Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New WCHA is dead

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: New WCHA is dead

    It was alluded to earlier in the thread but none of these schools are apparently eligible for B1G membership. What requirement do they not meet? Johns Hopkins is a B1G lacrosse member so I am not sure what would be stopping the B1G from taking on one of these programs to get to 8 members. We already have Notre Dame.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Pirateasaur View Post
      It was alluded to earlier in the thread but none of these schools are apparently eligible for B1G membership. What requirement do they not meet? ...
      “Demolish the bridges behind you… then there is no choice but to build again.”

      Live Radio from 100.3

      Comment


      • Re: New WCHA is dead

        Originally posted by aparch View Post
        You said it yourself: the NCHC was born from a failed power grab before it. These same NCHC schools were growing bitter with having to split the Final Five golden goose egg every year with the likes of MTU, UAA. Add in BSU in 2009 for the 2011 season, and all the grumbling finally came to a head.

        In hindsight, the NCHC schools had one foot out the door since the CHA exodus occurred in 2009, because they didn't want "more of *those* schools" taking their precious nest egg.


        *The exception is Miami, who wasn't getting a dime from the CCHA because NONE of the schools saw a Super Six check. That money went to pay for the fan experience and league award banquet during the finals.
        It's been well documented why the NCHC came about. Two of the major revenue producing schools in the conference left. That meant there were fewer schools producing revenue for the conference. The commissioner, who frankly was and is an idiot, refused to recognize this and basically recommended a "stay the course" narrative. The small schools in the conference, liking the austerity approach, negotiated a deal to extend his contract without even bothering to tell schools like UND and DU. So their response was basically, if you like him and his approach so much, have at it. We're going a different direction.

        You'd have a pretty tough time convincing anyone in the NCHC, or for that matter anyone who really understands college hockey, that those eight schools made a bad decision. In fact, they made a very good decision. That the remaining WCHA teams are only now just learning that DU and UND were right when they questioned McLeod's approach isn't the NCHC teams' fault.

        I don't blame the seven teams who are forming a separate league. They are doing what's best for their programs. Yeah, it sucks for those left behind. I feel more for the fans and players than I do for the programs, since the programs have a choice as to how much they want to invest to create a successful program with whom other programs want to associate.
        That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by aparch View Post
          I mean, probably, yeah. I figure it will never happen because of that but I was wondering if there is some actual written rule that makes it impossible.

          Comment


          • Re: New WCHA is dead

            Thank you SJHovey; as a CCHA fan, I didn't have my ear to the ground on the WCHA's problems. I knew it had come out later there were issues, but I didnt recall all of the behind the scenes problems. The CCHA was in a similar boat by losing their two "big" schools (tOSU was never treated like MI/MSU). Hell, our commissioner bailed two days after the B1G conference was announced.

            Obviously it was more tilted to the small schools in the CCHA, because with UNO, MI, MSU, and tOSU leaving, you were left with Notre Dame, Miami, WMU, a very large financial gap FSU/NMU/UAF, BGSU, then LSSU.
            “Demolish the bridges behind you… then there is no choice but to build again.”

            Live Radio from 100.3

            Comment


            • Re: New WCHA is dead

              Originally posted by gfmorris View Post
              Really?! It always felt to me, an alumnus and supporter of the hockey program, that UAH was included in the WCHA purely because those nine schools likely couldn't handle the guilt and reputation hit of being the school to reject a program when a quasi-new conference was being filled in a time where there's no value in having 9 teams instead of 10 (can't build a balanced schedule) and while UAH made the argument — I've seen the proposal, it's prominent —*that admitting the Chargers limited the amount of times that nWCHA teams would do the Alaska double.

              The timing couldn't suck more for any of the three schools. Alaska's budget woes are well-documented; UAH just put their (useless and sometimes actively destructive) AD (who ignored warnings that this was coming) out to pasture and just changed Presidents.

              GFM
              Right, I think we are saying the same thing. The WCHA added the Alaskas and UAH not because they particularly wanted to be in a conference with those three schools, but because no one else wanted to be in a conference with them, either, and the WCHA was the last dance partner to fill out their dance card. There's just as much (technical) room in the NCHC or Big 10 to add schools. I think it's fair for the rest of the WCHA to say "If there's anyone out there this matters to, help out. If not, we've done what we can do."

              And, to the point below that there's no "College Hockey" monolith and that there are just 60 schools orbiting around each other- isn't this the whole point of College Hockey, Inc.? Wouldn't the sport be better off if that organization was proactively helping to rescue three extant college programs, either by brokering a scheduling deal, or helping raise money to subsidize travel, or whatever, rather than sponsoring "feasibility studies" at schools that will never start hockey that end up lining the pockets of consulting firms with high level ties to College Hockey, Inc.?

