What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

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!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

UpNorthHockey said:
If SCSU is in talks with the Nacho league, it would be a big change from their earlier statement of "we weren't invited and wouldn't have accepted if we were."
If they do jump ship, they deserve what they get as the red-headed stepchild of the Nacho league......beaten severely and often.
Click to expand...

This is what I was referring to, actually. Quite the 180 if they join.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

Brenthoven said:
This is what I was referring to, actually. Quite the 180 if they join.
Click to expand...

I guess the question is, are the administrators and fans really that attached to playing the schools that are departing for the NCHC? I'll grant you North Dakota, but that's a secondary/minor rivalry for both teams (probably not even on the Sioux's 'rivalry' list). The Gophers are the program they reserve most of their hate for.

I know that in my case, I've pretty much gotten over all the splits. The only teams I'm going to miss a little are North Dakota and Duluth. The CO schools I don't really care other than CSprings and Denver being semi-sexy roadtrips, but I tend to like smaller cities/towns more anyway. Omaha will have been a blip on the WCHA's radar in two years, so that's no loss.

The only thing that still sets me off a little about this move is the notion that the NCHC is automatically the greatest collegiate hockey conference in history. While it's likely they will end up with three teams in the tournament most years, any more than that on a regular basis remains to be seen. Not to mention that programs will still finish at the bottom, and those teams who find themselves near the bottom more often than not, may find life in the NCHC less glamorous than they had envisioned.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
I guess the question is, are the administrators and fans really that attached to playing the schools that are departing for the NCHC? I'll grant you North Dakota, but that's a secondary/minor rivalry for both teams (probably not even on the Sioux's 'rivalry' list). The Gophers are the program they reserve most of their hate for.

I know that in my case, I've pretty much gotten over all the splits. The only teams I'm going to miss a little are North Dakota and Duluth. The CO schools I don't really care other than CSprings and Denver being semi-sexy roadtrips, but I tend to like smaller cities/towns more anyway. Omaha will have been a blip on the WCHA's radar in two years, so that's no loss.

The only thing that still sets me off a little about this move is the notion that the NCHC is automatically the greatest collegiate hockey conference in history. While it's likely they will end up with three teams in the tournament most years, any more than that on a regular basis remains to be seen. Not to mention that programs will still finish at the bottom, and those teams who find themselves near the bottom more often than not, may find life in the NCHC less glamorous than they had envisioned.
Click to expand...

For me, the SCSU response was a puke-worthy "no one asked you, why respond" thing. And now they might join? Hypocrisy at its best. Imagine in high school, you ask a girl out (a girl that is out of your league). She says no. Ok, so you ask a meh girl, just so you have a date. That is how I see this NCHC/SCSU situation. They still don't want SCSU, but right now? They'll take what they can get.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

Brenthoven said:
For me, the SCSU response was a puke-worthy "no one asked you, why respond" thing. And now they might join? Hypocrisy at its best. Imagine in high school, you ask a girl out (a girl that is out of your league). She says no. Ok, so you ask a meh girl, just so you have a date. That is how I see this NCHC/SCSU situation. They still don't want SCSU, but right now? They'll take what they can get.
Click to expand...
Agreed. IMHO it's like HF says, a dumb move. Think about it, what do they gain.... lets see, more TV exposure... not much more... more money,... not really, the WCHA total income likely has been in the same neighborhood due to the final 5 cash. So maybe a slight bump in net but the expenses are a lot higher so net won't rise much. Is the marginal increase in exposure and the definite increase in losing going to get them better recruits.. unlikely. Will it up their chances of getting into the ncaa. no. So overall why join.

To me the nchc is grasping at straws now, as a 6 team league is not good from a money point of view. Will I miss any of the teams... UMD I guess. But we might end up playing them anyway.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

manurespreader said:
Agreed. IMHO it's like HF says, a dumb move. Think about it, what do they gain.... lets see, more TV exposure... not much more... more money,... not really, the WCHA total income likely has been in the same neighborhood due to the final 5 cash. So maybe a slight bump in net but the expenses are a lot higher so net won't rise much. Is the marginal increase in exposure and the definite increase in losing going to get them better recruits.. unlikely. Will it up their chances of getting into the ncaa. no. So overall why join.

