The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

[Biddco]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Gophers aren't a swap deal. Its a 2 for 1, and now there's a report that the MN tournament might be at Mariucci and not the X. That means that in four years my team will play at Mariucci 10 times and the Gophers will travel to my barn for 2 games.

Nevermind.

 

[4four4]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Gophers aren't a swap deal. Its a 2 for 1, and now there's a report that the MN tournament might be at Mariucci and not the X. That means that in four years my team will play at Mariucci 10 times and the Gophers will travel to my barn for 2 games.

In the words of AM1500 "Garage Logic", we don't know that.

 

[beaverhockeyfan]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Gophers aren't a swap deal. Its a 2 for 1, and now there's a report that the MN tournament might be at Mariucci and not the X. That means that in four years my team will play at Mariucci 10 times and the Gophers will travel to my barn for 2 games.

Hmmm, if all four teams participating in the MN Tournament are to equally share the profits (what I have been told about the contract), wouldn't it make sense to hold it at the X? I mean, you get 12000 Gopher fans in there and then a fans from the other three teams, it equals more than what can fit in Mariucci.

Unless, they are going to jack up the prices considerably at Mariucci, which may turn off some fans. I know I would rather watch this at the X than at Mariucci.......

 

[aparch]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Or, the cost of renting out the X for that many games is something that Minnesota doesn't want to be on the hook for.

As for the Tournament setup, I thought it was going to be like a Minnesota Beanpot / GLI, and the one team not invited each year gets a visit from Minnesota? To me, that sounds like a 3-to-1 arrangement, where you're only guaranteed to play against the Gophers in the tourney once every three years.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Or, the cost of renting out the X for that many games is something that Minnesota doesn't want to be on the hook for.

As for the Tournament setup, I thought it was going to be like a Minnesota Beanpot / GLI, and the one team not invited each year gets a visit from Minnesota? To me, that sounds like a 3-to-1 arrangement, where you're only guaranteed to play against the Gophers in the tourney once every three years.

You missed the part where one of the 2 teams that is not guaranteed a game vs Minnesota in the Minnesota Beanpot will have 2 games at Mariucci.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Discriminate based on geography??? That's a good one! It's done all the time. If the WCHA had voted to not accept Huntsville, could they have sued and won for not being accepted because they are too far away? Gee, I wonder why they didn't do that the last time? Do you think the Great Northwest Conference would have to accept Michigan Tech if it applied? I mean, you don't want to discriminate based on Geography, right...and really it's not geography, its finance. Who wants to spend $30K on a trip to Fairbanks when they can play a series closer to home that costs $8K? By your geographic logic, the GLIAC would have to accept a school in Tennessee if they wanted to apply and met all the other criteria besides the desire for a team in the geographic footprint.

There's a BIG BIG difference between denying membership based on geography and discriminating against an existing member because of geography. You apparently don't understand that. IF the NCAA discontinued the Alaska/Hawaii exemption and then IF the nWCHA expelled UAF and UAA because of their geography the nWCHA would lose in court. End of story.

 

[beaverhockeyfan]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Or, the cost of renting out the X for that many games is something that Minnesota doesn't want to be on the hook for.

As for the Tournament setup, I thought it was going to be like a Minnesota Beanpot / GLI, and the one team not invited each year gets a visit from Minnesota? To me, that sounds like a 3-to-1 arrangement, where you're only guaranteed to play against the Gophers in the tourneymorning once every three years.

Minnesota wouldn't be responsible for the cost of rent, the tournament would be. Of course, that does cut into the profit margins some for all involved, but I think part of what sold the other schools on the idea, other than the guarantee of getting Minnesota once and a while outside of the 494/694 loop, was the fact that it was on "neutral ice" at the Xcel Center. Not sure how the other four teams will feel about having it at Mariucci, if that is indeed the latest proposal.

You are correct on that if you aren't in the tournament, then you play the Gophers in your barn.

