You do realize Pink Pony's post are nothing but drivel meant to get a rise out of people? No one could seriously believe the garbage it posts.
The big schools won't come to the UP unless the UP schools agree to two or three trips to their rinks.
You do realize that MSU, OSU and PSU (and potentially WI as well) do nothing for that tourney, right? No one cares about them going up to the UP and it won't drive attendance. Add to that they will probably demand an ungodly deal for them to go and it doesn't make much sense
Wisconsin is going to Alaska next season.
A big school will bring a 1000 to a venue.
Plus rivals that left from the formation of the big will renew.
Wisconsin is going to Alaska next season.
No they won't.
I guess maybe that's part of the reason Anchorage was in Madison this year. Also note that Wisconsin will gain an exemption for those games in Alaska and there is also a future Alaskan visit to Wisconsin.
Side note... It seems that while Barry Alvarez is generally labled as Father Death of the old WCHA, Wisconsin has been the most accomodating of the B1G schools in scheduling the "smaller" schools.
It really doesn't surprise me that Michigan or Michigan aren't more accomdating, considering the "lesser" schools always found a way to p*ss Anastos off by beating his media darlings in the CCHA.
I'm a little surprised that tOSU hasn't guaranteed more NC with the UP schools; their coaches and staff always raved about using a fall road trip to MQT or LSSU as a team building trip.
And Penn State... well, I feel they at least owe one cursory swing through the Midwest as a "sorry for being the linchpin that caused this mess."
Pastie Cup!
No they won't show up or renew rival?
If a different Big team shows up in a a UP barn every six years for a tournament is within reason.
I don't think you can blame barry for this. Personally I'd blame that pillar of the community peg bradley-dopes. and her henchmen who defended the brand.
As far as the other teams the Wcha plays, the first criteria to me would be a fairly reffed game. The big ten has done a good job with that. HE, not so much. I'd like to see more games with the ECAC, though I do think the big will do what it can, without spending much money, to help the smaller schools. PSU, I doubt it, maybe BGSU but not the UP.
I have never heard anyone from the Big Ten say that having 6 teams means they MUST play under the Big Ten banner, I've only ever heard them say 6 is required before the CAN play under the Big Ten banner.The bottom line is six big ten schools with a sport means they play under the big ten banner. For some reason fans want to blame others. Penn State was number six. Therefore hockey became a big ten sport.
They won't come up without UP schools making multiple trips to their arenas. Load up too many of those 2-1 deals and you find yourself playing 2 home and 6 road non conference games. Now, put a Yooper tournament in your own barn every third year, and you've basically done another 2 road for one home deal. That would be bad scheduling.
The UP schools could go to the venues together in a return trip.
NMU plays Friday in Lansing. MTU plays Friday in Ann Arbor.
Then exchange venues on Saturday. If the UP schools could get real creative in exchange dates as they should be working together to get good teams to play in the UP.
PSU and Wisconsin head to Alaska tournaments next season.
No it isn't.Wisconsin to Alaska is 2 for 1.
Alot of schools like Wisconsin like the early season trip to Wisconsin when you add in subsidized travel and the fact that the games don't hurt the # of games they can have at home. It's easy to see why UAA and UAF have little trouble filling the slate for their tournaments or NC schedule.No it isn't.