The New WCHA (2013-14)

[manurespreader]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

I'm not sure what the full set of priorities are for a league office. Of the future league, 5 programs are in MI...including 3 in the UP...with 2 in Minnesota and 2 in Alaska.

I like Marquette...unless air travel, access to hockey resources or player recruitment are priorities in which case I might consider the twin cities, madison or duluth in that order.

I think the existing CCHA offices are fine. Has a staff, price is reasonable, good air connections, etc. Too expensive for air travel from the UP or some of the smaller cities. Twin Cities might be ok as well.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

I think the existing CCHA offices are fine. Has a staff, price is reasonable, good air connections, etc. Too expensive for air travel from the UP or some of the smaller cities. Twin Cities might be ok as well.

I really don't think the actual location of league offices is that big of a deal, so I agree with you. There are too many built in advantages to going to the old CCHA offices to pass it up. Seriously, what is the difference between having the offices in Detroit or in the Twin Cities? It will make no difference. And may as well put them in a decent sized city.

The only thing that might mess that up is if the WCHA staff wants to have league offices on a league members campus, which I could see as a possibility.

 

[hoosierpuck]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

The UP and N. Minnesota fans make up 5 of the 9 schools. The only one really convenient is Bowling Green, with Ferris about another hour.

Yah, I sorta realized that after I posted. Maybe I need to lobby the CCHA to have their tourney here.

And Fangers, I totally understand about Pepsi being renovated, I'm an Ice season-ticketholder.

 

[beaverhockeyfan]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

That's the only reason? Can you expand? In football, Air Force is in Mountain West and Army is Independent; so, that doesn't seem to matter.

The reason always given publically is that they wanted four games with Army. But I am sure there were other underlying reasons. Speculation on my part (and many others from the CHA days):

Air Force was always in the bottom part of the CHA standings and saw AHA as a chance to change that.

Air Force probably saw the CHA demise coming and got out while they had an offer on the table.

They had a definite recruiting disadvantage compared to some of the other CHA teams. They can only recruit US citizens unless a foreign nation wants to pay for the training of one of their citizens at the academy, which can run seven figures, I have been told.

They cannot offer scholarships, which put them behind teams in the CHA that could offer the full 18. Granted, there is no tuition if you are accepted to the Academy, making everyone there on scholarship in essence. But the crux of this is that if you set foot into a classroom on the first day of your third year, you are now committed to a mandated four (or is it five?) years of service in the Air Force. That scared a lot of players away, either in the recruiting process or after their second year.

Now look at what they have done in the cost containment league of the AHA. They are going up against teams that can offer, at most, 11 (maybe 12 now, but not many do) scholarships. They have finished in the upper tier of the AHA every year since the move. They have won the AHA Tournament multiple times and advanced to the NCAAs.

They are now a big fish in the AHA pond, why would they want to leave? What would the "new" WCHA offer them that they are not getting in AHA? They would still be flying everywhere, so why not stay in a league where you are making the NCAAs regularly?

I don't see Air Force being interested in changing.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

Yah, I sorta realized that after I posted. Maybe I need to lobby the CCHA to have their tourney here.

And Fangers, I totally understand about Pepsi being renovated, I'm an Ice season-ticketholder.

You're a little bit behind the times, aren't you?

 

[gfmorris]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

the reason always given publically is that they wanted four games with army. But i am sure there were other underlying reasons. Speculation on my part (and many others from the cha days):

Air force was always in the bottom part of the cha standings and saw aha as a chance to change that.

Air force probably saw the cha demise coming and got out while they had an offer on the table.

They had a definite recruiting disadvantage compared to some of the other cha teams. They can only recruit us citizens unless a foreign nation wants to pay for the training of one of their citizens at the academy, which can run seven figures, i have been told.

They cannot offer scholarships, which put them behind teams in the cha that could offer the full 18. Granted, there is no tuition if you are accepted to the academy, making everyone there on scholarship in essence. But the crux of this is that if you set foot into a classroom on the first day of your third year, you are now committed to a mandated four (or is it five?) years of service in the air force. That scared a lot of players away, either in the recruiting process or after their second year.

Now look at what they have done in the cost containment league of the aha. They are going up against teams that can offer, at most, 11 (maybe 12 now, but not many do) scholarships. They have finished in the upper tier of the aha every year since the move. They have won the aha tournament multiple times and advanced to the ncaas.

They are now a big fish in the aha pond, why would they want to leave? What would the "new" wcha offer them that they are not getting in aha? They would still be flying everywhere, so why not stay in a league where you are making the ncaas regularly?

I don't see air force being interested in changing.

This.

GFM

 

[huskyfan]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

last fall, Air Force coach Frank Serratore scoffed at the suggestion the Falcons might change leagues. they do love their Army rivalry. (if only some Navy alum would cough up and get hockey going there - Donald Rumsfeld - I'm looking at you).

short article by Frank in the USA Hockey mag about the program:

http://www.usahockeymagazine.com/article/2011-11/academy-hockey-well-served-america’s-finest

 

[fangers]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

Yah, I sorta realized that after I posted. Maybe I need to lobby the CCHA to have their tourney here.

And Fangers, I totally understand about Pepsi being renovated, I'm an Ice season-ticketholder.

