All that matters is Gwoz got fired by Peggy.
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.
The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
- Thread starter gfmorris
- Start date
All that matters is Gwoz got fired by Peggy.
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
Since re-realignment is a topic here, I'll bring up a thought I had. Obviously it won't happen, because it would require the NCHC to work together for the greater good and would essentially be admitting the the NCHC was a rediculous overreaction. Anyway, this is what I would like to see and I think it would save on travel costs at least a little for some teams, a lot for others, as well as boosting attendance a little due to more games being closer for traveling fans:
The NCHC takes Mankato and Bemidji, the WCHA takes Miami and Western. I think it's generally better if the Alaska schools are split, so Anchorage would go to the NCHC (we could also dispense with the nonsense and just call them the WCHA and CCHA again). 24 game conference schedule like the NCHC has now, and each team has a protected rival they always play 4 times. The rivals would be mostly common sense:
St. Cloud-UMD
NoDak-Bemidji
The Colorado schools
The Maverick schools
Tech-Northern
Western-Ferris
Bowling Green-Miami
Lake State would kinda get screwed having to travel to UAH every season
This is where I get unrealistically innovative: The Alaska school always play each other 4 times and those games would count for their respective conferences. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think there is a way to make that schedule work.
This would also help the conference tournaments as a much higher % of the schools would be relatively close to the tournament sites (as long as what should be called the CCHA kept the tournament in Michigan, instead of rotating).
In my estimation, this would be better for everyone (except, maybe Lake State), but that means nothing like it would ever be considered.
Since re-realignment is a topic here, I'll bring up a thought I had. Obviously it won't happen, because it would require the NCHC to work together for the greater good and would essentially be admitting the the NCHC was a rediculous overreaction. Anyway, this is what I would like to see and I think it would save on travel costs at least a little for some teams, a lot for others, as well as boosting attendance a little due to more games being closer for traveling fans:
The NCHC takes Mankato and Bemidji, the WCHA takes Miami and Western. I think it's generally better if the Alaska schools are split, so Anchorage would go to the NCHC (we could also dispense with the nonsense and just call them the WCHA and CCHA again). 24 game conference schedule like the NCHC has now, and each team has a protected rival they always play 4 times. The rivals would be mostly common sense:
St. Cloud-UMD
NoDak-Bemidji
The Colorado schools
The Maverick schools
Tech-Northern
Western-Ferris
Bowling Green-Miami
Lake State would kinda get screwed having to travel to UAH every season
This is where I get unrealistically innovative: The Alaska school always play each other 4 times and those games would count for their respective conferences. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think there is a way to make that schedule work.
This would also help the conference tournaments as a much higher % of the schools would be relatively close to the tournament sites (as long as what should be called the CCHA kept the tournament in Michigan, instead of rotating).
In my estimation, this would be better for everyone (except, maybe Lake State), but that means nothing like it would ever be considered.
Tell that to Gwoz.
uaafanblog
AKA - "Drop The Puck"
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
Miami and Western can get urinated upon.
I understand what you want ... cos I'd love to not have any Michigan or Ohio schools in the conference my team plays in.
How about this ... NMU, MTU, Lake St., Ferris Wheel, Bowling Pins, Western, Miami and North Dakota (UND just to make them fly once a year so we can see the bichigan schools fans all moan and whine incessantly about it and because there's no way that group would consider taking UAH). The WCHA then would be UAA, UA_, Kato, Bemidji, St. Claude St., UofD, CC and HuntsKetchup.
Duluth and Omaha can just fold.
Miami and Western can get urinated upon.
I understand what you want ... cos I'd love to not have any Michigan or Ohio schools in the conference my team plays in.
How about this ... NMU, MTU, Lake St., Ferris Wheel, Bowling Pins, Western, Miami and North Dakota (UND just to make them fly once a year so we can see the bichigan schools fans all moan and whine incessantly about it and because there's no way that group would consider taking UAH). The WCHA then would be UAA, UA_, Kato, Bemidji, St. Claude St., UofD, CC and HuntsKetchup.
Duluth and Omaha can just fold.
Last edited:
MavHockey14
New member
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
We're talking legit conference realignment, or at least acknowledging what can and cannot be, and Donald comes and ruins it. Figures.
We're talking legit conference realignment, or at least acknowledging what can and cannot be, and Donald comes and ruins it. Figures.
uaafanblog
AKA - "Drop The Puck"
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
Cos putting UAA and UA_ in different leagues but having them play games that somehow count in two different conferences is legit. K.
Cos putting UAA and UA_ in different leagues but having them play games that somehow count in two different conferences is legit. K.
Seawolf Fan
New member
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
There ya go again skrewing it all up with logic.
MavHockey14
New member
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
"or at least acknowledging what can and cannot be"
He's in Tampa Bay. He doesn't care.
He does care, Peggy fired George.
beaverhockeyfan
Well-known member
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
The WCHA and Hockey East did it back when Hockey East was a new league. Interlocking schedule, games counted in your conference standings.
So it can be done.
The WCHA and Hockey East did it back when Hockey East was a new league. Interlocking schedule, games counted in your conference standings.
