Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Your concern has been logged and noted.
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.
New WCHA is dead
- Thread starter Dirty Dream No. 2
- Start date
- Status
Not quite. If they move to D2 and wait the 3-4 year phase in period, they'll be eligible for both men's D1 (via the D2 no championship exception) and women's NC championships.
mmf
Nanook Nation
Re: New WCHA is dead
I find it hard to justify a reason why we would field a 2019-20 team.
I find it hard to justify a reason why we would field a 2019-20 team.
I hope for another visit to Anchorage as well. It’s one of my favorite cities in the league.
Squarebanks
New member
Re: New WCHA is dead
From what I’ve heard, this was a coordinated backstabbing. UAF, UAA, and UAH were given no prior notice to the coordinated press releases going out from each of the other seven schools. What’s more, these schools had the gall to do this the same day that UAF and UAA were hit with significant cuts from a draconian Governor while they try to get the legislative votes for an override.
We may or may not survive. But if we do, I sincerely hope that that Bowling Green, Mankato, Michigan Tech, Northern Michigan, Ferris State, Lake Superior, and Bemidji State never appear on a Nanook schedule again. And since actions speak loudly, I know that’s a mutual feeling.
This is a sad and embarrassing day for college hockey.
From what I’ve heard, this was a coordinated backstabbing. UAF, UAA, and UAH were given no prior notice to the coordinated press releases going out from each of the other seven schools. What’s more, these schools had the gall to do this the same day that UAF and UAA were hit with significant cuts from a draconian Governor while they try to get the legislative votes for an override.
We may or may not survive. But if we do, I sincerely hope that that Bowling Green, Mankato, Michigan Tech, Northern Michigan, Ferris State, Lake Superior, and Bemidji State never appear on a Nanook schedule again. And since actions speak loudly, I know that’s a mutual feeling.
This is a sad and embarrassing day for college hockey.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Suze
New member
Re: New WCHA is dead
Yeah. But with the Sully charging $25,000 per weekend, do the math.
So, rough estimate, around $20k per home series?
But they weren’t “committed”.
Yeah. But with the Sully charging $25,000 per weekend, do the math.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
UAA just announced their recruiting class yesterday.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Yup. And people wondered why they bailed from the Sully.
woodenskates
New member
Re: New WCHA is dead
This is quite a blow to all three programs. It has the greatest immediate impact on the student athletes. They have had the rug yanked out from under their feet. What a horrible feeling it will be for them. If there is truth to the allegation that the 7 staged the overthrow without communication with the remaining 3, that is unjustifiable. The NCAA should jump in to this. The 2 Alaska programs just received a hard kick in the b***s
This is quite a blow to all three programs. It has the greatest immediate impact on the student athletes. They have had the rug yanked out from under their feet. What a horrible feeling it will be for them. If there is truth to the allegation that the 7 staged the overthrow without communication with the remaining 3, that is unjustifiable. The NCAA should jump in to this. The 2 Alaska programs just received a hard kick in the b***s
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Re: New WCHA is dead
I'd love to see the other programs in college hockey show some support by refusing to schedule the seven schools for non-conference games but I'd bet they're just as happy UAA, UAF, and UAH are going to die.
Again, UAA just publicly announced their recruiting class yesterday. I'm pretty sure they didn't know about this.
I'd love to see the other programs in college hockey show some support by refusing to schedule the seven schools for non-conference games but I'd bet they're just as happy UAA, UAF, and UAH are going to die.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
mmf
Nanook Nation
Re: New WCHA is dead
So if I understand this correctly…
…the cost difference between [a trip to Alaska net of the significant subsidies received] vs [a trip to any other school other than UAH] is bringing the conference to it’s knees. B.S.
or maybe it’s…
…the Alaska schools need to “step up” or “step out.” Of course, stepping up must not include the fact that the Alaska schools highly subsidize each and every team’s travel to Alaska, and that both Alaska schools pay the full cost for all their own travel without subsidy. I’m not sure how to quantify the “fatigue factor” associated with traveling to Alaska once, maybe twice a year when we haven’t tried quantifying that for the seven or eight times we travel outside every year. Good thing the kids that are lucky enough to move to the next level don’t have a lot of travel. B.S.
or maybe …
…it’s just a big inconvenience that takes a lot of planning and hard work to go north and skate against schools without marque programs. OK, I’ll give you that.
Obviously, our initial shock is turning into frustration and anger. It’s one thing when misinformed USCHO posters spout garbage about travel costs, fatigue, competitiveness etc., but it’s quite another and quite disingenuous when those same tired arguments are used by University ADs and Coaches.
