month. It's also my understanding that their acceptance is basically a done deal. I've also heard a plan for a new arena will be announced either at that time or, shortly afterwards. I haven't heard any information regarding conditions (buy out or not) on long-term membership. Nor, have I heard anything about how their addition may or may not affect the playoff format. I also haven't heard of any other teams joining. From what I've heard, the NCHC doesn't have any interest in adding Mankato in the near future so, my understanding is they're in the WCHA for the foreseeable future. Do I trust my sourcing? Absolutely. Have I been wrong before based on their info? Absolutely.....

    Now, if other things that are rumored to possibly be occurring (UND to B10) actually do occur, does that affect the long-term stability of the league? Yes, then all bets are off..... So, much like most statements on these forums, take them for what they're worth.
    I've heard the exact same thing about ASU coming into the WCHA.

    Leave a comment:


  • Revs89.2
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    Originally posted by manurespreader View Post
    Well given they subsidize travel I can see it. I wonder how this will affect the number of games.
    If this were to happen and you are an 11 team league, it opens many additional opportunities. Are there 3-game series and some 2? A bunch of 4's (home and home) and a mix of 2 games series? Do the playoffs stay at 8? Although I guess the Alaska situation plays into it as well. Naples will be interesting to see what comes out of there.

    Leave a comment:


  • manurespreader
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    Originally posted by Deman View Post
    I wouldn't be surprised at all if they ended up in the WCHA. There was so much hullabaloo surrounding the commish's trip to ASU that I think it was inevitable (unless the B1G decided to let them join, but this was before they denied them).

    But I do hope that, in addition to the travel dollars, that their acceptance is contingent on ASU putting shovels to dirt & getting an arena built. Not just a plan, look what happened with the Coyote's deal, but actual, tangible proof that an arena is being constructed.
    Well given they subsidize travel I can see it. I wonder how this will affect the number of games.

    Leave a comment:


  • davyd83
    replied
    Originally posted by Deman View Post
    I wouldn't be surprised at all if they ended up in the WCHA. There was so much hullabaloo surrounding the commish's trip to ASU that I think it was inevitable (unless the B1G decided to let them join, but this was before they denied them).

    But I do hope that, in addition to the travel dollars, that their acceptance is contingent on ASU putting shovels to dirt & getting an arena built. Not just a plan, look what happened with the Coyote's deal, but actual, tangible proof that an arena is being constructed.
    I'm calling first dibs on Alaska trips in October & early November, Arizona in January and Huntsville mid February!

    Leave a comment:


  • Deman
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    Originally posted by net presence View Post
    It's my understanding that ASU has applied to the WCHA and, will present a proposal that includes a fairly significant travel cost coverage -- similar to what the Alaska's and Huntsville currently provide to the league -- at the meetings in Naples later this month. It's also my understanding that their acceptance is basically a done deal. I've also heard a plan for a new arena will be announced either at that time or, shortly afterwards. I haven't heard any information regarding conditions (buy out or not) on long-term membership. Nor, have I heard anything about how their addition may or may not affect the playoff format. I also haven't heard of any other teams joining. From what I've heard, the NCHC doesn't have any interest in adding Mankato in the near future so, my understanding is they're in the WCHA for the foreseeable future. Do I trust my sourcing? Absolutely. Have I been wrong before based on their info? Absolutely.....

    Now, if other things that are rumored to possibly be occurring (UND to B10) actually do occur, does that affect the long-term stability of the league? Yes, then all bets are off..... So, much like most statements on these forums, take them for what they're worth.
    I wouldn't be surprised at all if they ended up in the WCHA. There was so much hullabaloo surrounding the commish's trip to ASU that I think it was inevitable (unless the B1G decided to let them join, but this was before they denied them).

    But I do hope that, in addition to the travel dollars, that their acceptance is contingent on ASU putting shovels to dirt & getting an arena built. Not just a plan, look what happened with the Coyote's deal, but actual, tangible proof that an arena is being constructed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Revs89.2
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    Originally posted by net presence View Post
    It's my understanding that ASU has applied to the WCHA and, will present a proposal that includes a fairly significant travel cost coverage -- similar to what the Alaska's and Huntsville currently provide to the league -- at the meetings in Naples later this month. It's also my understanding that their acceptance is basically a done deal. I've also heard a plan for a new arena will be announced either at that time or, shortly afterwards. I haven't heard any information regarding conditions (buy out or not) on long-term membership. Nor, have I heard anything about how their addition may or may not affect the playoff format. I also haven't heard of any other teams joining. From what I've heard, the NCHC doesn't have any interest in adding Mankato in the near future so, my understanding is they're in the WCHA for the foreseeable future. Do I trust my sourcing? Absolutely. Have I been wrong before based on their info? Absolutely.....

    Now, if other things that are rumored to possibly be occurring (UND to B10) actually do occur, does that affect the long-term stability of the league? Yes, then all bets are off..... So, much like most statements on these forums, take them for what they're worth.
    This ^^^

    Leave a comment:


  • net presence
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    It's my understanding that ASU has applied to the WCHA and, will present a proposal that includes a fairly significant travel cost coverage -- similar to what the Alaska's and Huntsville currently provide to the league -- at the meetings in Naples later this month. It's also my understanding that their acceptance is basically a done deal. I've also heard a plan for a new arena will be announced either at that time or, shortly afterwards. I haven't heard any information regarding conditions (buy out or not) on long-term membership. Nor, have I heard anything about how their addition may or may not affect the playoff format. I also haven't heard of any other teams joining. From what I've heard, the NCHC doesn't have any interest in adding Mankato in the near future so, my understanding is they're in the WCHA for the foreseeable future. Do I trust my sourcing? Absolutely. Have I been wrong before based on their info? Absolutely.....