              Comment


              • Re: New WCHA is dead

                Originally posted by AMC View Post
                Right, I think we are saying the same thing. The WCHA added the Alaskas and UAH not because they particularly wanted to be in a conference with those three schools, but because no one else wanted to be in a conference with them, either, and the WCHA was the last dance partner to fill out their dance card. There's just as much (technical) room in the NCHC or Big 10 to add schools. I think it's fair for the rest of the WCHA to say "If there's anyone out there this matters to, help out. If not, we've done what we can do."

                And, to the point below that there's no "College Hockey" monolith and that there are just 60 schools orbiting around each other- isn't this the whole point of College Hockey, Inc.? Wouldn't the sport be better off if that organization was proactively helping to rescue three extant college programs, either by brokering a scheduling deal, or helping raise money to subsidize travel, or whatever, rather than sponsoring "feasibility studies" at schools that will never start hockey that end up lining the pockets of consulting firms with high level ties to College Hockey, Inc.?
                College Hockey Inc exists as a loophole to deal with kids in Canada and Major Jr concerns so those kids have a place to go to get their info and reach out before they lose NCAA eligibility.
                Michigan Tech Legend, Founder of Mitch's Misfits, Co-Founder of Tech Hockey Guide, and Creator/Host of the Chasing MacNaughton Podcast covering MTU Hockey and the WCHA.

                Sports Allegiance: NFL: GB MLB: MIL NHL: MIN CB: UW CF: UW CH: MTU FIFA: USA MLS: MIN EPL: Everton

                Comment


                • Re: New WCHA is dead

                  And, to the point below that there's no "College Hockey" monolith and that there are just 60 schools orbiting around each other- isn't this the whole point of College Hockey, Inc.? Wouldn't the sport be better off if that organization was proactively helping to rescue three extant college programs, either by brokering a scheduling deal, or helping raise money to subsidize travel, or whatever, rather than sponsoring "feasibility studies" at schools that will never start hockey that end up lining the pockets of consulting firms with high level ties to College Hockey, Inc.?
                  +1 on that.

                  Comment


                  • Re: New WCHA is dead

                    Originally posted by Shirtless Guy View Post
                    College Hockey Inc exists as a loophole to deal with kids in Canada and Major Jr concerns so those kids have a place to go to get their info and reach out before they lose NCAA eligibility.
                    http://www.collegiateconsulting.com/...bility-studies

                    Atlanta-based Collegiate Consulting recently completed a unique, six-month study for five universities as part of an effort by the National Hockey League (NHL), the National Hockey League Players’ Assocation (NHLPA) and College Hockey, Inc., to expand college hockey.
                    They also exist as a funnel to move NHL money to Collegiate Consulting, apparently.

                    Comment


                    • Re: New WCHA is dead

                      Originally posted by AMC View Post
                      http://www.collegiateconsulting.com/...bility-studies



                      They also exist as a funnel to move NHL money to Collegiate Consulting, apparently.
                      sure, thats relatively new, it was founded out of a need to allow contact to circumvent NCAA rules because of MJ issues which are unique to college hockey.
                      Michigan Tech Legend, Founder of Mitch's Misfits, Co-Founder of Tech Hockey Guide, and Creator/Host of the Chasing MacNaughton Podcast covering MTU Hockey and the WCHA.

                      Sports Allegiance: NFL: GB MLB: MIL NHL: MIN CB: UW CF: UW CH: MTU FIFA: USA MLS: MIN EPL: Everton

                      Comment


                      • Re: New WCHA is dead

                        Originally posted by JohnsonsJerseys View Post
                        The NCHC needs to get off their high horse and offer a conference home to one of the AK schools and maybe add ASU to even out their number if they so choose. (I still don't think ASU is the desirable add some folks seem to think they are. If they were such a hot commodity they would be in a conference now, rink or not.) The Secret Seven needs to be thankful they only have to travel once to AK in a season and accept ONE of the AK schools back into their new conference as well.
                        ...why? Why would the NCHC ever take one of these teams with the lone exception being pitty? Neither AK schools nor UAH bring anything of value to the NCHC.
                        "In heaven there is no beer. NO BEER! That's why we drink it here. RIGHT HERE!"

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Pirateasaur View Post
                          I mean, probably, yeah. I figure it will never happen because of that but I was wondering if there is some actual written rule that makes it impossible.
                          If there is a rule, it’s that they need to be an AAU member. Every full member except Nebraska is in it, and they were in it until a couple months after they joined. Johns Hopkins is in it as well.

