WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

[SCSU Euro]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

So why would the WCHA want these 'unstable' programs?

_untsville becomes a lot more stable if they were to be admitted to the WCHA than the CCHA in my opinion.

 

[SCSU Euro]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

I think that's the first time I've ever heard the team that just won the national championship be referred to as a "cupcake".

When was the last time tne National Champion was a usually below .500 in their own conference and moving to a more competitive conference in the near future?

 

[MikeAnderson]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Oh, screw this whole GD sport.

No surprise, Huntsville on the outside looking in once again.

Hard to hang out with people who simply don't want you around.

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Another thing that they might want to hash out there at the meeting is the long term prospects of MSU-Moorhead being a viable school? If they're not going to be ready to come online til the 2015-16 season, that could be a problem as well, as it would cause some imbalances. Especially if things work out to where both leagues can work it out that they're ready to be at 8 schools each by 2013-14. Simple way around that would be to promise UAH a home in the CCHA then when the Dragons go online in the WCHA, and the both leagues would be at 9 schools and could use the interlock there to work out a good number of games to fill out a schedule. During conference play, each league would have a school in need of a dancing partner. They could work out a deal that would get both leagues to 8 schools for the 2013-14 and 2014-15 seasons, and a promise to UAH from both leagues to keep them afloat with a number of home games from both leagues members. 9 would be too much for everybody to do a home and home series and still have room for both interlock and other non-conference games, but you could work out something to were each team in each league would play 4 league members home and home for 16 games, then 2 league members away for 4 games, then the last 2 members at home for 4, which would then give them a total of 24 league games a year. Throw in say 6 games a year from the Interlock, and well, you're scheduling is pretty well done for the year.

Something to ponder anyways....

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Another thing that they might want to hash out there at the meeting is the long term prospects of MSU-Moorhead being a viable school? If they're not going to be ready to come online til the 2015-16 season, that could be a problem as well, as it would cause some imbalances. Especially if things work out to where both leagues can work it out that they're ready to be at 8 schools each by 2013-14. Simple way around that would be to promise UAH a home in the CCHA then when the Dragons go online in the WCHA, and the both leagues would be at 9 schools and could use the interlock there to work out a good number of games to fill out a schedule. During conference play, each league would have a school in need of a dancing partner. They could work out a deal that would get both leagues to 8 schools for the 2013-14 and 2014-15 seasons, and a promise to UAH from both leagues to keep them afloat with a number of home games from both leagues members. 9 would be too much for everybody to do a home and home series and still have room for both interlock and other non-conference games, but you could work out something to were each team in each league would play 4 league members home and home for 16 games, then 2 league members away for 4 games, then the last 2 members at home for 4, which would then give them a total of 24 league games a year. Throw in say 6 games a year from the Interlock, and well, you're scheduling is pretty well done for the year.

Something to ponder anyways....

Just worked it out a little here, it would be fairly easy for both leagues to get to 8 I think right now.

UAF, UAA, BSU, SCSU, Mankato, MTU, NMU, and LSSU all into the WCHA.
FSU, WMU, BGSU, UAH, Mercyhurst, Robert Morris, Niagara, and Caniasus into the CCHA.

That is of course assuming all 4 of the AHA schools sign off on the deal. And the NCHA gets the prize of the Irish and doesn't grab WMU as well. And frankly, I could see this interlock deal between the new CCHA and WCHA schools being a real hardship on the NCHA. Odds are, when they're looking for more non-conference dates, those schools are going to be a little more likely to entertain offers from the BTHC schools simply because they can offer a better deal for them, along with putting a school on the schedule that has national clout to the average Joe Sixpack. Thus, that would mean that the NCHA is likely going to have to look east a lot for more of their non-conference opponents. But with them having the Irish who has hinted that they would want some more games with the power schools out east, that might not be such a bad deal for everybody all around there.

 

[Skeeterman]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

You'll have to excuse Skeeterman's deep hate for the dogs. The last 2 years UMD has had a **** good team. But if you look what they have done over the last 11 years in the WCHA, he does a have a point being that they have a winning season 5 out of the last 11 years under their current coach.

With that being said, at least when they have a good team, they have made it count. FF appearance, Conference Tournament title, and now National Title.

Hey! I love UMD, those loveable Bottom Feeders! So they got lucky one year-now back to bottom feeding.