So it can be done.
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
This.
Am I wrong, or have the Alaska schools quit paying for opposing teams travel? If so, then I think all arrangements should be made for teams to travel to Alaska as little as possible, and the two schools being protected rivals in separate conferences would be one way to do that. If they still pay for all or most of opposing teams' travel, then the travel cost issue, as it relates to Alaska, is mostly moot.
This.
Am I wrong, or have the Alaska schools quit paying for opposing teams travel? If so, then I think all arrangements should be made for teams to travel to Alaska as little as possible, and the two schools being protected rivals in separate conferences would be one way to do that. If they still pay for all or most of opposing teams' travel, then the travel cost issue, as it relates to Alaska, is mostly moot.
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
The Alaska schools, along with Alabama-Huntsville, pay a portion of travel costs.
net presence
Active member
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
If I recall, Mike Hastings has mentioned a couple of times on the record that he believes there will be more movement. If you look at his experience as a coach, both as a head coach in the USHL and as an assistant at the Div. I level, you can make a strong educated guess as to which coaches he has the closest ties to and, therefore, which programs and league he would prefer to be in. Although this doesn't mean that Mankato's administration necessarily feels this way, we can be fairly certain Mike is probably making his opinion known. Therefore, IF the NCHC is looking to get to 10 teams OR, if it thinks it may lose a team or two, then Mankato would certainly be the most attractive candidate in terms of both strength of program and ease of access (travel). And, if a 2nd team is needed, then Bemidji would probably be the next most attractive choice.
On the other side of the league there's Bowling Green. Anyone with ANY ties to that program has indicated they're "hearing" that BG "isn't happy". With that much smoke there's got to be at least a little fire. And, since they hold the rights to the CCHA name, along with the belief that they made some type of effort in creating some sort of league prior to accepting admittance to the WCHA, it's certainly plausible that they could make another effort to do so. Due to current scheduling agreements/contracts, the very strong probability is that there not only won't be any movement but also can't be any movement for next season. That gives the league about 6-9 months to possibly appease those that need it.
The first thing the league needs to do is higher the best possible commissioner. Someone with a strong knowledge of college hockey who already has really good connections and relationships with as many of the coaches and ADs in the WCHA as possible and, obviously, someone with good business acumen and organizational leaderships skills as well. Since cost containment seems to be the number one issue on the table, finding a proactive, workable solution to that problem is priority number one. Here's my suggestion:
Approach Robert Morris and Niagara about joining the league. They've both been very outspoken about their desire to compete with 18 scholarships. I suspect both would be very willing to listen. IF they accept, create a West and East division with an Alaska school in each one. Play 2/3 of your conference games within your division and alternate yearly with the other schools home and away except that the Alaska schools would play each other twice a season which further limits the need for teams to travel to Alaska twice in any one season. I admit that I haven't "run the numbers" regarding how or if this scheduling arrangement can be made to work but, from what I've read of Mr. Morris's posts over the years, I suspect that would be mere child's play for him.
The divisions would look as follows:
East (or South?) -- UAF/UAH/Ferris/BG/RMU/Niagara
West (or North) -- UAA/BSU/MSMU/MTU/NMU/LSSU
As for a playoff format, well, lots of options there. Personally, I would take the top 10 overall seeds and leave the bottom two out. Then you can actually have a "Final Five" again. As for the site, if creating the best atmosphere is as important as it seems to be, I think we need to shoot for buildings in the 6500 to 10K capacity range. If neutral site is critical, considering the local college hockey community (Div. I & Div. III), decent sized regional airport, and available hotels at that time of year, I think Duluth makes the most sense. However, my understanding is that Amsoil's management was approached and, after consulting with UMD (obviously, their primary tenant) said they weren't interested. The main reason being that UMD didn't want to have the hassle of practicing somewhere else if they were still playing. Considering the amount of local tax dollars that went into building the facility, I'm a little surprised that the city wouldn't demand a little more say in that decision considering the potential economic impact of hosting the tournament. Otherwise, some other options that haven't been mentioned in the various recent discussions would be:
Omaha -- IF (and only if) you can get the old Auditorium (its currently for sale -- no, not saying any of us or the league should buy it). Best combination of arena size (holds about 8500) and downtown nite life and hotels near the arena
St. Charles, MO. -- newer arena (The Family Arena) that holds about 10,000 -- new CHL team currently plays there but their regular season doesn't finish until the end of March so should be able to avoid scheduling conflicts -- plus, like many CHL teams, they might not be there next year. Large casino nearby along with some great shopping. Very nice historical Missouri River community with many local shops and dining options.
The Quad Cities (the arena -- I Wireless Center -- is located in Moline, IL.) -- seats about 10,000 -- currently home to the Quad City Mallards of the CHL. Used to draw 9,000 a game in the team's heyday (1996-2002) but have struggled to average 3,000+ the last 5 or so years. Still, at least somewhat of a built in hockey following. Similar river community to St. Charles both in downtown Moline and across the river in Davenport, IA.