The brackets for the tournament are going to be on a rotating basis, so if you are in one of the years where you aren't guaranteed to play to Gophers, you play them at Mariucci. So, if the brackets are:

Minnesota vs. St. Cloud and Minnesota-Duluth vs. Bemidji, Bemidji and Duluth would play at Mariucci in non-conference series. And Mankato would have the Gophers in Mankato.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Minnesota wouldn't be responsible for the cost of rent, the tournament would be. Of course, that does cut into the profit margins some for all involved, but I think part of what sold the other schools on the idea, other than the guarantee of getting Minnesota once and a while outside of the 494/694 loop, was the fact that it was on "neutral ice" at the Xcel Center. Not sure how the other four teams will feel about having it at Mariucci, if that is indeed the latest proposal.

You are correct on that if you aren't in the tournament, then you play the Gophers in your barn.

The brackets for the tournament are going to be on a rotating basis, so if you are in one of the years where you aren't guaranteed to play to Gophers, you play them at Mariucci. So, if the brackets are:

Minnesota vs. St. Cloud and Minnesota-Duluth vs. Bemidji, Bemidji and Duluth would play at Mariucci in non-conference series. And Mankato would have the Gophers in Mankato.

I did not think both Bemidji and Duluth would play at Mariucci, only 1 of them each year...rotating so Minnesota's NC would be 2 @ MSU, 2 in Tourney (vs SCSU/vs UMD/BSU), 2 vs BSU

 

[aparch]

You missed the part where one of the 2 teams that is not guaranteed a game vs Minnesota in the Minnesota Beanpot will have 2 games at Mariucci.

So it's not like the Beanpot/GLI then? It's more of a fixed arrangement like the IceBreaker?

 

[davyd83]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

There's a BIG BIG difference between denying membership based on geography and discriminating against an existing member because of geography. You apparently don't understand that. IF the NCAA discontinued the Alaska/Hawaii exemption and then IF the nWCHA expelled UAF and UAA because of their geography the nWCHA would lose in court. End of story.

But nothing holds any other team to stay in a conference with two Alaskas. If six teams broke aaway from the WCHA and formed their own conference, there's not much the Alaskas could do about it. Like if North Dakota, Colorado, Denver, UMD, St Cloud and Nebraska-Omaha left...or if Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Western Michigan and Miami left...

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

There's a BIG BIG difference between denying membership based on geography and discriminating against an existing member because of geography. You apparently don't understand that. IF the NCAA discontinued the Alaska/Hawaii exemption and then IF the nWCHA expelled UAF and UAA because of their geography the nWCHA would lose in court. End of story.

They wouldn't expel the Alaska schools, they'd start a new conference with "like-minded" institutions.

Regardless, it isn't going to happen. I see no reason for the Alaska exemption to go away, and I don't think anyone is actually advocating for the Alaska schools to be kicked out. It is a hypothetical that IMO isn't worth arguing about.

 

[Bale]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

So it's not like the Beanpot/GLI then? It's more of a fixed arrangement like the IceBreaker?

The setup is like what beaverhockeyfan said. The team that doesn't play in the tourney has the Gophers come to their arena. The team that plays MN in the first round does not play MN in any other series that year. The teams that play in the other half of the bracket in the tourney each play MN at Mariucci. That would rotate every 4 years. All of the revenues are split between the 5 schools for the tourney (what the breakdown is, I don't know).

It's not a perfect scenario by any means, but it is a solution that can work for all involved. MSU, BSU, SCSU and UMD are able to keep playing MN albeit not 1-to-1, but it's probably the best we could hope for. MN is still playing the state schools and still has some room left on their schedule for others. The reality is that MN wasn't going to be able to schedule everyone for 1-for-1 series. It wasn't logistically possible without leaving someone out. This has allowed for that.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Regardless, I'll restate my original proposition. UAA and UAF should lobby the NCAA to eliminate the Alaska/Hawaii Exemption as it has become a tool for inequity rather than an incentive for fair play. Amazing though that it is that institutions of higher learning ever had to be incentivized for fairness.

 

[beaverhockeyfan]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

The setup is like what beaverhockeyfan said. The team that doesn't play in the tourney has the Gophers come to their arena. The team that plays MN in the first round does not play MN in any other series that year. The teams that play in the other half of the bracket in the tourney each play MN at Mariucci. That would rotate every 4 years. All of the revenues are split between the 5 schools for the tourney (what the breakdown is, I don't know).