I'm here to help.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

No to a merge.

Take a flying leap to anyone that thinks putting the AK schools in different conferences is a "good" idea.

Why the eff is anything Damien Goddard has to say in this thread relevant or even interesting?

I liked the way the WCHA was reforming with an eye toward 8 teams. If the league hopes in any manner to retain/rebuild some luster after losing 4 of it's good teams to the BTHC and the BHHC then I think they're best served by keeping membership at a maximum of 8. I say so because the divergent interests of more teams than that is harder to manage and hence prone to problems.

As to UAA and UAF in the same league. Quit moaning about having to fly to Alaska twice. Both of those teams do it for every away series 6, 7 and 8 times a season. The argument about needing a waiver to stay up here for 10 days and play both teams on one trip is specious because that waiver is granted to UAA and UAF when necessary and so that won't be a sticking point. If not going to Alaska twice a year is some big sticking point for a school then might I suggest they drop hockey. In North America .. hockey means travel. Kids do it from an early age all through their USA Hockey years, they leave home to play juniors and travel extensively in many leagues and obviously professional hockey exists on both coasts. Travel is part of the milieux. Don't like it. Don't play hockey. Also, there are tangible and recoverable revenues from going to Alaska ... with both teams in the same league conference opponents could get FOUR additional home games EVERY season. That's easily a half a million dollars in revenue at a place like SCSU and still a decent chunk of change at any of the other schools provided they manage those exemptions wisely.

My take on this "story" is that the WCHA is crossing it's T's and dotting it's I's as part of it's due diligence and that these preliminary discussions are not much more than that at this point.

And oh yeah ... Notre Dame. I think they could survive in this landscape as an independent.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Adding UAH doesn't really add any extra stability either.

Yeah ... cos adding a program with 30+ years history that is so dedicated to the sport that they're prepared to suffer through shortened seasons and few home games in order to keep playing the game they love. Right. They don't bring stability to a reformed CCHA with four new AHA teams? Of course they do.

That program is to be admired for it's commitment and dedication to NCAA Hockey. I would advocate for UAH into the WCHA and would happily consider them an equal addition to any of the remaining CCHA schools that the WCHA is courting. I don't simply because there are so many sissies on this board about "travel" that I already have to counter.

A trip to a city where you can golf in February? What the heck is there to whine about that?

 

[Biddco]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Biddco, I'm bitter too. SCSU has not been able to get the job done when we have had all of the tools necessary to do so. In all fairness, it did take you 50 years to complete the same task.

But it only took 10% of that time for me as a fan . SCSU might be waiting that longer than 50 years.

 

[Biddco]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Hey! I love UMD, those loveable Bottom Feeders! So they got lucky one year-now back to bottom feeding.

I'm here to help.

SCSU will be the bottom feeder of the WCCHA

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Yeah ... cos adding a program with 30+ years history that is so dedicated to the sport that they're prepared to suffer through shortened seasons and few home games in order to keep playing the game they love. Right. They don't bring stability to a reformed CCHA with four new AHA teams? Of course they do.

That program is to be admired for it's commitment and dedication to NCAA Hockey. I would advocate for UAH into the WCHA and would happily consider them an equal addition to any of the remaining CCHA schools that the WCHA is courting. I don't simply because there are so many sissies on this board about "travel" that I already have to counter.

A trip to a city where you can golf in February? What the heck is there to whine about that?

Hell, you Alaska boys would just enjoy getting to see the sun for most of the day down there. Not to mention getting to break out your summer clothes and such.

 

[dggoddard]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Why the eff is anything Damien Goddard has to say in this thread relevant or even interesting?

While you throw out ideas like inviting UAH & Alaska-Fairbanks to join the WCHA and continue to ignore the economic realities that plague the rest of the WCHA conference members, you have no chance of ever correctly predicting what will actually happen.

 

[beaverhockeyfan]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Yeah ... cos adding a program with 30+ years history that is so dedicated to the sport that they're prepared to suffer through shortened seasons and few home games in order to keep playing the game they love. Right. They don't bring stability to a reformed CCHA with four new AHA teams? Of course they do.

That program is to be admired for it's commitment and dedication to NCAA Hockey. I would advocate for UAH into the WCHA and would happily consider them an equal addition to any of the remaining CCHA schools that the WCHA is courting. I don't simply because there are so many sissies on this board about "travel" that I already have to counter.