So if I understand this correctly…
…the cost difference between [a trip to Alaska net of the significant subsidies received] vs [a trip to any other school other than UAH] is bringing the conference to it’s knees. B.S.
or maybe it’s…
…the Alaska schools need to “step up” or “step out.” Of course, stepping up must not include the fact that the Alaska schools highly subsidize each and every team’s travel to Alaska, and that both Alaska schools pay the full cost for all their own travel without subsidy. I’m not sure how to quantify the “fatigue factor” associated with traveling to Alaska once, maybe twice a year when we haven’t tried quantifying that for the seven or eight times we travel outside every year. Good thing the kids that are lucky enough to move to the next level don’t have a lot of travel. B.S.
or maybe …
…it’s just a big inconvenience that takes a lot of planning and hard work to go north and skate against schools without marque programs. OK, I’ll give you that.
Obviously, our initial shock is turning into frustration and anger. It’s one thing when misinformed USCHO posters spout garbage about travel costs, fatigue, competitiveness etc., but it’s quite another and quite disingenuous when those same tired arguments are used by University ADs and Coaches.
Re: New WCHA is dead
7 schools, including Mankato, Bemidji State, begin process of leaving WCHA
Startribune.com
7 schools, including Mankato, Bemidji State, begin process of leaving WCHA
Startribune.com
JohnsonsJerseys
Michigan Tech Fan
Re: New WCHA is dead
As a Michigan Tech fan this is EXACTLY the sort of thing that I have railed on the NCHC for since the conference was formed. I do not support this move if the ONLY motive was to shed the two AK schools and UAH. I don't think the "Secret Seven" have any interest in adding ASU. Why shed UAH just to add another long trip to the middle of the desert SW? Maybe they have dreams of an AH school joining or St Thomas filling the 8th spot by the time the new conference is rolling? Maybe the men's programs are tired of bankrolling a women's conference for programs that all bailed their men's teams to other conferences (WI, MN, SCSU, OSU, UMD). Only BSU and MSU had teams in both conferences.
The ONLY way I would support this move is if it is a way of forcing the hand of the other conferences to start carrying the financial load. Maybe these seven looked around and said "Why are in a conference with UAF... AND UAA... AND UAH?" If this is the way for the Secret Seven to force the NCHA to pick up a Western team and AH to pick up UAH, then maybe the Secret Seven pick up the remaining AK team and thing look more like they did when the CCHA existed, with the AK teams split and that financial load shared by multiple conferences.
I doubt this makes any of the fans from UAF, UAA or UAH feel any better. If I were them I would feel exactly as I did when Tech fans learned of the NCHC's plans. I was p!$$ed then and I still am now. The Seven should be better than this so I really hope there is more to this story that is yet to come and that there is some sort of plan for the three teams that were excluded - interlocked schedules, a line in the sand that keeps them in the conference if they can meet certainly goals, whatever. If this was simply a move to dump perceived dead weight, then Tech and the other six are no better than the NCHC teams who stood on their high horse and complained about how sore their backs were from carrying the CCHA and WCHA for so many years.
Not cool and not supported...
As a Michigan Tech fan this is EXACTLY the sort of thing that I have railed on the NCHC for since the conference was formed. I do not support this move if the ONLY motive was to shed the two AK schools and UAH. I don't think the "Secret Seven" have any interest in adding ASU. Why shed UAH just to add another long trip to the middle of the desert SW? Maybe they have dreams of an AH school joining or St Thomas filling the 8th spot by the time the new conference is rolling? Maybe the men's programs are tired of bankrolling a women's conference for programs that all bailed their men's teams to other conferences (WI, MN, SCSU, OSU, UMD). Only BSU and MSU had teams in both conferences.
The ONLY way I would support this move is if it is a way of forcing the hand of the other conferences to start carrying the financial load. Maybe these seven looked around and said "Why are in a conference with UAF... AND UAA... AND UAH?" If this is the way for the Secret Seven to force the NCHA to pick up a Western team and AH to pick up UAH, then maybe the Secret Seven pick up the remaining AK team and thing look more like they did when the CCHA existed, with the AK teams split and that financial load shared by multiple conferences.
I doubt this makes any of the fans from UAF, UAA or UAH feel any better. If I were them I would feel exactly as I did when Tech fans learned of the NCHC's plans. I was p!$$ed then and I still am now. The Seven should be better than this so I really hope there is more to this story that is yet to come and that there is some sort of plan for the three teams that were excluded - interlocked schedules, a line in the sand that keeps them in the conference if they can meet certainly goals, whatever. If this was simply a move to dump perceived dead weight, then Tech and the other six are no better than the NCHC teams who stood on their high horse and complained about how sore their backs were from carrying the CCHA and WCHA for so many years.
Not cool and not supported...
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Re: New WCHA is dead
LOL. Tech did exactly the same thing that the NCHC schools. What do you think "this is for the best academic and athletic opportunities for the student athlete at these seven schools" means?
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
I would fully expect UAH to end up in the AHA.
- Status