To me the nchc is grasping at straws now, as a 6 team league is not good from a money point of view. Will I miss any of the teams... UMD I guess. But we might end up playing them anyway.
Click to expand...

Agree. With the addition of the CCHA teams, St. Cloud leaving isn't as big a loss at this point. Why they want to go I'm not sure as they haven't been able to climb to the top of the current WCHA ladder; they should have viewed the new WCHA as an opportunity as tech is.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

I agree with FTB&G, I'm finally getting over the splits as well and looking forward to the new WCHA.

I will enjoy watching the new as much as I ever did the old. I live in CCHA country and I can't stand the UM / MSU and everybody else mentality.

The best part is to see Tech rise back and be a force in the league. If Mel said he is here to stay, that is awesome.

Hockey is still hockey though and there should not be the expectation that Tech cannot win the 2013 -14 GLI's and beyond.
The old saying Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard. Well, now Tech is going to have some greater depth which has been the problem the last 30 years.
I hope the "leftovers" give it to the other programs this year to remind them that it always is settled on the ice.

I hope the GLI continues, I'm wondering what the Olympia Arenas thinks of all of this. Will they continue the support of college hockey? I would think so, but to be fair the CCHA tournament was a total embarassment to this area and is probably a good thing that it is gone.

As for this year's GLI, I fully expect MTU to beat State this year and make the title game against Boston College. That is my expectation. I can't wait to see the tourney this year.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

I'm excited about the realignment. I, too, will miss Duluth. the others ... not so much.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
It's not only about trying to make more money, it's also about spending more money. St. Cloud recently moved to drop their football program, until a student fee saved it. I know they've got an arena upgrade on their upcoming schedule, but I'm under the impression that it is mostly state-funded. SCSU doesn't sound like they have an Athletic Department that is willing to blow $Texas on some hope of competing with the B1G's name recognition.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, the NCHC is going to have to spend a whole lot of money now for travel. Its not really going to affect DU, CC, and UNO that much, but UND, Duluth, and Miami are going to notice it a bit. Sure, they don't have to go to Alaska now, but they had most of that flight paid for, and they got an extra weekend to play with for that trip. They don't have that now.
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
I guess the question is, are the administrators and fans really that attached to playing the schools that are departing for the NCHC? I'll grant you North Dakota, but that's a secondary/minor rivalry for both teams (probably not even on the Sioux's 'rivalry' list). The Gophers are the program they reserve most of their hate for.

I know that in my case, I've pretty much gotten over all the splits. The only teams I'm going to miss a little are North Dakota and Duluth. The CO schools I don't really care other than CSprings and Denver being semi-sexy roadtrips, but I tend to like smaller cities/towns more anyway. Omaha will have been a blip on the WCHA's radar in two years, so that's no loss.

The only thing that still sets me off a little about this move is the notion that the NCHC is automatically the greatest collegiate hockey conference in history. While it's likely they will end up with three teams in the tournament most years, any more than that on a regular basis remains to be seen. Not to mention that programs will still finish at the bottom, and those teams who find themselves near the bottom more often than not, may find life in the NCHC less glamorous than they had envisioned.
Click to expand...
Yeah, honestly, I could easily see Duluth and Miami to come crawling back to being with the new WCHA, especily if WMU and BGSU opt to go WCHA. Miami might be more willing to stick around the NCHA if the rest of the MAC schools go to the NaCHo, but I could still see Duluth having second thoughts about NaCHo League without the Irish.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
While it's likely [the NaCHo] will end up with three teams in the tournament most years, any more than that on a regular basis remains to be seen. Not to mention that programs will still finish at the bottom, and those teams who find themselves near the bottom more often than not, may find life in the NCHC less glamorous than they had envisioned.
Click to expand...