    Now, if other things that are rumored to possibly be occurring (UND to B10) actually do occur, does that affect the long-term stability of the league? Yes, then all bets are off..... So, much like most statements on these forums, take them for what they're worth.

    Leave a comment:


  • Revs89.2
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    Originally posted by manurespreader View Post
    A lot of this boils down to finances. So a few unrelated observations.

    I don't think anyone is going to put asu in their league unless there is a rink under construction. I also don't think the WCHA is going to be a destination for them because they turned down the WCHA last year.
    I think we ought to schedule atlantic hockey when we can because otherwise, as this year shows, we could end up below them in the power.
    I'd like to see a few more ECAC schools in our schedule.
    I'm sure a number of teams are interested in reducing the costs of transportation... So you can figure that Mankato is as good as gone. Just one year or maybe two later than planned. And when they are gone, the NCHC will get on their high horse and tell people it won't hurt the rest of college hockey.
    I wonder how the NCHC teams feel about additional travel to Phoenix on top of what is already a difficult schedule.
    The total BS that the fine gentleman from north dakota, Schlossmann puts out, about the NCHC caring about the rest of college hockey, is laughable.
    I don't think teams will continue to schedule ASU in Arizona long term without a new rink.
    I hope the league, after this years' playoffs, is more stable financially and I'm pretty sure they are. I'm hoping like crazy that translates into more help for the struggling teams and a better league performance nationally.
    I think we have seen that the two for ones with the B1g are not a good deal for us. I think they will be fewer and fewer going forward as we get some substitute teams to play. I hope the ones we do are paid more highly, in effect requiring the big to subsidize some of our teams.
    I'm somewhat surprised the big would go to 7 teams unless there is some other motivation.
    Regarding ASU, I think you will be getting your conference/arena announcements much sooner than you imagine. But I do love your interest and opinions on the program. If both our schools are in Vegas next year and you go, first round of drinks are on me!

    Leave a comment:


  • manurespreader
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    A lot of this boils down to finances. So a few unrelated observations.

    I don't think anyone is going to put asu in their league unless there is a rink under construction. I also don't think the WCHA is going to be a destination for them because they turned down the WCHA last year.
    I think we ought to schedule atlantic hockey when we can because otherwise, as this year shows, we could end up below them in the power.
    I'd like to see a few more ECAC schools in our schedule.
    I'm sure a number of teams are interested in reducing the costs of transportation... So you can figure that Mankato is as good as gone. Just one year or maybe two later than planned. And when they are gone, the NCHC will get on their high horse and tell people it won't hurt the rest of college hockey.
    I wonder how the NCHC teams feel about additional travel to Phoenix on top of what is already a difficult schedule.
    The total BS that the fine gentleman from north dakota, Schlossmann puts out, about the NCHC caring about the rest of college hockey, is laughable.
    I don't think teams will continue to schedule ASU in Arizona long term without a new rink.
    I hope the league, after this years' playoffs, is more stable financially and I'm pretty sure they are. I'm hoping like crazy that translates into more help for the struggling teams and a better league performance nationally.
    I think we have seen that the two for ones with the B1g are not a good deal for us. I think they will be fewer and fewer going forward as we get some substitute teams to play. I hope the ones we do are paid more highly, in effect requiring the big to subsidize some of our teams.
    I'm somewhat surprised the big would go to 7 teams unless there is some other motivation.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shirtless Guy
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    Originally posted by JohnsonsJerseys View Post
    If each WCHA team played 6 NC games and won them all, no one would be worried about playing more NC games. It is only the recent lack of NC success that brings up this discussion and desire to play more NC games. Playing 12 NC games each and going 25-90-5 in those games isn't going to help anything. If you win 75% of your NC games, suddenly the WCHA gets the "NCHC effect" where playing more conference games builds your PWR because everyone did their job in NC play.
    Ryan J
    IF each team played 6 NC games and won them all, there would be no point in adding more...we'd probably get 4 teams in the tournament just based on that information alone.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohnsonsJerseys
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    If each WCHA team played 6 NC games and won them all, no one would be worried about playing more NC games. It is only the recent lack of NC success that brings up this discussion and desire to play more NC games. Playing 12 NC games each and going 25-90-5 in those games isn't going to help anything. If you win 75% of your NC games, suddenly the WCHA gets the "NCHC effect" where playing more conference games builds your PWR because everyone did their job in NC play.
    Ryan J

    Leave a comment:


  • Deman
    replied
    Re: WCHA offseason thread 2017.

    Originally posted by Shirtless Guy View Post
    Say that all you want but I don't think we're really that worried about BSU, MSU, or BGSU all 3 are located very close to a couple NCHC teams so they are desirable. It is impressive that NMU has gotten some 1 for 1s with both UMD and UNO. But what about FSU, LSSU, UAH, and the Alaska schools?
    As for LSSU, we had an away series with UNO, not sure if there is some sort of reciprocation there anytime soon. We are rumored to be playing Denver sometime in the next few years, don't think I've heard any specifics, but I think it's a home series for us. We've also played away at NoDak recently, but haven't heard anything about hosting them either.

    So, LSSU has had a few cracks at different NCHC teams too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Squarebanks
    replied
    Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
    Ferris has had Home & Homes with Western the past two years. Huntsville had a swap with Colorado College. The two Alaska early season tournaments/showcases had been their home non-conference play.
    UAA had a home and home with Penn State recently, and we did a home and home with Western Michigan since the split.

    I've heard we have to play UAA six times next season (with two games as a non-conference home and home). I think that blows for a variety of reasons (doesn't really do anything to elevate either program, and does jack squat to help out the conference in PWR), but times are tough right now and it saves some coin.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X