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.

so...AK/UAA...COVID-19

Sol Diablo said:
I had the same reaction, especially seeing their arena only holds 800. But I suppose the travel subsidies they have to pay would be a charter bus for the other teams? But good for UST, wishing them the best.
Click to expand...

There are some deep pockets in the St. Thomas Alumni network, so I would guess funding for an acceptable arena will not be a problem.
 
Sol Diablo said:
I had the same reaction, especially seeing their arena only holds 800. But I suppose the travel subsidies they have to pay would be a charter bus for the other teams? But good for UST, wishing them the best.
Click to expand...

My initial reaction was along the lines of a school that nobody outside college hockey or the upper Midwest has heard of, perfect fit with the other 7.

Snarkiness aside, it’s probably a home run add for the new conference. It gets them visibility in a major market in the middle of their footprint that it otherwise would have lacked.
 
beaverhockeyfan said:
There are some deep pockets in the St. Thomas Alumni network, so I would guess funding for an acceptable arena will not be a problem.
Click to expand...

True enough. I just thought it interesting how such a big deal was made of ASU needing to get an acceptably sized arena before they could join a conference. Maybe was a negotiating tactic to get travel subsidies from them???? But I do wish it would have worked out for ASU & WCHA as it would have been fun playing the Beavers & traveling to Bemidji, nice area.
 
gfmorris said:
Easily $40MM. Those are some deep pockets.

GFM
Click to expand...

It won't be a problem. The one thing I have learned is that the alumni of St. John's and St. Thomas here in Minnesota have never really had a problem throwing their money around to keep up with each other. Now that St. Thomas is going D-I, that will just invigorate that network.

FWIW, St. John's did not want to kick St. Thomas out of the MIAC.....
 
beaverhockeyfan said:
It won't be a problem. The one thing I have learned is that the alumni of St. John's and St. Thomas here in Minnesota have never really had a problem throwing their money around to keep up with each other. Now that St. Thomas is going D-I, that will just invigorate that network.
Click to expand...

Ah, so it's like $EC football donors!

GFM
 
Squarebanks said:
In actual hockey related news, in a move that should surprise nobody who follows the program closely, Max Newton is getting the C for the Nanooks next season.
Click to expand...

With UAS being taken over by ua_ and they have a rink in good codition maybe hockey will transfer there and be closer for the C- teams long brutal once a year road trip.
 
Alaska Hockey said:
With UAS being taken over by ua_ and they have a rink in good codition maybe hockey will transfer there and be closer for the C- teams long brutal once a year road trip.
Click to expand...

The whining and virtual screaming that would happen after one of them inevitably gets stuck in Sitka and has to take the ferry because JNU is fogged in would be worth it.
 
Sol Diablo said:
True enough. I just thought it interesting how such a big deal was made of ASU needing to get an acceptably sized arena before they could join a conference. Maybe was a negotiating tactic to get travel subsidies from them???? But I do wish it would have worked out for ASU & WCHA as it would have been fun playing the Beavers & traveling to Bemidji, nice area.
Click to expand...

I'd almost wager money that it was as much ASU not wanting the WCHA as it was the WCHA not wanting ASU. They explored it, and most likely came to a mutual agreement it just wasn't going to work. The only school close to ASU's profile was BGSU, and it was no secret BG wanted out.

If it wasn't mutual, ASU wouldn't be participating in the WCHA's supplemental discipline policy.
 
pdt1081 said:
I'd almost wager money that it was as much ASU not wanting the WCHA as it was the WCHA not wanting ASU. They explored it, and most likely came to a mutual agreement it just wasn't going to work. The only school close to ASU's profile was BGSU, and it was no secret BG wanted out.

If it wasn't mutual, ASU wouldn't be participating in the WCHA's supplemental discipline policy.
Click to expand...