If those teams believe they are as good as they think they are, they will do themselves a huge service by limiting the number of conference games. I know the obvious play is for a balanced schedule of 4 games against each of the other 5 teams (20 games), but someone has to lose those games and you are hanging a lot of losses on someone's record before you even get out of conference play. A smarter move might be to NOT play everyone home and away and let the teams find more non-conference (and in their eyes) lesser opponents to put some wins on their overall records.

Ryan J
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

Had some good comments on the possible lineups.
If Tech looks at putting strengths together with playmakers and finishers, I see two options based on who shows well in the first weeks of practice.

Which lineup does everyone thinks favors the Huskies chances A or B

A
1st line
B. Pietila Olson Gordic

2nd line
Baker Holmberg Furne

3rd line
J. Johnstone D. Johnstone Kero

4th line
Lickteig Witt Gubb

D
1st pair
Brown Seigo

2nd pair
Stebner Nielsen

3rd pair
Sweeney Davis

B
1st line
Furne Olson Gordic

2nd line
Baker J. Johnstone B. Pietila

3rd line
Gubb D. Johnstone Kero

4th line
A. Pietila McCadden Rix

D
1st pair
Brown Seigo

2nd pair
Stebner Nielsen

3rd pair
Sweeney Sova


Goalies
1A Genoe
1B Robinson
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

Huskiefan906 said:
Had some good comments on the possible lineups.
If Tech looks at putting strengths together with playmakers and finishers, I see two options based on who shows well in the first weeks of practice.

Which lineup does everyone thinks favors the Huskies chances A or B

A
1st line
B. Pietila Olson Gordic

2nd line
Baker Holmberg Furne

3rd line
J. Johnstone D. Johnstone Kero

4th line
Lickteig Witt Gubb

D
1st pair
Brown Seigo

2nd pair
Stebner Nielsen

3rd pair
Sweeney Davis

B
1st line
Furne Olson Gordic

2nd line
Baker J. Johnstone B. Pietila

3rd line
Gubb D. Johnstone Kero

4th line
A. Pietila McCadden Rix

D
1st pair
Brown Seigo

2nd pair
Stebner Nielsen

3rd pair
Sweeney Sova


Goalies
1A Genoe
1B Robinson
Click to expand...

I tend to like the second set better. We'll see if sweeney turns out well but I don't see Brown a first line defenseman, though he is a lot better. They have to play good defensive hockey too and some of these guys don't.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

Just curious, who else do the fans see for the left side of the #1 defensive pair.

Brown is a good skater and puck mover and compliments Seigo.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

bigblue_dl said:
If a freshman that is a last minute add, just months before the season starts, is on our top d-pair, we really are ****ed and may as well just give up this year.
Click to expand...

Would you rather have one of our slower upperclassmen on the top pair, undoubtedly making some of the same mistakes they did last year? It's a wash in the end, perhaps better for the team by the end of the year.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

I'm putting a lot of hopes in freshmen stepping up, too. Keep in mind that last year we had virtually no defense at times. Remember those late games against NoDak? Yeah, I'm trying to forget too. If some freshmen don't step up for major minutes, that's what will point to trouble this year.
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
Would you rather have one of our slower upperclassmen on the top pair, undoubtedly making some of the same mistakes they did last year? It's a wash in the end, perhaps better for the team by the end of the year.
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with a slower defenseman, as long as they can play a sound game positionally and play within their skillset. You don't have to be a speedster to play quality defense. Besides, given the defenseman on this team, we're going to have to play the big slow guys, would you rather have 2 of them paired together or have one of them (preferably whichever one shows the most promise/improvement) with Seigo, so their lack of speed can be covered partially by Seigo's abilities?
 
Re: Michigan Tech Offseason III: Two Years To Prove It Can Be Done

bigblue_dl said:
I don't have a problem with a slower defenseman, as long as they can play a sound game positionally and play within their skillset. You don't have to be a speedster to play quality defense. Besides, given the defenseman on this team, we're going to have to play the big slow guys, would you rather have 2 of them paired together or have one of them (preferably whichever one shows the most promise/improvement) with Seigo, so their lack of speed can be covered partially by Seigo's abilities?
Click to expand...

Good points, though Pearson has also indicated that he may look to pair freshmen with upperclassmen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top