It's not a perfect scenario by any means, but it is a solution that can work for all involved. MSU, BSU, SCSU and UMD are able to keep playing MN albeit not 1-to-1, but it's probably the best we could hope for. MN is still playing the state schools and still has some room left on their schedule for others. The reality is that MN wasn't going to be able to schedule everyone for 1-for-1 series. It wasn't logistically possible without leaving someone out. This has allowed for that.

The only thing I have heard differently is that the four teams at the Xcel split the profits from the tournament, the Gophers keep the revenue from the games at Mariucci, and whoever hosts the Gophers gets to keep their revenues.

Of course if all profits go into a pot and then are split between all five teams, we could possibly see some "creative" accounting practices pop up!

 

[davyd83]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

Regardless, I'll restate my original proposition. UAA and UAF should lobby the NCAA to eliminate the Alaska/Hawaii Exemption as it has become a tool for inequity rather than an incentive for fair play. Amazing though that it is that institutions of higher learning ever had to be incentivized for fairness.

So if you eliminate that exemption, how do you get other schools to want to be in a conference with teams so far away, and how do you get others to come for non-conference games? I'm not sure if you noticed the difficulty that Alabama-Huntsville had in finding a home. But it was for those very reasons. No, you don't get to exempt games against UAH, but then again, the flight to Huntsville from most WCHA schools will be less arduous than just getting to SeaTac on the Fairbanks trip. It's not fair that North Dakota and Denver blew up the WCHA. It's now fair that Michigan and MSU blew up the CCHA. It's not fair that the Big East is turning into a MAC/Conference USA Hybrid. Please note that "fair" and "for the good of the game" went out the window in college sports a long time ago.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

So if you eliminate that exemption, how do you get other schools to want to be in a conference with teams so far away, and how do you get others to come for non-conference games? I'm not sure if you noticed the difficulty that Alabama-Huntsville had in finding a home. But it was for those very reasons. No, you don't get to exempt games against UAH, but then again, the flight to Huntsville from most WCHA schools will be less arduous than just getting to SeaTac on the Fairbanks trip. It's not fair that North Dakota and Denver blew up the WCHA. It's now fair that Michigan and MSU blew up the CCHA. It's not fair that the Big East is turning into a MAC/Conference USA Hybrid. Please note that "fair" and "for the good of the game" went out the window in college sports a long time ago.

What I do agree with from donald's post is that Alaska/Hawaii schools should not be held to the same game limit as teams in the lower 48. UAA and UAF should be allowed to schedule 2-4 extra games just like the other members of their conference can. Why should UAA and UAF be given extra games to help them recoup costs of their exorbitant travel costs?

In college hockey under the nWCHA format, UAA and UAF should be give 3 extra games a season and be allowed to rollover 1 game a season.

 

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

They wouldn't expel the Alaska schools, they'd start a new conference with "like-minded" institutions.

Hockey West?

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

What I do agree with from donald's post is that Alaska/Hawaii schools should not be held to the same game limit as teams in the lower 48. UAA and UAF should be allowed to schedule 2-4 extra games just like the other members of their conference can. Why should UAA and UAF be given extra games to help them recoup costs of their exorbitant travel costs?

In college hockey under the nWCHA format, UAA and UAF should be give 3 extra games a season and be allowed to rollover 1 game a season.

And there's how some measure of equitability is restored.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

So if you eliminate that exemption, how do you get other schools to want to be in a conference with teams so far away, and how do you get others to come for non-conference games?

How do you get them to? That's a question that shouldn't even be asked. It's this inability to understand the basic inequity that pervades people from the continguous US. Alaska and Hawaii are fully fledged states. What part of that don't you get? UAA and UAF travel down to play your schools without ever moaning and biatching and demanding subsidies and compensation. You think that it's ok because you cannot think outside your little regionalistic predispositions. When the "enlightened" likewise parrot such shallow thinking (i.e... all your universities act unfairly) then it's no surprise that boobs on a hockey forum don't effing get it.

 

[MikeAnderson]

Re: The New WCHA 2, The Electric Boogaloo (2013-14)

And the common sense of most WCHA teams will prevent them from trying to fix a relationship and welcome them back where one party packed up and left town in the middle of the night. The NCHC teams are free to join Atlantic Hockey or the ECAC when they are tired of trying to make it on their own. They wanted to be "national" and travel all over the country... then go join a league out East.
Ryan J

They should try the independent route. It's just the snacks.