Who's next for a move up to D1?

[MilkUniversity]

I think the question should be who's next to move to D3. The higher costs and sky rocketing prices why would Atlantic/Independent/CCHA teams want to fund hockey? If I am on the board this is the #1 worst ROI

For a number of these colleges, hockey is the biggest sport they have to offer to the community and students. Unfortunately we'll probably see some more cases like Mercyhurst or AIC (I feel like Robert Morris and maybe UAA are most at risk). But still a lot of these schools have large endowments, donor backing, and existing facilities and history to boot that won't just go away.

 

[LordofBrewtown]

Atlantic hockey has no plans for expansion. The board has expressed no interest in adding long island or stonehill.

"On the men's side, the board of directors for Atlantic Hockey America is not looking to add in the immediate future," AHA commissioner Michelle Morgan said" The teams are currently preparing for a 24 league-game schedule in 2028.

'There is a belief among AHA teams that adding teams back, only makes it harder to make the NCAA Tournament.'

I've always thought the way for the smaller conferences to have the most power is fewer members, not more - precisely because of the auto-bid and ability to make the tournament. I understand the concern about having enough members/being strong enough to survive if a program drops; but 12 teams is probably too many, and 8 likely makes more sense. I think the way for them to go is keep membership limited, and have 2 conferences with a scheduling agreement for home/way non-conference games vs one giant conference. Picture 14 teams (or even 12): split into 2 7 team conferences each with an auto bid: they could have 24 conference games (each opponent 4 times, 2 home, 2 away), and say 4 non-conference games against the partner conference (2 home, 2 away), and still have 6 remaining non-conference games available where they could take paydays for away games against the big schools if they wanted to help fund the programs. I know the ECAC would never do it, but really they could split into 2 6 team conferences (ECAC and Ivy) with a scheduling arrangement (contract to re-unify if a school dropped a program) and get another auto-bid.

 

[beaverhockeyfan]

I've always thought the way for the smaller conferences to have the most power is fewer members, not more - precisely because of the auto-bid and ability to make the tournament. I understand the concern about having enough members/being strong enough to survive if a program drops; but 12 teams is probably too many, and 8 likely makes more sense. I think the way for them to go is keep membership limited, and have 2 conferences with a scheduling agreement for home/way non-conference games vs one giant conference. Picture 14 teams (or even 12): split into 2 7 team conferences each with an auto bid: they could have 24 conference games (each opponent 4 times, 2 home, 2 away), and say 4 non-conference games against the partner conference (2 home, 2 away), and still have 6 remaining non-conference games available where they could take paydays for away games against the big schools if they wanted to help fund the programs. I know the ECAC would never do it, but really they could split into 2 6 team conferences (ECAC and Ivy) with a scheduling arrangement (contract to re-unify if a school dropped a program) and get another auto-bid.

That is going to be a very tough sell as for every auto bid you add to the tournament, it means an at large bid that goes away. And the blue bloods don't like that as if they stumble in the conference tournament, there is one less way in for them. When College hockey America and the MAAC/AHA were formed, there was some uproar over those two leagues taking at large bids away from the tournament. Granted, the addition of those leagues/teams allowed the tournament to expand to 16 teams, so unless D-I hockey is going to add more programs, the NCAA will not allow the tournament to expand. The typical threshold for the NCAA is 25% of the teams for the NCAA tournaments, and hockey is right around that, currently.

 

[MLP8415]

The logic of conferences not to grow so they could get at large bids is detrimental to the grown of D1 hockey. I think large conferences should get the at large bids because the top teams would be the best in the conference. Having conferences that do not offer membership will kill the newcomers. Smaller conferences - smaller bids.