Realignment Rumors

[CHFAN222]

Re: Realignment Rumors

.

UAA would be the sticking point because I can't see those teams wanting to keep traveling up to AK every season given that the exemption will not be worth much on anything to them as they will have a difficult time filling a schedule with home dates as it is. I suspect that those teams would tollerate UAA as long as it is needed to keep a scheduling agreement in place with UW and MN, otherwise they would drop UAA the first change they get (particullarly BSU and MSUM because they get no travel assistance).

IDK about that. I think the remaining WCHA schools can reach agreements with UAH (2 years home 1 year away deal) , ECAC schools, and Atlantic Hockey schools to get fill in home games.

 

[Rhett]

Re: Realignment Rumors

The BTHC may potentially instill a Major/Mid-Major feel to CH and that will make it tougher on the "mid-majors" to compete in the recruiting department. If a second power conference emergences that will certainly be the case.

It already exists. It's called Hockey East. There are really no possible permutations of the realignment fallout that damages the larger New England schools.

 

[Patman]

Re: Realignment Rumors

It already exists. It's called Hockey East. There are really no possible permutations of the realignment fallout that damages the larger New England schools.

unless they decide to inflict it upon themselves

 

[Almington]

Re: Realignment Rumors

Not if it is a 6 or 7 team conference where they have 10 or 14 games to fill. Add to that that these are not the four B1G schools that can schedule anyone for NC home games and not really worry about ticket sales. Plus those smaller school don't have the cash to pay for those team to come and visit without making a return trip.

Now, if UAA is still willing to fund the travel for the conference teams, then it isn't a major deal. This assumes that UAA would want to stay in a conference with those teams.

The formation of a Western Six Conference (WSC) will require that FSU, WMU, BGSU and LSSU raid AH for their western team to try and fill in a conference with team like Robert Morris, Mercyhurst, and Niagara. UAH could be added just to keep even numbers.

I'm not sure how UA(F) fits into everything. I can see both UAA and UA(F) being left behind in all the realignment fallout as I just don't see the exemption being that valuable to the lower attendance teams who will be looking to cut costs as much as they can.

 

[joecct]

Re: Realignment Rumors

well... the proposed "Liberty League" idea would actually be i believe 5 of the 6 play-ups. Although 3 are able to offer scholarships.

Now check out the West where there are lots of D-II's playing up.

 

[moose97]

Re: Realignment Rumors

Not if it is a 6 or 7 team conference where they have 10 or 14 games to fill. Add to that that these are not the four B1G schools that can schedule anyone for NC home games and not really worry about ticket sales. Plus those smaller school don't have the cash to pay for those team to come and visit without making a return trip.

Now, if UAA is still willing to fund the travel for the conference teams, then it isn't a major deal. This assumes that UAA would want to stay in a conference with those teams.

The formation of a Western Six Conference (WSC) will require that FSU, WMU, BGSU and LSSU raid AH for their western team to try and fill in a conference with team like Robert Morris, Mercyhurst, and Niagara. UAH could be added just to keep even numbers.

I'm not sure how UA(F) fits into everything. I can see both UAA and UA(F) being left behind in all the realignment fallout as I just don't see the exemption being that valuable to the lower attendance teams who will be looking to cut costs as much as they can.

False. Bemidji State played guarantee games while a member of the CHA in the old John Glas when they drew ~ 1000 a game.

That being a true statement, you can't tell me that BSU now, or SCSU, MSUM, UMD wouldn't be able to do so in the future. Plus, LSSU, FSU, NMU, Tech and BGSU are in better situations than that (>1000 and better potential opponents), so there's no reason they couldn't play a guarantee series here or there.

 

[Rhett]

Re: Realignment Rumors

unless they decide to inflict it upon themselves

Any idea how/why that could come to pass?

 

[peten16]

Re: Realignment Rumors

It already exists. It's called Hockey East. There are really no possible permutations of the realignment fallout that damages the larger New England schools.