                          Notre Dame is not, but I believe they’re on the cusp, they should be in the Big Ten anyway, and they’re Notre Dame.

                          If ASU gets an invite, it’ll be due to the Big Ten/Pac 12 relationship. But I think they’re out of luck with Illinois nearing announcement because I can’t see them wanting to go with a 9 team conference.
                          Go Green! Go White! Go State!

                          1966, 1986, 2007

                          Go Tigers, Go Packers, Go Red Wings, Go Pistons

                          Comment


                          • Re: New WCHA is dead

                            As a fan, I’m heartbroken for the fans in Alaska & Alabama that need these conference affiliations for their program’s scheduling and survival. These relationships are part of the life blood of any program. For me, I’ve enjoyed these trips so much and they’re part of the charm of college hockey.

                            As a person who worked in front offices and crunched numbers and travel budgets and travel arrangements in the minor pros and with sixteen years working in college hockey (not number crunching), and having a pretty good idea what goes into it, I know that this isn’t a sustainable business model on either side of the equation, for the 7 or the 3. And for the athletes, the fatigue factor for all involved is a negative. I know how wiped out I am after those trips, and I haven’t stepped on the rink, sprinted end to end or got crushed into the glass in the corner. As for Alabama-Huntsville, from Day 1 I was a big proponent of their inclusion in the league, given my hockey ties to the state. I’m of strong belief that they could be a very competitive program if they had a competitive recruiting budget, a commitment to fly everywhere except BG & Ferris (24 hour bus trips the day before a playoff opener don’t set you up for success) would aid recruitment as well. Can you imagine other coaches competing with, “Would you rather bus to Mankato or fly to Huntsville?” I’ve had similar conversations over the past six years with people around the UAH program. The final piece is they need a competitive facility. The VBC is one of the lowest rates facilities in the league. They have improved their space over the past few years, but the visitors space in most WCHA rinks is better than what the VBC offers the home team. It ranks below just about everyone but Anchorage in that regard. And UAH is the #2 tenant in that barn and is treated as such. And the VBC offers no support for visitors. (We were halfway to dinner after our Saturday game and notified we had to come back and clear out our room because of an upcoming event at VBC).

                            At the final CCHA Celebration, Ron Mason told me, “This is great for the Big Ten. It’s bad for college hockey.” He was 100% right.

                            Attendance has dropped big time and the conference tournaments in the west were destroyed. And those regional rivalries and David vs Goliath game were pushed from the forefront to the back burner.

                            On one hand, I’m not happy about it. We are rapidly losing what has made college hockey great. But on the other, I completely understand the decision.

                            I sincerely hope that these schools are able to find a path to move forward.
                            Last edited by davyd83; 07-03-2019, 12:07 PM.
                            "The use of common sense and logic will not be tolerated and may result in fine and/or suspension."- Western Professional Hockey League By-laws. 1999-2000.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by TheRevengeance View Post
                              How does the narrative that the NCHC hand picked all the good teams then packed up and left keep propagating? It's been pretty well established that after the B1G teams pulled out the small schools realized they had a numbers advantage and intended to use it to bring everybody else to their level and cut back spending. Of course the teams that are nationally competitive year in and year out are going to look for other options at that point. The break off is just as much the small schools' fault as anybody else's, they tried to take advantage of the new reality and it backfired on them. And in the end they kind of did get what they wanted, their conference with a small budget full of financially "like minded" schools, losing the teams they wanted to play with was the price they paid for it. And now many of those same schools are back here as the ringleaders yet again. The NCHC may have been a power grab by a number of schools, but it was born from a failed power grab before it.
                              So... the narrative is exactly what you said it was? It keeps propagating because its true... you just said as such
                              BS UML '04, PhD UConn '09

                              Jerseys I would like to have:
                              Skating Friar Jersey
                              AIC Yellowjacket Jersey w/ Yellowjacket logo on front
                              UAF Jersey w/ Polar Bear on Front
                              Army Black Knight logo jersey


                              NCAA Men's Division 1 Simulation Primer

                              Comment


                              • Re: New WCHA is dead

                                Originally posted by AMC View Post
                                Right, I think we are saying the same thing. The WCHA added the Alaskas and UAH not because they particularly wanted to be in a conference with those three schools, but because no one else wanted to be in a conference with them, either, and the WCHA was the last dance partner to fill out their dance card. There's just as much (technical) room in the NCHC or Big 10 to add schools. I think it's fair for the rest of the WCHA to say "If there's anyone out there this matters to, help out. If not, we've done what we can do."
                                So your presumption is that the concept is, "We've carried them this far but no further." I can accept that.

                                GFM
                                Geof F. Morris
                                UAH BSE MAE 2002
                                UAHHockey.com

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X