Ft. Wayne, IN. -- yes, I know, the NCAA's were a disaster. But, we all believe that was a pricing issue above all else. The War Memorial is a great refurbished arena with good sight lines and the community has been the 2nd highest in average attendance in ALL of minor league hockey for many years. If you promote and price it properly you will get decent local attendance and maybe even better if you stay there for a few years in a row.
Obviously, this is all predicated on saving the WCHA history and brand. IF Mankato and Bemidji were to get the invite to the NCHC and accept (as someone said in another post somewhere -- amounts to a major "Dave Hakstol" to both UAA and MTU from UND, DU, and CC) AND Bowling Green decides it wants to flex its CCHA muscle, the possibility exists that the WCHA just fades away and the CCHA returns with my previous list of teams minus the two Minnesota schools.
BG/Ferris/UAH/RMU/Niagara/LSSU/MTU/NMU/UAF/UAA -- and, if Western and Miami decide they made a mistake, then add them back into the mix. 12 teams with two divisions:
West -- MTU/NMU/LSSU/Ferris/Western/UAA
East -- Miami/BG/UAH/RMU/Niagara/UAF
However, if BG is the force that drives this change then the two Alaska schools (Donald, I'm not saying this is right or fair but, definitely a possibility if not probability) would most likely be held hostage about travel cost coverage in order to gain membership.
Ultimately, it's about money and leadership -- in that order. In today's economy, money not only will but, in the case of publicly funded universities, MUST drive most decisions. However, how those decisions are managed to the greater good of these schools from a hockey perspective, both short and long term, is all about quality leadership. Despite the arguments to the contrary of many on these boards, the minute Terry Pugula chose to donate his millions in support of a varsity PSU program, there HAD TO BE a B1G Hockey conference. It was Denver, North Dakota, UNO and, to a much lesser extent, CC, UMD, St. Cloud, Miami, and Western that truly sent us down the path we're now on. And the reason for their decision (at least for the WCHA schools) was a lack of leadership from their perspective regarding Bruce McLeod and the rest of the WCHA administration. As with most controversies such as this, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I apologize for the length of this post. It's probably why I've "lurked" for as long as I have but not ever posted until now.
If I recall, Mike Hastings has mentioned a couple of times on the record that he believes there will be more movement. If you look at his experience as a coach, both as a head coach in the USHL and as an assistant at the Div. I level, you can make a strong educated guess as to which coaches he has the closest ties to and, therefore, which programs and league he would prefer to be in. Although this doesn't mean that Mankato's administration necessarily feels this way, we can be fairly certain Mike is probably making his opinion known. Therefore, IF the NCHC is looking to get to 10 teams OR, if it thinks it may lose a team or two, then Mankato would certainly be the most attractive candidate in terms of both strength of program and ease of access (travel). And, if a 2nd team is needed, then Bemidji would probably be the next most attractive choice.
On the other side of the league there's Bowling Green. Anyone with ANY ties to that program has indicated they're "hearing" that BG "isn't happy". With that much smoke there's got to be at least a little fire. And, since they hold the rights to the CCHA name, along with the belief that they made some type of effort in creating some sort of league prior to accepting admittance to the WCHA, it's certainly plausible that they could make another effort to do so. Due to current scheduling agreements/contracts, the very strong probability is that there not only won't be any movement but also can't be any movement for next season. That gives the league about 6-9 months to possibly appease those that need it.
The first thing the league needs to do is higher the best possible commissioner. Someone with a strong knowledge of college hockey who already has really good connections and relationships with as many of the coaches and ADs in the WCHA as possible and, obviously, someone with good business acumen and organizational leaderships skills as well. Since cost containment seems to be the number one issue on the table, finding a proactive, workable solution to that problem is priority number one. Here's my suggestion:
Approach Robert Morris and Niagara about joining the league. They've both been very outspoken about their desire to compete with 18 scholarships. I suspect both would be very willing to listen. IF they accept, create a West and East division with an Alaska school in each one. Play 2/3 of your conference games within your division and alternate yearly with the other schools home and away except that the Alaska schools would play each other twice a season which further limits the need for teams to travel to Alaska twice in any one season. I admit that I haven't "run the numbers" regarding how or if this scheduling arrangement can be made to work but, from what I've read of Mr. Morris's posts over the years, I suspect that would be mere child's play for him.
The divisions would look as follows:East (or South?) -- UAF/UAH/Ferris/BG/RMU/Niagara
West (or North) -- UAA/BSU/MSMU/MTU/NMU/LSSU
As for a playoff format, well, lots of options there. Personally, I would take the top 10 overall seeds and leave the bottom two out. Then you can actually have a "Final Five" again. As for the site, if creating the best atmosphere is as important as it seems to be, I think we need to shoot for buildings in the 6500 to 10K capacity range. If neutral site is critical, considering the local college hockey community (Div. I & Div. III), decent sized regional airport, and available hotels at that time of year, I think Duluth makes the most sense. However, my understanding is that Amsoil's management was approached and, after consulting with UMD (obviously, their primary tenant) said they weren't interested. The main reason being that UMD didn't want to have the hassle of practicing somewhere else if they were still playing. Considering the amount of local tax dollars that went into building the facility, I'm a little surprised that the city wouldn't demand a little more say in that decision considering the potential economic impact of hosting the tournament. Otherwise, some other options that haven't been mentioned in the various recent discussions would be:
Omaha -- IF (and only if) you can get the old Auditorium (its currently for sale -- no, not saying any of us or the league should buy it). Best combination of arena size (holds about 8500) and downtown nite life and hotels near the arena
St. Charles, MO. -- newer arena (The Family Arena) that holds about 10,000 -- new CHL team currently plays there but their regular season doesn't finish until the end of March so should be able to avoid scheduling conflicts -- plus, like many CHL teams, they might not be there next year.