It's a little different, Hockey East has been around since long before the MAAC, AHC, or CHA. They emerged out of ECAC. The other "mid-majors" were flushed out with the dissolution of D-II. That said I was referring more to the west. Other than BC (and MAYBE UNCONN); none of those schools in the east are large NCAA powerhouses like the B10 schools.

 

[Vindy]

Re: Realignment Rumors

If there is a realignment, I think you'll see the Alaska schools in the same league. One upshot of of realignment will be smaller leagues. One possibility would be

UAA
UAF
BSU
UMD
SCSU
MSUM
NMU
MTU

That lets you have a perfect round robin with a 28 game league slate, with all of the lower-48 teams then having 10 non-conference games. Use the extra dates for more home games for revenue, or collect a few paychecks from Big Ten or Super 6 teams. Set up the league schedule so that each travel pair makes only a single trip to Alaska. Base one trip the weekends before and after Thanksgiving, a second around the first two weekends of January and a third in early February. This would save on travel costs and missed class time.

That would definitely be a viable league with a ton of built in rivalries.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: Realignment Rumors

I'm not sure how UA(F) fits into everything. I can see both UAA and UA(F) being left behind in all the realignment fallout as I just don't see the exemption being that valuable to the lower attendance teams who will be looking to cut costs as much as they can.

Let's pretend a team has a home rink where they average 3500 per game. At 16 dollars per ticket you're looking at $112,000.
Let's pretend a team has a home rink where they average 5000 per game. At 20 dollars per ticket you're looking at $200,000.
Let's pretend a team has a home rink where they average 2000 per game. At 12 dollars per ticket you're looking at $48,000.

No doubt there's a cutoff somewhere in there where the pretend program doesn't see a specific revenue gain as particularly enticing. Difficult to say where that lies per each pretend program. Nevertheless, in general it seems fairly obvious to me that the exemptions have more value than you're inferring. And when you add in the subsidized travel that UAA and UAF provide then for most programs there's incentive.

Sure ... Wisconsin doesn't give a crap about a potential $500,000 revenue increase from playing a couple of games in Alaska and maybe Minnesota doesn't either. But, it's pretty clear from past schedules that every other existing WCHA program is interested in trying to maximize their opportunities to gain exempt games. If they weren't they wouldn't accept invitations to play in UAA/UAF tourneys in years when they otherwise aren't scheduled to come to Alaska in conference competition. FFS, Hockey East, ECAC and AHA teams accept the invitations every year. I'll bet dollars to donuts that Penn State comes to Alaska in 2012-13. Non-conference teams don't come to Alaska to play out of some altruistic bent to keep UAA and UAF afloat. They come here because it makes sense from a revenue generating standpoint.

The Alaska teams aren't going anywhere. Both schools are committed to their programs. Any of about 30 other D-1 schools will give up on hockey before UAA and UAF do.

 

[bigmrg74]

The Alaska teams aren't going anywhere. Both schools are committed to their programs. Any of about 30 other D-1 schools will give up on hockey before UAA and UAF do.

Eh, that or they'll get all jihad on us and send out the Nanook to blow up the whole world on us.

 

[Almington]

Re: Realignment Rumors

Let's pretend a team has a home rink where they average 3500 per game. At 16 dollars per ticket you're looking at $112,000.
Let's pretend a team has a home rink where they average 5000 per game. At 20 dollars per ticket you're looking at $200,000.
Let's pretend a team has a home rink where they average 2000 per game. At 12 dollars per ticket you're looking at $48,000.

No doubt there's a cutoff somewhere in there where the pretend program doesn't see a specific revenue gain as particularly enticing. Difficult to say where that lies per each pretend program. Nevertheless, in general it seems fairly obvious to me that the exemptions have more value than you're inferring. And when you add in the subsidized travel that UAA and UAF provide then for most programs there's incentive.

