The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

[Bale]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

I seem to remember reading that Alvarez said he couldn't see any reason to ever schedule Mankato again.

Of course, that was before it came out in the past few months that they are negotiating to get MSU back on the schedule in the near future. Apparently, that line of schools never materialized for the "right" to play in Sconni.

 

[Hockey John]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

We can dream of this, but it is useless because the Big Ten will never agree to this. When Michigan and Michigan State for two examples require a 2 for 1 agreement to get them to come to a road arena, their arrogance will never let them agree to this arrangement even with the Alaskan exemption. I'll settle for our home and home with Ohio State and will agree to play any Big Ten team on an EQUAL basis. Until then, let them rot.

 

[gfmorris]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

Perhaps you should consider staying off the internets.

I was on Usenet in 1995 — I'm not that hard to find, given my name. It's not that the messenger is more important than the message. It's that the messenger's attitude and demeanor can overwhelm any message that they may have. If you can't get that, "perhaps you should consider staying off the internets".

GFM

 

[gfmorris]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

After reading your posts since UAH got into this league I made the incorrect assumption you were a little more tolerant of other points of view than what you are showing here.
Or maybe I just made the mistake of thinking you had a little thicker skin than what you are showing here.
I guess what I'm trying to say is why not just read what someone else has to say and move on.
I've posted what I thought were valid points and there were no responses to them.
Made me think "guess it wasn't so important as I thought".
Why the personal attacks?
Wanta talk some hockey????????????

I'm not upset at you at all.

Here you go, Geoff. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApfOnU5g-h_ndEQ4UW4tWmk3TjltTmMwaklmTlZZLUE&usp=sharing

This is just an example. The only requirement is that each WCHA team has 3 1-for-1's with a BIG team (could be 3 with the same team or all with different teams), and each BIG team has 4 1-for-1's with WCHA teams.

Cool! I look forward to going through it this evening.

GFM

 

[oldish husky]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

There is some extra drama created when teams miss the playoffs, but I can't see why the league would give up ticket sales for a fifth home playoff series on a campus site. A fifth series alone increases revenue by 25% that first weekend (depending on the host school and spring break schedules). The only negative effect is that it creates a fifth team at the final five, but that just means you need another game = more ticket sales. There's lots of stuff that can improve, but it might be nice to start by optimally selling what we already have.

And yeah, I'm a bit biased since Tech would have been that 5th team this year...

 

[Bale]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

There is some extra drama created when teams miss the playoffs, but I can't see why the league would give up ticket sales for a fifth home playoff series on a campus site. A fifth series alone increases revenue by 25% that first weekend (depending on the host school and spring break schedules). The only negative effect is that it creates a fifth team at the final five, but that just means you need another game = more ticket sales. There's lots of stuff that can improve, but it might be nice to start by optimally selling what we already have.

And yeah, I'm a bit biased since Tech would have been that 5th team this year...

Pretty sure the reason I heard is that the arenas didn't want to commit an additional day to the tourney and the ticket sales on that 5th game wouldn't justify paying for that third day.

 

[gfmorris]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

All I know is that the subject of 8 vs. 10 came up at the hockey banquet and that our players were fine with missing the playoffs, for all the reasons that those of us who like the 8-team system like it.

GFM

 

[gfmorris]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

Here you go, Geoff. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApfOnU5g-h_ndEQ4UW4tWmk3TjltTmMwaklmTlZZLUE&usp=sharing

This is just an example. The only requirement is that each WCHA team has 3 1-for-1's with a BIG team (could be 3 with the same team or all with different teams), and each BIG team has 4 1-for-1's with WCHA teams.

That looks like it makes sense to me. I forwarded it to our coaches for their review.

GFM

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

BBDL for deputy commissioner

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

BBDL for deputy commissioner

I don't think I could handle the pay cut.

 

[Squarebanks]

Where are you Squarebanks?
I kinda thought you would be one of the first to point out that BigBlue's plan to increase game attendance is predicated on "The Alaska Exemption". There have been a couple of posters on this thread suggesting the Alaska schools are irrelevant and darned lucky to be let into "their" league.
Guess I'll take the red paint for you.

Edit: And Big Blue, it's a good plan. Thanks for the effort!

Fortunately, a couple of posters does not a league make.

 

[RapidsCity]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

We can dream of this, but it is useless because the Big Ten will never agree to this. When Michigan and Michigan State for two examples require a 2 for 1 agreement to get them to come to a road arena, their arrogance will never let them agree to this arrangement even with the Alaskan exemption. I'll settle for our home and home with Ohio State and will agree to play any Big Ten team on an EQUAL basis. Until then, let them rot.

