Re: New WCHA is dead
I may be (and am frequently) wrong but I thought the B1G has had a policy that dictates the formation of a B1G conference if 6 or more member schools compete at the D1 level in any sport and all member schools playing in said sport are obligated to compete in the B1G unless there is no B1G conference in that sport.
If that is the case, as soon as Terry Pegula bought Penn State a team, the 6-team requirement was met and the other five had no choice but to leave the WCHA and CCHA.
IMHO neither the WCHA (10 teams) nor the CCHA (8 teams) would have folded. Both had a good mix of schools and other than the AK schools they had relatively easy travel. Having the AK schools split between the tow made having them in conference a bit more tolerable.
So, if I am right about the B1G, I lay the responsibility of this whole mess squarely at the feet of DU and UND as the Nacho instigators.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Originally posted by icehawk
View Post
If that is the case, as soon as Terry Pegula bought Penn State a team, the 6-team requirement was met and the other five had no choice but to leave the WCHA and CCHA.
IMHO neither the WCHA (10 teams) nor the CCHA (8 teams) would have folded. Both had a good mix of schools and other than the AK schools they had relatively easy travel. Having the AK schools split between the tow made having them in conference a bit more tolerable.
So, if I am right about the B1G, I lay the responsibility of this whole mess squarely at the feet of DU and UND as the Nacho instigators.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Comment