Large casino nearby along with some great shopping. Very nice historical Missouri River community with many local shops and dining options.The Quad Cities (the arena -- I Wireless Center -- is located in Moline, IL.) -- seats about 10,000 -- currently home to the Quad City Mallards of the CHL. Used to draw 9,000 a game in the team's heyday (1996-2002) but have struggled to average 3,000+ the last 5 or so years. Still, at least somewhat of a built in hockey following. Similar river community to St. Charles both in downtown Moline and across the river in Davenport, IA.
Ft. Wayne, IN. -- yes, I know, the NCAA's were a disaster. But, we all believe that was a pricing issue above all else. The War Memorial is a great refurbished arena with good sight lines and the community has been the 2nd highest in average attendance in ALL of minor league hockey for many years. If you promote and price it properly you will get decent local attendance and maybe even better if you stay there for a few years in a row.
Obviously, this is all predicated on saving the WCHA history and brand. IF Mankato and Bemidji were to get the invite to the NCHC and accept (as someone said in another post somewhere -- amounts to a major "Dave Hakstol" to both UAA and MTU from UND, DU, and CC) AND Bowling Green decides it wants to flex its CCHA muscle, the possibility exists that the WCHA just fades away and the CCHA returns with my previous list of teams minus the two Minnesota schools.
BG/Ferris/UAH/RMU/Niagara/LSSU/MTU/NMU/UAF/UAA -- and, if Western and Miami decide they made a mistake, then add them back into the mix. 12 teams with two divisions:
West -- MTU/NMU/LSSU/Ferris/Western/UAA
East -- Miami/BG/UAH/RMU/Niagara/UAF
However, if BG is the force that drives this change then the two Alaska schools (Donald, I'm not saying this is right or fair but, definitely a possibility if not probability) would most likely be held hostage about travel cost coverage in order to gain membership.
Ultimately, it's about money and leadership -- in that order. In today's economy, money not only will but, in the case of publicly funded universities, MUST drive most decisions. However, how those decisions are managed to the greater good of these schools from a hockey perspective, both short and long term, is all about quality leadership. Despite the arguments to the contrary of many on these boards, the minute Terry Pugula chose to donate his millions in support of a varsity PSU program, there HAD TO BE a B1G Hockey conference. It was Denver, North Dakota, UNO and, to a much lesser extent, CC, UMD, St. Cloud, Miami, and Western that truly sent us down the path we're now on. And the reason for their decision (at least for the WCHA schools) was a lack of leadership from their perspective regarding Bruce McLeod and the rest of the WCHA administration. As with most controversies such as this, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I apologize for the length of this post. It's probably why I've "lurked" for as long as I have but not ever posted until now.
bigblue_dl
Armed
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
That might be the most well thought-out first post I've ever seen.
If I recall, Mike Hastings has mentioned a couple of times on the record that he believes there will be more movement. If you look at his experience as a coach, both as a head coach in the USHL and as an assistant at the Div. I level, you can make a strong educated guess as to which coaches he has the closest ties to and, therefore, which programs and league he would prefer to be in. Although this doesn't mean that Mankato's administration necessarily feels this way, we can be fairly certain Mike is probably making his opinion known. Therefore, IF the NCHC is looking to get to 10 teams OR, if it thinks it may lose a team or two, then Mankato would certainly be the most attractive candidate in terms of both strength of program and ease of access (travel). And, if a 2nd team is needed, then Bemidji would probably be the next most attractive choice.
On the other side of the league there's Bowling Green. Anyone with ANY ties to that program has indicated they're "hearing" that BG "isn't happy". With that much smoke there's got to be at least a little fire. And, since they hold the rights to the CCHA name, along with the belief that they made some type of effort in creating some sort of league prior to accepting admittance to the WCHA, it's certainly plausible that they could make another effort to do so. Due to current scheduling agreements/contracts, the very strong probability is that there not only won't be any movement but also can't be any movement for next season. That gives the league about 6-9 months to possibly appease those that need it.
The first thing the league needs to do is higher the best possible commissioner. Someone with a strong knowledge of college hockey who already has really good connections and relationships with as many of the coaches and ADs in the WCHA as possible and, obviously, someone with good business acumen and organizational leaderships skills as well. Since cost containment seems to be the number one issue on the table, finding a proactive, workable solution to that problem is priority number one. Here's my suggestion:
Approach Robert Morris and Niagara about joining the league. They've both been very outspoken about their desire to compete with 18 scholarships. I suspect both would be very willing to listen. IF they accept, create a West and East division with an Alaska school in each one. Play 2/3 of your conference games within your division and alternate yearly with the other schools home and away except that the Alaska schools would play each other twice a season which further limits the need for teams to travel to Alaska twice in any one season. I admit that I haven't "run the numbers" regarding how or if this scheduling arrangement can be made to work but, from what I've read of Mr. Morris's posts over the years, I suspect that would be mere child's play for him.