A trip to a city where you can golf in February? What the heck is there to whine about that?

Loved my trips to Huntsville when UAH and BSU were in the CHA together. Leaving Minnesota at 6 in the morning when it was 20 below zero and eight hours later (layovers when going from Brainerd-MSP-Detroit-Huntsville), being in shorts and a polo with it being 60 above.

I could handle UAH being in the WCHA!

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

While you throw out ideas like inviting UAH & Alaska-Fairbanks to join the WCHA and continue to ignore the economic realities that plague the rest of the WCHA conference members, you have no chance of ever correctly predicting what will actually happen.

While you spew propaganda, shill for league consultants and post claptrap here for no other purpose than to generate disharmony ... you have no chance of ever regaining what tiny shred of credibility you actually might have had.

Nobody in this thread cares what you think. You have zero standing to discuss these issues with WCHA and CCHA fans.

 

[dggoddard]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Nobody in this thread cares what you think. You have zero standing to discuss these issues with WCHA and CCHA fans.

It breaks my heart that we can't still be friends. Sure breaking up is hard to do, but I was hoping we could still go to the beach together, catch a movie or take the dog for a walk.

 

[Neil Diamond]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

So you're going to convince the Alaska schools to play half of their conference home games on weeknights as opposed to weekends and to play more of their home games during holiday breaks, which traditionally are not great attendance nights? Now you want the schools that are traveling to miss 8 school days instead of six when they have to play both. For a Friday/ Saturday & Wednesday/ Thursday setup, teams generally leave on Wednesday. So you lose 3 school days that week, plus the entire following week. By traveling to both stops separately, they would lose Wed-Fri in each of those weeks, for a total of six days. The NCAA has limits on the number of class days that can be missed. And when you consider that those Mankato-Lake State or Bemidji-Ferris trips are 2 day bus rides, giving up two extra days for Alaska is not a good idea.

I knew if I scrolled long enough I'd find you pouring cold water on this idea.

You, the guy who stated on the Lake State thread you hoped the WCHA would be willing to entertain the possibility of bringing LSSU into the fold.

What a freakin' hypocrite.

 

[Andrew J Carter]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

Just worked it out a little here, it would be fairly easy for both leagues to get to 8 I think right now.

UAF, UAA, BSU, SCSU, Mankato, MTU, NMU, and LSSU all into the WCHA.
FSU, WMU, BGSU, UAH, Mercyhurst, Robert Morris, Niagara, and Caniasus into the CCHA.

That is of course assuming all 4 of the AHA schools sign off on the deal. And the NCHA gets the prize of the Irish and doesn't grab WMU as well. And frankly, I could see this interlock deal between the new CCHA and WCHA schools being a real hardship on the NCHA. Odds are, when they're looking for more non-conference dates, those schools are going to be a little more likely to entertain offers from the BTHC schools simply because they can offer a better deal for them, along with putting a school on the schedule that has national clout to the average Joe Sixpack. Thus, that would mean that the NCHA is likely going to have to look east a lot for more of their non-conference opponents. But with them having the Irish who has hinted that they would want some more games with the power schools out east, that might not be such a bad deal for everybody all around there.

Hey Bigmgr74:

I'll go with the two leagues with the two automatic bids. I'll take Lake State and Fairbanks in the WCHA. If Lake State would rather stay where they are, I'll takes Huntsville. Hey, Huntsville is like a southern trip and they are worth salvaging.

Many of the NCHA programs, especially UND, UMD, & MN from the Big Ten will still want to keep most of their Minnesota college rivalries.

I guess we'll see after the Notre Dame decision.

 

[SCSU Euro]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

No to a merge.

Take a flying leap to anyone that thinks putting the AK schools in different conferences is a "good" idea.

Why the eff is anything Damien Goddard has to say in this thread relevant or even interesting?

I liked the way the WCHA was reforming with an eye toward 8 teams. If the league hopes in any manner to retain/rebuild some luster after losing 4 of it's good teams to the BTHC and the BHHC then I think they're best served by keeping membership at a maximum of 8. I say so because the divergent interests of more teams than that is harder to manage and hence prone to problems.

