Originally posted by Sol Diablo
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The new WCHA is dead pt2
Collapse
X
-
U-A-A!!!Go!Go!GreenandGold!
Applejack Tells You How UAA Is Doing...
I spell Failure with UAF
Originally posted by UAFIceAngelBut let's be real...There are 40 some other teams and only two alaskan teams...the day one of us wins something big will be the day I transfer to UAAOriginally posted by Doyle WoodyBest sign by a visting Seawolf fan Friday went to a young man who held up a piece of white poster board that read: "YOU CAN'T SPELL FAILURE WITHOUT UAF."
-
Re: The new WCHA is dead pt2
Originally posted by Jimjamesak View PostDid they really? Lol, what a bunch of dumbsh—s! A bunch of mid-majors (at best) asking a Power 5 school to subsidize travel is as dumb as... well, the NCHC telling Notre Dame to give up their NBC deal.
But its probably dumber to ask poor schools to subsidize richer schools. Although I think it was ok to ask, you never know, the deep pockets thing, so I don't blame them.
Comment
-
Re: The new WCHA is dead pt2
Originally posted by moose97 View PostCan we just fast forward a year or dump you now?
Originally posted by moose97 View PostLast I checked, travel to Alaska isn't a requirement for having a DI hockey team [emoji848]“We offer no apology for our location at 64 51’21’’ north latitude. We are building for the future and we are confident that well directed effort and education are the forces which make progress possible”
—UA President Charles E. Bunnell, 1925
Comment
-
Re: The new WCHA is dead pt2
Originally posted by Squarebanks View PostBe our guest. Your ****ant school brings nothing of value to us.
Originally posted by Squarebanks View PostLast I checked, travel to butt-**** MN/MI/OH isn’t a requirement for having a D1 hockey team.Current NCAA D-I rinks I've been to:
AHA:
B1G: UMich, MSU, UMinn, Notre Dame, OSU, UWisc
CCHA: BSU, BG, FSU, LSSU, MSU, MTU, NMU
ECAC:
HEA: UMass
NCHC: Miami, UMD, UND, SCSU, WMU
Independant: ASU
Inactive: UAH, ASU, BSU, UMD, UND, NMU, Notre Dame
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sol Diablo View PostBingo!
But its probably dumber to ask poor schools to subsidize richer schools. Although I think it was ok to ask, you never know, the deep pockets thing, so I don't blame them.U-A-A!!!Go!Go!GreenandGold!
Applejack Tells You How UAA Is Doing...
I spell Failure with UAF
Originally posted by UAFIceAngelBut let's be real...There are 40 some other teams and only two alaskan teams...the day one of us wins something big will be the day I transfer to UAAOriginally posted by Doyle WoodyBest sign by a visting Seawolf fan Friday went to a young man who held up a piece of white poster board that read: "YOU CAN'T SPELL FAILURE WITHOUT UAF."
Comment
-
Re: The new WCHA is dead pt2
Originally posted by Jimjamesak View PostI don’t blame them for asking but to insist upon it as a condition for joining the conference is pretty d- foolish.
Comment
-
Re: The new WCHA is dead pt2
Originally posted by moose97 View PostPay attention. I'm still saying travel costsOriginally Posted by aparch
I love the "UA_" comment. When I see it, I think of re-runs of Match Game, and Gene Rayburn going "U, A, Blank... UA blank"
From ADN:
"According to NCAA, the (UAF) hockey team used ineligible players in every game played from the 2007-08 season to the 2010-11 season. Over that span, the wins and ties will all become losses. 4 wins and 2 ties came against rival UAA".
UAF is 56-86-12 vs. UAA.
Comment
-
Re: The new WCHA is dead pt2
Originally posted by Sean Pickett View PostSo why did they agree to have UAA, UA_ (and UAH) in the nWCHA? Or did they think that travel wouldn't be involved and they finally realized that travel is involved?