East (or South?) -- UAF/UAH/Ferris/BG/RMU/Niagara
West (or North) -- UAA/BSU/MSMU/MTU/NMU/LSSU
As for a playoff format, well, lots of options there. Personally, I would take the top 10 overall seeds and leave the bottom two out. Then you can actually have a "Final Five" again. As for the site, if creating the best atmosphere is as important as it seems to be, I think we need to shoot for buildings in the 6500 to 10K capacity range. If neutral site is critical, considering the local college hockey community (Div. I & Div. III), decent sized regional airport, and available hotels at that time of year, I think Duluth makes the most sense. However, my understanding is that Amsoil's management was approached and, after consulting with UMD (obviously, their primary tenant) said they weren't interested. The main reason being that UMD didn't want to have the hassle of practicing somewhere else if they were still playing. Considering the amount of local tax dollars that went into building the facility, I'm a little surprised that the city wouldn't demand a little more say in that decision considering the potential economic impact of hosting the tournament. Otherwise, some other options that haven't been mentioned in the various recent discussions would be:
Omaha -- IF (and only if) you can get the old Auditorium (its currently for sale -- no, not saying any of us or the league should buy it). Best combination of arena size (holds about 8500) and downtown nite life and hotels near the arena
St. Charles, MO. -- newer arena (The Family Arena) that holds about 10,000 -- new CHL team currently plays there but their regular season doesn't finish until the end of March so should be able to avoid scheduling conflicts -- plus, like many CHL teams, they might not be there next year.
The Quad Cities (the arena -- I Wireless Center -- is located in Moline, IL.) -- seats about 10,000 -- currently home to the Quad City Mallards of the CHL. Used to draw 9,000 a game in the team's heyday (1996-2002) but have struggled to average 3,000+ the last 5 or so years. Still, at least somewhat of a built in hockey following. Similar river community to St. Charles both in downtown Moline and across the river in Davenport, IA.
Ft. Wayne, IN. -- yes, I know, the NCAA's were a disaster. But, we all believe that was a pricing issue above all else. The War Memorial is a great refurbished arena with good sight lines and the community has been the 2nd highest in average attendance in ALL of minor league hockey for many years. If you promote and price it properly you will get decent local attendance and maybe even better if you stay there for a few years in a row.
Obviously, this is all predicated on saving the WCHA history and brand. IF Mankato and Bemidji were to get the invite to the NCHC and accept (as someone said in another post somewhere -- amounts to a major "Dave Hakstol" to both UAA and MTU from UND, DU, and CC) AND Bowling Green decides it wants to flex its CCHA muscle, the possibility exists that the WCHA just fades away and the CCHA returns with my previous list of teams minus the two Minnesota schools.
BG/Ferris/UAH/RMU/Niagara/LSSU/MTU/NMU/UAF/UAA -- and, if Western and Miami decide they made a mistake, then add them back into the mix. 12 teams with two divisions:
West -- MTU/NMU/LSSU/Ferris/Western/UAA
East -- Miami/BG/UAH/RMU/Niagara/UAF
However, if BG is the force that drives this change then the two Alaska schools (Donald, I'm not saying this is right or fair but, definitely a possibility if not probability) would most likely be held hostage about travel cost coverage in order to gain membership.
Ultimately, it's about money and leadership -- in that order. In today's economy, money not only will but, in the case of publicly funded universities, MUST drive most decisions. However, how those decisions are managed to the greater good of these schools from a hockey perspective, both short and long term, is all about quality leadership. Despite the arguments to the contrary of many on these boards, the minute Terry Pugula chose to donate his millions in support of a varsity PSU program, there HAD TO BE a B1G Hockey conference. It was Denver, North Dakota, UNO and, to a much lesser extent, CC, UMD, St. Cloud, Miami, and Western that truly sent us down the path we're now on. And the reason for their decision (at least for the WCHA schools) was a lack of leadership from their perspective regarding Bruce McLeod and the rest of the WCHA administration. As with most controversies such as this, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I apologize for the length of this post. It's probably why I've "lurked" for as long as I have but not ever posted until now.
That might be the most well thought-out first post I've ever seen.
gfmorris
New member
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
I could concoct a scheduling arrangement based on that; it wouldn't be hard.
Bringing just the CHA refugees is interesting, as most variations of this also pull Mercyhurst and Canisius out of AHA. I think that those programs would benefit from a better league than either AHA or the CHA.
The other answer to this problem is for the western schools to lower the number of conference games and go to an interlocking schedule with the other leagues. Sure, B1G won't go for it, but let's do it with NCHC and the WCHA.
