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.

The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

If there are no exemptions, which schools will travel to Alaska to play in their tournaments, non-conference? If they can't get anyone to fly up for non-conference, they're stuck playing each other in non-conference games or traveling south and losing home revenue. Who knows? Maybe they'd enjoy playing 10 games per year between UA and UAA.
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

wolverineTrumpet said:
You don't seem to understand that no one is whining. Just pointing out that the exemption and travel subsidy are needed motivation for teams to travel to Alaska.
No one has said, "wahh, 15 hours of planes and layovers, I hate having to go to Alaska". What has been stated is, less travel time and less expense looks good to schedulers and athletic departments.

Now, if my team gets 2 extra games by going to Alaska, you've got my attention. Just ask my team that seems to refuse to schedule non-conference away games. I enjoyed a trip to Anchorage for the icebreaker one of the years where we weren't playing at UA_.

As for an arguement about once they are in a conference you're obligated to play there and shouldn't get the benefits of subsidies and exempt games....well, your acceptance in a conference might be difficult.

Yes, it is unfair to the Alaska schools that travel all the time, and are spending $$ for their travel as well as their opponents'. It's also unfair for a B1G school to say, "sure we'll schedule you for non-conference, but only if you come here, and don't expect us to visit your barn, ever". It's unfair for non-scholarship teams to compete against teams with almost all scholarship players. It's unfair to have an amazing goalie recruit commit to your team and then never set foot on campus.

In case you haven't noticed, the NCAA isn't about fair. Maybe it used to be, but today, it's about the $$$
Click to expand...
Fair went out the window with the big money TV contracts. And one should not that prior to that explosion, you had the SEC in a pretty tight footprint, the Big Ten, the Big 8, the Southwest Conference, the Pac 8 and the ACC as well. They were regionalized leagues that facilitated efficient travel, not only for their football and basketball programs, but also for the sports that generated far less revenue than was their cost to operate. Big TV money has made it possible for the SEC to add Missouri, for the Big Ten to have Maryland and Nebraska, and it must be some really big money because those prime revenue generators also have to cover the plane tickets for the soccer or lacrosse team to go from Lincoln to College Park.
 
Jwilly48 said:
I think the better solution is not to end the exemptions, but rather the Alaska schools should also be eligible for those exemptions and be allowed to host extra games to help offset some of their costs. It might be a better/more realistic solution.

Petitioning the NCAA to do away with the exemptions for schools in the lower 48 would probably be more damaging long term than it would be advantageous.
Click to expand...

Playing an extra two home games for us isn't advantageous because we'd still be paying for flights for other teams. UAF averages about 3,000 for home games, more for games against B1G schools or UAA (and home games against B1G schools are a thing of the past for us after this season); after paying rent for the Carlson Center we would lose money. The only way it would make sense is if UAA and UAF scheduled another regular season series against each other that counted as non-conference games.

The Governor's Cup games are fun, but playing possibly nine of those games in a season (if this Alaska playoff rule sticks) is overkill.
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

Freddie said:
Look again, you'll see that much of the falcon head is hidden behind the interlocking BG. Down here, we refer to this present incarnation as 'peek-a-boo falcon'. Our marketing department is managed by interns, retards and the children of retarded interns with ADHD, so we get a new-look logo every couple of years.

PS: UAH is just happy to be on a map...ANY map.
Click to expand...

As someone who worked in the Media Relations/Sport Information department, I agree with all that has been said ;)
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

uaafanblog said:
Potential Additional Revenue from hosting 2 additional home games granted by the Alaska/Hawaii Exemption ...

(#of seats x price of ticket x 2 extra home games)
BGSU -- 5,000 x $20 x 2 = $200,000
Ferris Wheel -- 2457 x $20 x 2 = $98,280
Lake State -- 3373 x $20 x 2 = $134,920
Norm Ich U -- 3800 x $20 x 2 - $152,000
ButtSmelly -- 4350 x $20 x 2 = $174,000
MTU -- 4200 x $20 x 2 = $168,000
Kato -- 4382 x $20 x 2 = $193,280
UAH -- 6800 x $20 x 2 = $272,000

Yes you'll argue that these are not actual numbers. Actual attendance differs greatly. Ticket prices vary. Blah Blah Blah. Not my problem. This is a "potential revenue" number presented as an example.