As for the UAA and UA_ subsidies I've read a lot here about they do or don't pay a lot, but no one has bothered to post any numbers. I have the NCAA financials for UAA and UA_ from 2010 through 2018 and I was planning to wait until I obtained the 2019 financials (in the next few months) but I've decided to post what I have because of all the back and forth. Here are the reported guarantees paid out by UAA and UA_ for 2009-10 through 2017-18:
The guarantees amount is the total amount paid by each school, the teams column is how many visiting teams they hosted (including an exhibition game each season, but not each other) and the average column is the average each team got if the payouts were equal across all teams. I also look at the reported guarantees received by each of the other nWCHA teams between 2010 and 2018:
As can be seen, before the nWCHA was formed the other 7 schools reported no or less guarantees revenue than the average guarantees paid out by the 2 Alaska schools. Since the nWCHA was formed that has changed. Lake Superior and Northern Michigan have reported higher guarantees revenue than the average paid out by the Alaska schools all 5 seasons, while Michigan Tech has done so for 4 of the 5 seasons. Bemidji State has done so for 3 seasons, Bowling Green for and Ferris State for 2, with Minnesota State only 1 season, but I'm missing information for them for 2017 & 2018.
This limited information indicates that the schools are receiving more from the Alaska schools in the nWCHA than they did in CCHA/oWCHA. However, they only way to get the actual numbers is to request the actual documents through FOIA punblic records requests.
SeanOriginally Posted by aparch
I love the "UA_" comment. When I see it, I think of re-runs of Match Game, and Gene Rayburn going "U, A, Blank... UA blank"
From ADN:
"According to NCAA, the (UAF) hockey team used ineligible players in every game played from the 2007-08 season to the 2010-11 season. Over that span, the wins and ties will all become losses. 4 wins and 2 ties came against rival UAA".
UAF is 56-86-12 vs. UAA.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Suze View PostSo when is Tech going to get booted because teams don't like taking a extra 2 hour bus ride from Marquette? I mean if they don't like it then they shouldn't have to do it.
If rumblings/rumors are correct that the NCAA doesn’t have time to figure out rules to allow Canadian schools who want to play D1 sports, including hockey, what the? Especially when their addition could significantly help struggling smaller marker/geographical challenged schools. Not saying this is a silver bullet, but would appear to give schools some options
Comment
-
Re: The new WCHA is dead pt2
About Friday night (and Saturday, too), I haven't seen any UAH supporters say that MSU ran up the scores this weekend. What is happening is that the calls for Corbett's removal as coach continue to get louder and louder.Michael Napier - UAH '97
uahhockey.com
UAH Chargers Hockey
U.S. National Club Champions - 1982, 1983, 1984
NCAA Division II National Champions - 1996, 1998
CHA Regular Season Champions - 2001, 2003
CHA Tournament Champions - 2007, 2010
Comment
-
Re: The new WCHA is dead pt2
Originally posted by Lost_Husky View PostIt seems like the bigger issue here is given the geographic, demographic, and financial challenges a good number of DI college hockey schools face why doesn’t the NCAA appear to care? If the NCAA is trying so hard to grow college hockey, but it appears apathetic towards a potential 5% contraction, what kind of message does that send?
If rumblings/rumors are correct that the NCAA doesn’t have time to figure out rules to allow Canadian schools who want to play D1 sports, including hockey, what the? Especially when their addition could significantly help struggling smaller marker/geographical challenged schools. Not saying this is a silver bullet, but would appear to give schools some optionsCurrent NCAA D-I rinks I've been to:
AHA:
B1G: UMich, MSU, UMinn, Notre Dame, OSU, UWisc
CCHA: BSU, BG, FSU, LSSU, MSU, MTU, NMU
ECAC:
HEA: UMass
NCHC: Miami, UMD, UND, SCSU, WMU
Independant: ASU
Inactive: UAH, ASU, BSU, UMD, UND, NMU, Notre Dame
Comment
-
Re: The new WCHA is dead pt2
Originally posted by Lost_Husky View PostIt seems like the bigger issue here is given the geographic, demographic, and financial challenges a good number of DI college hockey schools face why doesn’t the NCAA appear to care? If the NCAA is trying so hard to grow college hockey, but it appears apathetic towards a potential 5% contraction, what kind of message does that send?
If rumblings/rumors are correct that the NCAA doesn’t have time to figure out rules to allow Canadian schools who want to play D1 sports, including hockey, what the? Especially when their addition could significantly help struggling smaller marker/geographical challenged schools. Not saying this is a silver bullet, but would appear to give schools some options
Comment
Comment