Sure ... Wisconsin doesn't give a crap about a potential $500,000 revenue increase from playing a couple of games in Alaska and maybe Minnesota doesn't either. But, it's pretty clear from past schedules that every other existing WCHA program is interested in trying to maximize their opportunities to gain exempt games. If they weren't they wouldn't accept invitations to play in UAA/UAF tourneys in years when they otherwise aren't scheduled to come to Alaska in conference competition. FFS, Hockey East, ECAC and AHA teams accept the invitations every year. I'll bet dollars to donuts that Penn State comes to Alaska in 2012-13. Non-conference teams don't come to Alaska to play out of some altruistic bent to keep UAA and UAF afloat. They come here because it makes sense from a revenue generating standpoint.

The Alaska teams aren't going anywhere. Both schools are committed to their programs. Any of about 30 other D-1 schools will give up on hockey before UAA and UAF do.

What are the costs associated with operating the arena for two games? What are the costs associated with a return trip to the school that comes in or costs of having them come in without a return trip? What are the costs of making a trip up to AK for two games even with the travel subsidy? Can those teams even get home games for the exemption?

Teams want to be able to play more games overall because one of the disadvantages of the NCAA route compared to the MJ route is the much shorter schedule. Some programs see the trip as a team bonding experence. They don't make the trip for NC games from a revenue perspective. It doesn't get them any more home games, all that the exemption does is allow them to make the trip and not LOSE any home games. Unless the Alaska based school is in your conference, you don't get any extra home games by traveling to AK for a NC series. You just get to play two more games overall.

Look at a theoretical HE team schedule
HE: 27 total (14H, 13A), NC: 7 (5H, 0A, 2N) = 34 games total (19H, 13A, 2N)

HE with a NC trip to AK:
HE: 27 total (14H, 13A), NC: 9 (5H, 2A w/ those away games in AK, 2N) = 36 games total (19H, 15A, 2N)

In both cases the teams play the same number of home games and the exemption does not change the maximum number of home games that a team can have.

If PSU makes the trip up to Ak is won't be for revenue reasons but because they will want to play as many games as they can to build as much experence and team unity as they can before the start of B1G play in 13-14

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Realignment Rumors

...
If PSU makes the trip up to Ak is won't be for revenue reasons but because they will want to play as many games as they can to build as much experence and team unity as they can before the start of B1G play in 13-14

Don't bother, Donald won't be bothered with other facts in this debate and we don't need to have this rehashed every 50 posts or so...

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: Realignment Rumors

What are the costs associated with operating the arena for two games? What are the costs associated with a return trip to the school that comes in or costs of having them come in without a return trip? What are the costs of making a trip up to AK for two games even with the travel subsidy? Can those teams even get home games for the exemption?

Teams want to be able to play more games overall because one of the disadvantages of the NCAA route compared to the MJ route is the much shorter schedule. Some programs see the trip as a team bonding experence. They don't make the trip for NC games from a revenue perspective. It doesn't get them any more home games, all that the exemption does is allow them to make the trip and not LOSE any home games. Unless the Alaska based school is in your conference, you don't get any extra home games by traveling to AK for a NC series. You just get to play two more games overall.

Look at a theoretical HE team schedule
HE: 27 total (14H, 13A), NC: 7 (5H, 0A, 2N) = 34 games total (19H, 13A, 2N)

HE with a NC trip to AK:
HE: 27 total (14H, 13A), NC: 9 (5H, 2A w/ those away games in AK, 2N) = 36 games total (19H, 15A, 2N)

In both cases the teams play the same number of home games and the exemption does not change the maximum number of home games that a team can have.

If PSU makes the trip up to Ak is won't be for revenue reasons but because they will want to play as many games as they can to build as much experence and team unity as they can before the start of B1G play in 13-14

Been through this. I already schooled you with regard to your silly (patently false) claim that extra home games aren't enabled by the exemption.

The expenses of hosting that home game are what they are and naturally would be factored into the revenue/expense decision.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: Realignment Rumors

Don't bother, Donald won't be bothered with other facts in this debate and we don't need to have this rehashed every 50 posts or so...

Go back to your referee stalking/socializing.

 

[kingdobbs]

Re: Realignment Rumors

Any idea how/why that could come to pass?

Overreacting to the formation of the Big Ten, and thinking they need to snap up the remainders to stay competitive.

My estimation is that Hockey East isn't that stupid.