OK, but the Ice have publically stated they will be out of Pepsi for two years, not just the next year. And the CCHA is going away, remaining teams joing this new WCHA that this thread is all about...

 

[4four4]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

If BTN doesn't show MN, I've heard FSN can pick them up.

That would be correct. The BTN will have an A, B, C, unit to try to maximize their audience and profit. I was told the only school in the country who has ratings is your Golden Gophers they are a brand for other sports and especially for hockey.

 

[aparch]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

OK, but the Ice have publically stated they will be out of Pepsi for two years, not just the next year. And the CCHA is going away, remaining teams joing this new WCHA that this thread is all about...

After forty pages of discussion like we've had, I think there have been quite a few discussions contained within that have been forgotten about.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

After forty pages of discussion like we've had, I think there have been quite a few discussions contained within that have been forgotten about.

Yeah, forgetting a conversation is understandable, but this guy forgot the damm premise of the entire thread!

 

[manurespreader]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

So to boil this down a bit, we have several issues that have been discussed.

1. How to structure the playoffs.
2. Where should the playoffs be.
3. Travel problems with the large distances we have.
4. Can we find a way to admit UAH. ( I hope so)
5. How many conference games to play
6. Where will the offices be.( I can say for sure they will not be in Denver)
7. How to work together to make everyones program more successful.
8. How to get some sort of TV package/ media exposure.

additional issues to be discussed.

rules changes. Will we sit still or make changes, for instance the ccha point system.


any others?

I'm sure all of these are issues being discussed by the high muckity mucks.

 

[giwan]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

So to boil this down a bit, we have several issues that have been discussed.

1. How to structure the playoffs.
2. Where should the playoffs be.
3. Travel problems with the large distances we have.
4. Can we find a way to admit UAH. ( I hope so)
5. How many conference games to play
6. Where will the offices be.( I can say for sure they will not be in Denver)
7. How to work together to make everyones program more successful.
8. How to get some sort of TV package/ media exposure.

additional issues to be discussed.

rules changes. Will we sit still or make changes, for instance the ccha point system.
any others?
I'm sure all of these are issues being discussed by the high muckity mucks.

Does the autobid go to the regular season or playoff winner? I would vote playoff winner as this may get an extra team into the NCAA tournament.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

So to boil this down a bit, we have several issues that have been discussed.

1. How to structure the playoffs.
2. Where should the playoffs be.
3. Travel problems with the large distances we have.
4. Can we find a way to admit UAH. ( I hope so)
5. How many conference games to play
6. Where will the offices be.( I can say for sure they will not be in Denver)
7. How to work together to make everyones program more successful.
8. How to get some sort of TV package/ media exposure.

additional issues to be discussed.

rules changes. Will we sit still or make changes, for instance the ccha point system.


any others?

I'm sure all of these are issues being discussed by the high muckity mucks.

Oh god, please no shootout.

 

[stuckinwi]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

Oh god, please no shootout.

That would be awful...

 

[aparch]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

Great summary manurespreader, it's too bad that the league office hasn't been able to announce anything that we have discussed. Hopefully over the summer though.


As an aside discussion, UConn just applied to Hockey East to round out them to 12 members. Is this the start of the Great East Breakup part deux (starring Atlantic Hockey)?

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

As an aside discussion, UConn just applied to Hockey East to round out them to 12 members. Is this the start of the Great East Breakup part deux (starring Atlantic Hockey)?

I think the Ivies will have to decide to break way to cause any major shakeup out east.

 

[manurespreader]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

I think the Ivies will have to decide to break way to cause any major shakeup out east.

generally agree BB. Uconn in and of itself won't hurt Atlantic hockey all that much I don't think. But there is a lot of fear out there that the ivy's are going. Might not be the greatest idea, but...

As far as our issues, the playoff situation is a big one because it has so much potential to mess things up financially, if they get that straight maybe they can tackle the transportation thing. I really like the Soo Canada idea, you would certainly get plenty of fans in the building.

 

[beaverhockeyfan]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

Great summary manurespreader, it's too bad that the league office hasn't been able to announce anything that we have discussed. Hopefully over the summer though.

Part of the issue with this is that the WCHA is still a functioning league. I believe it was "The Hockey Show" out of Bemidji that interviewed McLeod this past season and that was one of the issues. You still have 12 teams in the WCHA that are together for one more year and there are decisions and time being taken up with that. The NCHC on the other hand, doesn't have this problem.

The "new" WCHA has set up, I believe, three committees of ADs to look at the different aspects of the league so that when the time comes that decisions need to be "set in stone", there can be somewhat of a fast track process.

 

[gfmorris]

Re: The New WCHA (2013-14)

Part of the issue with this is that the WCHA is still a functioning league. I believe it was "The Hockey Show" out of Bemidji that interviewed McLeod this past season and that was one of the issues. You still have 12 teams in the WCHA that are together for one more year and there are decisions and time being taken up with that. The NCHC on the other hand, doesn't have this problem.

The "new" WCHA has set up, I believe, three committees of ADs to look at the different aspects of the league so that when the time comes that decisions need to be "set in stone", there can be somewhat of a fast track process.

And I expect that UAH's petition would be able to be acted on in the same way that the invitations went out to new members. I certainly hope to hear on that before it's sizzling hot down here this summer.

GFM <-- prepared for a hot one.