Not when you have 7 cup shakers wanting you to pay for their way out of the woods and back.
 
pdt1081 said:
I'd almost wager money that it was as much ASU not wanting the WCHA as it was the WCHA not wanting ASU. They explored it, and most likely came to a mutual agreement it just wasn't going to work. The only school close to ASU's profile was BGSU, and it was no secret BG wanted out.

If it wasn't mutual, ASU wouldn't be participating in the WCHA's supplemental discipline policy.
Click to expand...

You are probably correct. If WCHA wanted ASU badly they likely would not have had the travel subsidy request. If ASU wanted to be in WCHA badly they would have agreed to make those payments. Regardless, I think everything is mutually respectful at this point.
 
Hockey John said:
Their lack of solid footing was due to the falling gas prices and the severe economic problems of the state of Alaska and their university system. It is hard to run a league when you don't know from year to year that all of the programs will remain solvent. That is the real issue here.
Click to expand...
BP just announced that they're slashing fossil fuel production, and ramping up low-carbon emission investments.

This type of strategy will 1) either create an increased demand for Alaska crude, and drive up the price or 2) scare the Alaska-based energy companies to follow suit. Here's hoping for the former.
 
elbojpb said:
BP just announced that they're slashing fossil fuel production, and ramping up low-carbon emission investments.

This type of strategy will 1) either create an increased demand for Alaska crude, and drive up the price or 2) scare the Alaska-based energy companies to follow suit. Here's hoping for the former.
Click to expand...

I think you are right. But the increase in demand for Alaska crude still faces competition from shale and a generational move away from fossil fuel. My guess is for a short term increase in demand but nothing like the good old days.

What Alaska needs is a more diverse economy relying less on oil and gas.
 
elbojpb said:
BP just announced that they're slashing fossil fuel production, and ramping up low-carbon emission investments.

This type of strategy will 1) either create an increased demand for Alaska crude, and drive up the price or 2) scare the Alaska-based energy companies to follow suit. Here's hoping for the former.
Click to expand...

Being oil is a commodity, Alaska oil price, including shipping costs, would have to decrease against other oil sources for demand for it to increase. The Alaska based energy companies will jump right in to take over the share BP abandons (sells) as BP will lower the assets price to make it look attractive. That may help lower the prices and increase demand.
 
I believe we only have 10 sports so dropping hockey is not an option for UAF unless we drop athletics entirely. They'll probably try to hold on a while longer but dropping everything is probably not off the table.
 
Statement from UAF
[TABLE="cellpadding: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]Aug. 19, 2020[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="cellpadding: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]Dear UAF community,[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="cellpadding: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]Earlier today, UAA Chancellor Cathy Sandeen announced that UAA is recommending the discontinuation of three Division I sports: men’s hockey, men’s and women’s skiing, and women’s gymnastics. The recommendation will go to the UA Board of Regents for approval during its meeting Sept. 10-11, 2020.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="cellpadding: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]I want it to be clear for UAF student-athletes, parents, coaches, and the UAF and Fairbanks community that ourathletics programs are not part of this recommendation. UAF already has only10 sports, the minimum number allowed by the NCAA. As such, we haveno plans to eliminate any sports teams.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="cellpadding: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]In the coming months there will be many details to work out as we better understand how today’s announcement will affect UAF’s athletics competition in the future. I am confident that our Alaska Nanooks athletics program will continue to move forward in a positive direction and will remain an important part of our university and our community. As with all of UAF departments, our athletics programs are addressing budget cuts through both reductions and new revenues.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="cellpadding: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]I know the decision to recommend discontinuation of these athletics programs must have been very difficult for our colleagues at UAA. Multiple years of budget cuts have forced many difficult decisions to be made across the UA system, and none of these decisions are made lightly. UAF athletics staff will work with their counterparts in Anchorage to provide whatever support they can for the student-athletes affected by these changes.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="cellpadding: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]I look forward to welcoming our student-athletes back to campus and to resuming competition when it is safe to do so. I am also looking forward to seeing our many fans and community supporters when the time is right. I thank you for your continued support.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="cellpadding: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]— Dan White, UAF chancellor[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top