This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
An equivalent position? I think not! He'd be going to the WCHA!!
Suze is right.Assistant coaching positions are so prestigious in the WCHA that they have been known to attract head coaches from struggling wanna-be programs...even from with-in.
Regarding our assistant coaches. There is probably little chance that the Nook head coach position opens up in the foreseeable future. They certainly know that. Plus, I would assume that working under different coaches, systems, and within different recruiting circles makes an assistant that much more valuable and prepared for the next level.
It would probably benefit our program to pick up an assistant coach with some new, radical ideas...like scoring. I know nothing about either assistant coach or what their responsibilities are. Both seem competent and professional. Personally, I would occasionally like to see a little more emotion from the bench, from someone. Not over the top, just a bit more inspiring at times.
Understandably, Forrest is cautious about what he says and to whom. And as you say, Forrest is a decent guy, but clear and open communication is neither the U's nor his strong point. They are much more guarded than they need to be or should be in my opinion.
We won't get and shouldn't expect the details of any individual conversations, sticking points, or roadblocks, but it would be nice to know what the U's "official position" or strategy is, besides "looking at options", blah, blah, blah. It would surprise no one, and in fact shock almost everyone, if our official strategy wasn't to gain membership in the WCHA. That's not an insult to the beleaguered CCHA, it just is what it is.
NMU is/was in a different position and their acceptance into the WCHA as the sixth team was almost a foregone conclusion. But they did it right. They acted professionally and their University administration and governing body made their desire publicly known (again, no surprises there). I might have missed it, but I have not heard a similar message from anyone associated with UAF.
It was good to hear Forrest say that he has talked to Commissioners McLeod and Pletsch, all but one CCHA AD, and a number of WCHA ADs. I just hope our priority is not to try and hold the CCHA together in some fashion, at the detriment of getting into the WCHA. That bridge will have to be crossed (or not) if it comes to that.
Forrest also mentioned the pros of the program, which should be welcomed news to the team, potential recruits, and visiting teams.
1. Solid coaching, solid team.
2. Good community support, great hockey town.
3. Investment in the program, including :
-----Coach contract extended through 2016
-----New boards and glass on Olympic size ice
-----Relatively new center ice video display
-----Warm storage facility for media trucks etc.
-----And a recent $3.5m appropriation for renovations, including home and visitor
locker-rooms, training room, media room, etc.
4. Alaska exemption
5. Emphasizes a strong regional rivalry with UAA
And he didn't side step the issue of travel as being about the only con. Actually, the issue is more time away from classrooms then travel costs. We pay most travel costs and the flight to Alaska is the easy part. It's the bus rides on the lower 48 end that are a killer. I think fans make more of a deal about it then the players. Hopefully, it's the type of experience they will put to good use in their hockey careers. Not sure what UAA's financial commitment for travel is now, but a creative travel schedule that shares costs between the two of us on back-to-back weekends in Alaska (if possible), could benefit all teams.
Time away from the classroom should be a consideration (and it must adhere to NCAA regs or waivers), but now days, most students carry their "classroom" with them anyway. Online access, lesson submittals, chat rooms, and support is common place. There will always be issues, and some majors are next to impossible, more because of the attitude of the instructors, and not so much the degree. But I would think that happens even if you are strictly a bus league. If you're not self motivated, you're probably not going to make it in D1 hockey anyway.
I think I just burnt up my "post allotment" for another three months.
But anyway, now we wait. And remember, it’s dry cold.
PS – If offered membership into the WCHA, I think Forrest should ditch the "Alaska" brand and return to UAF.
Played with some numbers. The exemption works if it can be turned into home receipts.We are in a worse spot then before. We do not have any bargaining power. The WCHA does not "need" us. This realignment is probably going to increase our operating costs, or take them all the way down to zero. Conferences are wary of travel costs and will act accordingly unless mitigated. The Alaska exemption and having a large part of travel costs paid for are mitigating factors. With those factors we should be a logical piece of the puzzle. At best we are in a pay-to-play situation with the WCHA. Creative scheduling and a cost sharing arrangement with UAA could lessen the cost impact.
I do not think there is a viable CCHA for us. The WCHA will probably end up with at least eight teams. I think we could and should be one of them. But if not, we are doomed. NMU is gone. ND is certainly gone, along with one or two more CCHA teams.
If we are left on the outside looking in, I can not see us subsidizing travel for a newly formed CCHA. Based on the teams that could possibly become part of the CCHA, I'm not sure they could afford the travel or even want us in the conference if we do not continue to subsidize travel.
I just hope the decision is made this August, I need to decide if I can settle for becoming a Fairbanks Ice Dog fan and season ticket holder.
We are in a worse spot then before. We do not have any bargaining power. The WCHA does not "need" us. This realignment is probably going to increase our operating costs, or take them all the way down to zero. Conferences are wary of travel costs and will act accordingly unless mitigated. The Alaska exemption and having a large part of travel costs paid for are mitigating factors. With those factors we should be a logical piece of the puzzle. At best we are in a pay-to-play situation with the WCHA. Creative scheduling and a cost sharing arrangement with UAA could lessen the cost impact.
I do not think there is a viable CCHA for us. The WCHA will probably end up with at least eight teams. I think we could and should be one of them. But if not, we are doomed. NMU is gone. ND is certainly gone, along with one or two more CCHA teams.
If we are left on the outside looking in, I can not see us subsidizing travel for a newly formed CCHA. Based on the teams that could possibly become part of the CCHA, I'm not sure they could afford the travel or even want us in the conference if we do not continue to subsidize travel.
I just hope the decision is made this August, I need to decide if I can settle for becoming a Fairbanks Ice Dog fan and season ticket holder.