WCHA: drop to 24 league games. Keep the rivalry/travel partner arrangement. Rotate the four-times schedule through the other eight opponents, with the caveat that you never play in Alaska twice. In that vein: if it's your turn to play UAA or UAF home-and-home, you get a home visit from the other school; otherwise, you play 2x and go to the Great North once with an Alaska team coming to you once. I think that this works out, but I'm running out of time to do the math today given that our end-of-season banquet is in 2.5 hours.
NCHC: they're at 24 games, but apparently that's too many for them, so drop it to 20. That means you can play three teams 4x and four teams 2x. To make the math simple, do a travel-partner scenario (maybe they do this already, I don't know) and pair off DU-CC, SCSU-UMD, WMU-MU, and UNO-UND. That last pairing may suck, but again, I don't have the time to look into this. At most, you're making four trips that aren't all that pleasing (five if you're the Mavs and TAFKASioux).
This gives the WCHA teams 12 non-conference games a season (34 + 2 exempted games by making an Alaska trip - 24 league games). The NCHC would have 14 non-conference games a season. Let's figure that the NCHC teams can get six NC dates on their own, while the WCHA can get four (everyone's been getting 6-8 anyway). The other eight games for each league can be put into an interlocking schedule, with two WCHA teams exempted every time. (Do you exempt the Alaska schools all of the time? That would make it work, but oh, the hue and cry.) Then you rotate through the interlock with two road trips and two home weekends. It's tempting to say that the WMU should only ever play the other Michigan schools, but that makes the interlock more pleasing to some than others.
Why would any of us want to do this?
1. The WCHA teams would want to do it because the NCHC teams are former foes in almost every case.
2. The NCHC teams would want to do it because they trade bigger travel woes for smaller ones. If Western is replacing four conference dates with trips and home dates inside Michigan every few years, they have to love that. These games don't help DU/CC/UNO that much, given that none of those schools are all that close to a WCHA school, but they get more guaranteed home dates.
Anyhow, this idea makes some sense, so it probably won't go anywhere. Where it doesn't make sense, I haven't thought it through enough. To paraphrase Mark Twain, I didn't have the time to make a short post, so I made a long one instead.
GFM
I could concoct a scheduling arrangement based on that; it wouldn't be hard.
Bringing just the CHA refugees is interesting, as most variations of this also pull Mercyhurst and Canisius out of AHA. I think that those programs would benefit from a better league than either AHA or the CHA.The other answer to this problem is for the western schools to lower the number of conference games and go to an interlocking schedule with the other leagues. Sure, B1G won't go for it, but let's do it with NCHC and the WCHA.
WCHA: drop to 24 league games. Keep the rivalry/travel partner arrangement. Rotate the four-times schedule through the other eight opponents, with the caveat that you never play in Alaska twice. In that vein: if it's your turn to play UAA or UAF home-and-home, you get a home visit from the other school; otherwise, you play 2x and go to the Great North once with an Alaska team coming to you once. I think that this works out, but I'm running out of time to do the math today given that our end-of-season banquet is in 2.5 hours.
NCHC: they're at 24 games, but apparently that's too many for them, so drop it to 20. That means you can play three teams 4x and four teams 2x. To make the math simple, do a travel-partner scenario (maybe they do this already, I don't know) and pair off DU-CC, SCSU-UMD, WMU-MU, and UNO-UND. That last pairing may suck, but again, I don't have the time to look into this. At most, you're making four trips that aren't all that pleasing (five if you're the Mavs and TAFKASioux).
This gives the WCHA teams 12 non-conference games a season (34 + 2 exempted games by making an Alaska trip - 24 league games). The NCHC would have 14 non-conference games a season. Let's figure that the NCHC teams can get six NC dates on their own, while the WCHA can get four (everyone's been getting 6-8 anyway). The other eight games for each league can be put into an interlocking schedule, with two WCHA teams exempted every time. (Do you exempt the Alaska schools all of the time? That would make it work, but oh, the hue and cry.) Then you rotate through the interlock with two road trips and two home weekends. It's tempting to say that the WMU should only ever play the other Michigan schools, but that makes the interlock more pleasing to some than others.
Why would any of us want to do this?
1. The WCHA teams would want to do it because the NCHC teams are former foes in almost every case.
2. The NCHC teams would want to do it because they trade bigger travel woes for smaller ones. If Western is replacing four conference dates with trips and home dates inside Michigan every few years, they have to love that. These games don't help DU/CC/UNO that much, given that none of those schools are all that close to a WCHA school, but they get more guaranteed home dates.
Anyhow, this idea makes some sense, so it probably won't go anywhere. Where it doesn't make sense, I haven't thought it through enough. To paraphrase Mark Twain, I didn't have the time to make a short post, so I made a long one instead.
GFM
uaafanblog
AKA - "Drop The Puck"
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
This automatic idea that everyone (other than Alaskans) has about "splitting" them is untenable. Every other team in the league has it's geographic rivals. Forcing Alaska schools is wrong in the strongest terms. Should such an attempt arise, I can only hope that UAA and UA_ join in some court action to block it and I think they could get the NCAA to join such an action.