Cut it in half if you want to ... average your team's actual attendance for the last three years and calculate the numbers yourself. WCHA teams used to dance around like it was raining gold from above when they got their fat $100,000 share from the Final Five each year and yet nearly every one of them made more money on the extra home games they played. The point is to be made again ...

Each of your schools is being more than fairly compensated for travel by the subsidies that make an Alaska trip equal to the next most expensive trip on your schedule that isn't Alaska. That's a perfectly fair geographic recompense ... the largess of the Alaska/Hawaii Exemption should be put to an end.

Am I ranting from a soapbox? Eff yes I am. Why? Because I'm already sick and tired of hearing the moaning and whining about your team's effing long arduous trip to Alaska. Quit that and you'll hear none of this from me. Don't quit and I'll bring it up from time to time to remind the whiners of the actual benefits of having UAA and UAF in your crappy conference. Don't like what I have to say? Avail yourself of the forum options.
Click to expand...

I know these are just guesses but BGSU students don't have to pay for tickets, for each game a general fee is applied at the start of the year that covers all athletic events and is way less than what it would be to buy tickets to every game and factor in that BG has been averaging about 500-800 students for games recently and attendance has been around 2000-3000.

Not an attack just showing how BG does their ticketing

Based on Average attendance for this season and estimates based on my time working for BG Athletics.

BGSU AVG ATTENDENCE: 2372

Chairback: ~5 or less per game x 20 = 100 (no one sits here except for the Univ. President and a couple of season ticket holders)
Bench: ~600 x 12 = 7200
GA: ~1017 x 10 = 101700
Student: ~750 x 0 = 0

= 17,470 a game, not including concessions/student fees/rough estimate. (34,940 for a weekend series)

BGSU 2012-2013 Single Game Ticketing
PRIME Chairback Reserved -- Minimum Falcon Club giving level required $20 $20*
Bench Reserved $12 $15*
General Admission $10 $13*
* PREMIUM Game Prices apply to all regular season home games against Notre Dame, Ohio State, and Michigan State.
 
Last edited:
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

Gotta agree with the sentiment. Glad that the Alaska rule is gone before it could start, and glad that we're progressing towards league games meaning more than just seeding.


... Although check back with me on my opinion on it the first time my team misses out. :o
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

Earn your place in the playoffs... I like....
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

The WCHA accepted UAH. Now they make regular season games worth something. Confirm the end of shootouts, and I think they score a hat trick with the college hockey crowd. :D
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

aparch said:
The WCHA accepted UAH. Now they make regular season games worth something. Confirm the end of shootouts, and I think they score a hat trick with the college hockey crowd. :D
Click to expand...

Confirm the end of shootouts. We never had that crap!
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

The first season you have a tie for 8th place and one team goes golfling due to some 3rd tiebreaker you'll have people screaming for shootouts unfortunately.
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

uaafanblog said:
The first season you have a tie for 8th place and one team goes golfling due to some 3rd tiebreaker you'll have people screaming for shootouts unfortunately.
Click to expand...
screaming for shootouts? I highly doubt that...screaming for everyone making the conference tournament? probably.
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

aparch said:
The WCHA accepted UAH. Now they make regular season games worth something. Confirm the end of shootouts, and I think they score a hat trick with the college hockey crowd. :D
Click to expand...
I'm already sick of the B1G. The truths in this post have me ready to be a WCHA fan. Now, which team to adopt as my own?


Clearly that answer is Tech. I love that part of the fight song when they sing about, "the Michigan, Michigan, Michigan Engineers"
 
Re: The New WCHA 3, Revenge of the Sieve (2013-14)

uaafanblog said:
The first season you have a tie for 8th place and one team goes golfling due to some 3rd tiebreaker you'll have people screaming for shootouts unfortunately.
Click to expand...


I'd rather be eliminated by a 3rd tiebreaker than a gimmick talent contest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top