No. They really like going to Alaska. UAAFANBLOG says that. And if UAAFANBLOG says it, it must be so. If you give them four chances to go to Alaska, they'll gladly scrap those 2 for 1 deals with Tech and LSSU. Wisconsin will dump the never play a game in the UP series with NMU and the Gold Gophers will be jumping at the chance to dump their 3 for 1 money maker with the little guys. And they'll do it all so they can go to Houghton and the Soo and Bowling Green on equal terms. Besides the Big Ten, the "Super" Conference like the team bonding experience so much that they were gravely disappointed when both Alaska schools opted for the WCHA instead of the chance to be Super.

 

[Pink Pony]

. Besides the Big Ten, the "Super" Conference like the team bonding experience so much that they were gravely disappointed when both Alaska schools opted for the WCHA instead of the chance to be Super.

The Super didn't like the team bonding of going Alaska. They thought the UP teams needed to travel more planes and snowstorms to make Davyd a happy traveler.

 

[gfmorris]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

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.

Doing this equitably is proving to be an interesting exercise. I think that the key is going to be making sure that you don't do H&H or away series to all three of UAH, UAA, and UAF very often. I'm at an impasse right now, but I'm sure that will come through the next day.

As for the add-Niagara-and-Robert-Morris, split-into-divisions, and all the rest idea that net presence had, well, that's fun to do and all, but I don't think that the WCHA expands in one place and keeps all ten current members. Maybe I'm wrong.

GFM <— still loves that first post from net presence.

 

[net presence]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

Doing this equitably is proving to be an interesting exercise. I think that the key is going to be making sure that you don't do H&H or away series to all three of UAH, UAA, and UAF very often. I'm at an impasse right now, but I'm sure that will come through the next day.

As for the add-Niagara-and-Robert-Morris, split-into-divisions, and all the rest idea that net presence had, well, that's fun to do and all, but I don't think that the WCHA expands in one place and keeps all ten current members. Maybe I'm wrong.

GFM <— still loves that first post from net presence.

Mr. Morris, this means alot coming from you!

 

[JohnsonsJerseys]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

I understand why the proposed schedule was set up as a 12 year time period, but let's be honest - college hockey in its current conference configuration will be lucky to survive four years. It is a powder keg waiting to blow up again the next time a team makes a jump to a new conference and others use it as an excuse to reposition again.

You can save this post as a reference down the road, but mark my words, someone is going to figure out that playing in a "National" league isn't worth the travel budget (especially when you're a doormat every year) or the National convinces another team that wasn't good enough the first time that now they really wanted you all along (and bring another team with you) or Atlantic Hockey and ECAC go through an Eastern Explosion and become the Atlantic 6, The Ivys and the Eastern Leftovers.

Regardless of what happens I just get the gut feel that so much of what happened over the last couple years was knee-jerk reactionary that eventually some teams will come to their senses and we'll see this massive change happen again, but maybe with some planning put into it.

Ryan J

 

[Hockey John]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

I agree JohnsonsJersey! More geographically sound decisions will be made in the next few years.

 

[gfmorris]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

I agree JohnsonsJersey! More geographically sound decisions will be made in the next few years.

While I agree, you can imagine just how happy I am to hear that.

GFM

 

[davyd83]

Re: The New WCHA, 2014 Offseason: See-ya, Bruce

The Super didn't like the team bonding of going Alaska. They thought the UP teams needed to travel more planes and snowstorms to make Davyd a happy traveler.

This guy has over 250,000 miles of hockey travel under his belt. It was great to visit a few new places this season. Anchorage is a beautiful city and the surrounding area is breath taking. Mankato was pretty cool as well. It was nice that the second trip was much warmer than the first so I could get out and see the area a bit and walk around downtown. Grand Forks...well...it's got a really nice rink. Looking forward to Happy Valley next year, the ten day Alaskan adventure and a return trip to Huntsville. Always great to see my good friends in Alabama. And those frequent flyer miles and flight vouchers I got for taking a bump will turn into a nice trip to Tuscaloosa for the Bama/Florida game.

 

[Pink Pony]

If the WCHA is still around in six years, he'll have done a great job

The WCHA better be around in six years. They didn't hire Bill to help shutdown the league.This isn't the CHA who awarded the McLeod trophy.