Here's what I see as patently ridiculous about the suggestion:
UAA and UA_ would be fine with paying probably paying 100% of travel for league opponents as long as there is no threat to their rivalry. And on top of that concession. The exempted games that all league opponents get is PURELY AND SIMPLY $$$$ in their pockets. What each school does with those extra games is up to them but if you count the seats in each teams arena and multiply by $15.00 then you have the revenue that each team stands to make if they are able to maximize the potential.
So, you'd have a situation where travel to Alaska is paid ... And $XX,000 potential in additional revenue is generated. Which leaves anyone with a brain scratching their head as to what could possibly be the objection to maintaining the current "Alaska Status Quo" structure. There is NO financial downside for ANY league member regardless of the number of trips to Alaska.
If the objection is nothing more than the amount of time that it takes to get there and back then I have no reasoned response. I'm left but to say, "Suck it up babies". Both Alaska schools make a minimum of 6 or 7 trips a year. I don't make that point in any sort of machismo; instead it is an example. They do it with no harm to their players/programs so it's logically obvious that other's can do it 3 times in 2 years. Scheduling accommodation makes it likely that many of the teams each year could make a single 2 week trip to Alaska and play both teams.
This automatic idea that everyone (other than Alaskans) has about "splitting" them is untenable. Every other team in the league has it's geographic rivals. Forcing Alaska schools is wrong in the strongest terms. Should such an attempt arise, I can only hope that UAA and UA_ join in some court action to block it and I think they could get the NCAA to join such an action.
Here's what I see as patently ridiculous about the suggestion:
UAA and UA_ would be fine with paying probably paying 100% of travel for league opponents as long as there is no threat to their rivalry. And on top of that concession. The exempted games that all league opponents get is PURELY AND SIMPLY $$$$ in their pockets. What each school does with those extra games is up to them but if you count the seats in each teams arena and multiply by $15.00 then you have the revenue that each team stands to make if they are able to maximize the potential.
So, you'd have a situation where travel to Alaska is paid ... And $XX,000 potential in additional revenue is generated. Which leaves anyone with a brain scratching their head as to what could possibly be the objection to maintaining the current "Alaska Status Quo" structure. There is NO financial downside for ANY league member regardless of the number of trips to Alaska.
If the objection is nothing more than the amount of time that it takes to get there and back then I have no reasoned response. I'm left but to say, "Suck it up babies". Both Alaska schools make a minimum of 6 or 7 trips a year. I don't make that point in any sort of machismo; instead it is an example. They do it with no harm to their players/programs so it's logically obvious that other's can do it 3 times in 2 years. Scheduling accommodation makes it likely that many of the teams each year could make a single 2 week trip to Alaska and play both teams.
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
Please show a legal precedent that would force any conference in any sport to accept any team. Maybe Ferris State can use it to get themselves back together with Western Michigan. Those schools are far closer than Fairbanks and Anchorage. If the Alaska teams were willing to pay 100% of opponent travel, why didn't they make that offer years ago. The current agreement was actually a reduction in the amount the University of Alaska pays.
Please show a legal precedent that would force any conference in any sport to accept any team. Maybe Ferris State can use it to get themselves back together with Western Michigan. Those schools are far closer than Fairbanks and Anchorage. If the Alaska teams were willing to pay 100% of opponent travel, why didn't they make that offer years ago. The current agreement was actually a reduction in the amount the University of Alaska pays.
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Huntsville all finished in the bottom five in APR score among hockey teams last year, so the travel is probably having some effect.
Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Huntsville all finished in the bottom five in APR score among hockey teams last year, so the travel is probably having some effect.
Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce
Outstanding stuff. I know that several schools in both the NCHC and WCHA are unhappy about their massive increase in travel expense and travel time. Yours is a good common sense solution. The only problem is that common sense is not very common among administrators in the game we love.
If I recall, Mike Hastings has mentioned a couple of times on the record that he believes there will be more movement. If you look at his experience as a coach, both as a head coach in the USHL and as an assistant at the Div. I level, you can make a strong educated guess as to which coaches he has the closest ties to and, therefore, which programs and league he would prefer to be in. Although this doesn't mean that Mankato's administration necessarily feels this way, we can be fairly certain Mike is probably making his opinion known. Therefore, IF the NCHC is looking to get to 10 teams OR, if it thinks it may lose a team or two, then Mankato would certainly be the most attractive candidate in terms of both strength of program and ease of access (travel). And, if a 2nd team is needed, then Bemidji would probably be the next most attractive choice.
On the other side of the league there's Bowling Green. Anyone with ANY ties to that program has indicated they're "hearing" that BG "isn't happy". With that much smoke there's got to be at least a little fire. And, since they hold the rights to the CCHA name, along with the belief that they made some type of effort in creating some sort of league prior to accepting admittance to the WCHA, it's certainly plausible that they could make another effort to do so. Due to current scheduling agreements/contracts, the very strong probability is that there not only won't be any movement but also can't be any movement for next season. That gives the league about 6-9 months to possibly appease those that need it.