 

[Almington]

Re: Realignment Rumors

Been through this. I already schooled you with regard to your silly (patently false) claim that extra home games aren't enabled by the exemption.

The expenses of hosting that home game are what they are and naturally would be factored into the revenue/expense decision.

No you didn't. You are ompletely wrong. Show me where the extra home games are for this theoretical Hockey East team:

A theoretical HE team schedule without a trip to Alaska:
HE: 27 total (14H, 13A), NC: 7 (5H, 0A, 2N) = 34 games total (19H, 13A, 2N)

HE with a NC trip to AK:
HE: 27 total (14H, 13A), NC: 9 (5H, 2A w/ those away games in AK, 2N) = 36 games total (19H, 15A, 2N)

Zero difference in number of home games. The AK exemption does not allow a team to play any more home games if the games in AK are non-conference games. It is mathematically impossible.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: Realignment Rumors

No you didn't. You are ompletely wrong. Show me where the extra home games are ...

Let's use a fictional team just for simplicity ...

The Almington Junior College Maroons in 2010-11 play a 34 game schedule that includes a tournament in Alaska for which they pocket two exemptions. 18 are at home and 16 are on the road (not that this matters but used as exposition of the Maroon's typical schedule).

In 2011-2012 the Almington Junior College Maroons are allowed to play a 36 game schedule. They play 20 games at home and 16 on the road. Conference affliation has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

There's your two extra home games. The two extra games ARE NOT played during the SAME season as the games in Alaska were played. How hard is that?

If the Almington Junior College Maroons are TOO DIM to schedule the extra contests at home and get the revenue then they should fold up shop and never play sports again.

End of story.

 

[Patman]

Re: Realignment Rumors

Let's use a fictional team just for simplicity ...

The Almington Junior College Maroons in 2010-11 play a 34 game schedule that includes a tournament in Alaska for which they pocket two exemptions. 18 are at home and 16 are on the road (not that this matters but used as exposition of the Maroon's typical schedule).

In 2011-2012 the Almington Junior College Maroons are allowed to play a 36 game schedule. They play 20 games at home and 16 on the road. Conference affliation has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

There's your two extra home games. The two extra games ARE NOT played during the SAME season as the games in Alaska were played. How hard is that?

If the Almington Junior College Maroons are TOO DIM to schedule the extra contests at home and get the revenue then they should fold up shop and never play sports again.

End of story.

I was under the impression that any exemptions were applied within the same season. In fact I'm quite sure the NCAA guidebooks say nothing about pocketing those games.

The only thing the exemption enables is the ability not to count those games to the total... they need not be extra home games... but they often tend to be as home dates can be scheduled against those willing to take those dates (lower half of the Big 4 leagues and Atlantic Hockey). In the end, the schedule only allows you to play games in Alaska (or Hawaii) against schools in those locations which do not count to the total. This can never add more home dates during the year.

Since you don't seem to be arguing about a hypothetical rule then I don't see the point.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Realignment Rumors

Let's use a fictional team just for simplicity ...

The Almington Junior College Maroons in 2010-11 play a 34 game schedule that includes a tournament in Alaska for which they pocket two exemptions. 18 are at home and 16 are on the road (not that this matters but used as exposition of the Maroon's typical schedule).

In 2011-2012 the Almington Junior College Maroons are allowed to play a 36 game schedule. They play 20 games at home and 16 on the road. Conference affliation has NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

There's your two extra home games. The two extra games ARE NOT played during the SAME season as the games in Alaska were played. How hard is that?

If the Almington Junior College Maroons are TOO DIM to schedule the extra contests at home and get the revenue then they should fold up shop and never play sports again.

End of story.

Yeah, you're going to need to provide something that proves that you can "store away" exception games for a future season.

All that exists is 17.14.5.3 in this on page 257, which includes matches occurring in Alaska and Hawaii as being exempt from the 34 game limit. It says nothing about "Go ahead and schedule a couple extra games next year for your trouble"

Now, since that's the 2007-08 rulebook, it should be child's play for you to find the article that changed that rule in the last 4 years.