Re: New WCHA is dead
I'm partially in agreement about creation of the NCHC over Pairwise concerns but it's more of a result that a specific reason.
It was a financial resources decision. The schools that created the NCHC have a history of prioritizing hockey over other sports. And they followed that up with significant monetary support. When the B1G was announced, that left an even number of rich vs less rich schools. The rich schools were seeing they were losing the pull they were used to in the WCHA and they didn't want to be controlled by schools that weren't as interested in increased travel costs, bigger budgets, and more expenses.
Generally, yes you can say that those less rich schools are going to traditionally be lower in the pairwise. Year-to-year, that's usually the case, although there are obviously going to be exceptions each year as teams fluctuate and do well.
Originally posted by moose97
View Post
It was a financial resources decision. The schools that created the NCHC have a history of prioritizing hockey over other sports. And they followed that up with significant monetary support. When the B1G was announced, that left an even number of rich vs less rich schools. The rich schools were seeing they were losing the pull they were used to in the WCHA and they didn't want to be controlled by schools that weren't as interested in increased travel costs, bigger budgets, and more expenses.
Generally, yes you can say that those less rich schools are going to traditionally be lower in the pairwise. Year-to-year, that's usually the case, although there are obviously going to be exceptions each year as teams fluctuate and do well.
Comment