The first thing the league needs to do is higher the best possible commissioner. Someone with a strong knowledge of college hockey who already has really good connections and relationships with as many of the coaches and ADs in the WCHA as possible and, obviously, someone with good business acumen and organizational leaderships skills as well. Since cost containment seems to be the number one issue on the table, finding a proactive, workable solution to that problem is priority number one. Here's my suggestion:
Approach Robert Morris and Niagara about joining the league. They've both been very outspoken about their desire to compete with 18 scholarships. I suspect both would be very willing to listen. IF they accept, create a West and East division with an Alaska school in each one. Play 2/3 of your conference games within your division and alternate yearly with the other schools home and away except that the Alaska schools would play each other twice a season which further limits the need for teams to travel to Alaska twice in any one season. I admit that I haven't "run the numbers" regarding how or if this scheduling arrangement can be made to work but, from what I've read of Mr. Morris's posts over the years, I suspect that would be mere child's play for him.
East (or South?) -- UAF/UAH/Ferris/BG/RMU/Niagara
West (or North) -- UAA/BSU/MSMU/MTU/NMU/LSSU
As for a playoff format, well, lots of options there. Personally, I would take the top 10 overall seeds and leave the bottom two out. Then you can actually have a "Final Five" again. As for the site, if creating the best atmosphere is as important as it seems to be, I think we need to shoot for buildings in the 6500 to 10K capacity range. If neutral site is critical, considering the local college hockey community (Div. I & Div. III), decent sized regional airport, and available hotels at that time of year, I think Duluth makes the most sense. However, my understanding is that Amsoil's management was approached and, after consulting with UMD (obviously, their primary tenant) said they weren't interested. The main reason being that UMD didn't want to have the hassle of practicing somewhere else if they were still playing. Considering the amount of local tax dollars that went into building the facility, I'm a little surprised that the city wouldn't demand a little more say in that decision considering the potential economic impact of hosting the tournament. Otherwise, some other options that haven't been mentioned in the various recent discussions would be:
Omaha -- IF (and only if) you can get the old Auditorium (its currently for sale -- no, not saying any of us or the league should buy it). Best combination of arena size (holds about 8500) and downtown nite life and hotels near the arena
St. Charles, MO. -- newer arena (The Family Arena) that holds about 10,000 -- new CHL team currently plays there but their regular season doesn't finish until the end of March so should be able to avoid scheduling conflicts -- plus, like many CHL teams, they might not be there next year.
The Quad Cities (the arena -- I Wireless Center -- is located in Moline, IL.) -- seats about 10,000 -- currently home to the Quad City Mallards of the CHL. Used to draw 9,000 a game in the team's heyday (1996-2002) but have struggled to average 3,000+ the last 5 or so years. Still, at least somewhat of a built in hockey following. Similar river community to St. Charles both in downtown Moline and across the river in Davenport, IA.
Ft. Wayne, IN. -- yes, I know, the NCAA's were a disaster. But, we all believe that was a pricing issue above all else. The War Memorial is a great refurbished arena with good sight lines and the community has been the 2nd highest in average attendance in ALL of minor league hockey for many years. If you promote and price it properly you will get decent local attendance and maybe even better if you stay there for a few years in a row.
Obviously, this is all predicated on saving the WCHA history and brand. IF Mankato and Bemidji were to get the invite to the NCHC and accept (as someone said in another post somewhere -- amounts to a major "Dave Hakstol" to both UAA and MTU from UND, DU, and CC) AND Bowling Green decides it wants to flex its CCHA muscle, the possibility exists that the WCHA just fades away and the CCHA returns with my previous list of teams minus the two Minnesota schools.
BG/Ferris/UAH/RMU/Niagara/LSSU/MTU/NMU/UAF/UAA -- and, if Western and Miami decide they made a mistake, then add them back into the mix. 12 teams with two divisions:
West -- MTU/NMU/LSSU/Ferris/Western/UAA
East -- Miami/BG/UAH/RMU/Niagara/UAF
However, if BG is the force that drives this change then the two Alaska schools (Donald, I'm not saying this is right or fair but, definitely a possibility if not probability) would most likely be held hostage about travel cost coverage in order to gain membership.
Ultimately, it's about money and leadership -- in that order. In today's economy, money not only will but, in the case of publicly funded universities, MUST drive most decisions. However, how those decisions are managed to the greater good of these schools from a hockey perspective, both short and long term, is all about quality leadership. Despite the arguments to the contrary of many on these boards, the minute Terry Pugula chose to donate his millions in support of a varsity PSU program, there HAD TO BE a B1G Hockey conference. It was Denver, North Dakota, UNO and, to a much lesser extent, CC, UMD, St. Cloud, Miami, and Western that truly sent us down the path we're now on. And the reason for their decision (at least for the WCHA schools) was a lack of leadership from their perspective regarding Bruce McLeod and the rest of the WCHA administration. As with most controversies such as this, the truth is somewhere in the middle. I apologize for the length of this post. It's probably why I've "lurked" for as long as I have but not ever posted until now.
Outstanding stuff. I know that several schools in both the NCHC and WCHA are unhappy about their massive increase in travel expense and travel time. Yours is a good common sense solution. The only problem is that common sense is not very common among administrators in the game we love.