As to UAA and UAF in the same league. Quit moaning about having to fly to Alaska twice. Both of those teams do it for every away series 6, 7 and 8 times a season. The argument about needing a waiver to stay up here for 10 days and play both teams on one trip is specious because that waiver is granted to UAA and UAF when necessary and so that won't be a sticking point. If not going to Alaska twice a year is some big sticking point for a school then might I suggest they drop hockey. In North America .. hockey means travel. Kids do it from an early age all through their USA Hockey years, they leave home to play juniors and travel extensively in many leagues and obviously professional hockey exists on both coasts. Travel is part of the milieux. Don't like it. Don't play hockey. Also, there are tangible and recoverable revenues from going to Alaska ... with both teams in the same league conference opponents could get FOUR additional home games EVERY season. That's easily a half a million dollars in revenue at a place like SCSU and still a decent chunk of change at any of the other schools provided they manage those exemptions wisely.

My take on this "story" is that the WCHA is crossing it's T's and dotting it's I's as part of it's due diligence and that these preliminary discussions are not much more than that at this point.

And oh yeah ... Notre Dame. I think they could survive in this landscape as an independent.

You still gonna be ok with the WCHA to 8 teams idea if UA_ doesn't make the cut?

And all these exemptions to the rules, like giving teams 4 extra games for going up to AK twice, that's all great in theory, but you can't say it WILL happen, you have to wait until they actually rule on this, something that they haven't ever done before. Also, you're talking about how much money teams like SCSU could make with extra home games. That's if we get the Big 10 or BCHC opponents to come to our barn; I'm not saying they won't, but we don't know for a fact that they will. I'm not saying that you're necessarily wrong, but you act like you spit the unquestionable facts.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

While you throw out ideas like inviting UAH & Alaska-Fairbanks to join the WCHA and continue to ignore the economic realities that plague the rest of the WCHA conference members, you have no chance of ever correctly predicting what will actually happen.

I'm in the mood to break this down ...

While you throw out ideas like inviting UAH & Alaska-Fairbanks to join the WCHA

No where did I throw out any idea "like" inviting UAH. It's clear what I said is (unfortunately) the exact opposite with regard to UAH. What part of "I don't advocate" did DG not understand?

and continue to ignore the economic realities that plague the rest of the WCHA conference members

I have consistently over the last month or so pointed out exactly how conference membership with UAA and UAF can generate SIGNIFICANT revenue. More money certainly than any BHHC school will make from ANY Televison deal. The truth is in order to move forward with their Butt Hurt plan those five schools decided to forego the opportunity to make anywhere from a couple of hundred thousand to as much as half a million dollars. They all had the majority of their travel expenses paid to Alaska (as will almost certainly continue for future conference mates with UAA and UAF) AND carried away extra home games in their pocket after a series up here. Fans of those 5 programs who are genuinely concerned about their program's ability to remain fiscally sound in the future really ought to be asking their adminstrators if it was so smart to walk away from that revenue stream into a future with no guarantees?

So um ... no Damien, I have paid close attention and consistently addressed the financial issues. To say I haven't is really nothing short of a lie. It was something that sounded good in your head but try using the edit button between your brain and fingers; that's one of the first things Eddie Bernays would teach you.

And even in this forum using gross mischaracterizations when restating what someone else said is purely disingenuous. So yeah .. the beach is right out.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: WCHA, CCHA talk merger (08-03-11)

You still gonna be ok with the WCHA to 8 teams idea if UA_ doesn't make the cut?

And all these exemptions to the rules, like giving teams 4 extra games for going up to AK twice, that's all great in theory, but you can't say it WILL happen, you have to wait until they actually rule on this, something that they haven't ever done before. Also, you're talking about how much money teams like SCSU could make with extra home games. That's if we get the Big 10 or BCHC opponents to come to our barn; I'm not saying they won't, but we don't know for a fact that they will. I'm not saying that you're necessarily wrong, but you act like you spit the unquestionable facts.

UAF into the WCHA is a gotta have for me or I'll be feeling like Mike Anderson feels right now.

I/others can and have carefully interpreted the language of the exemption clause and it is pretty clear. I don't see any ruling or whatever that "they" will have to make. It was structured to compensate programs for the hardship of travel ... if you travel twice then certainly it's reasonable that you'd be compensated twice. I'm not NCAA expert so I'm not going to sit here and guarantee that 4 games is how it will be but I can't find a reason either to imagine that it won't be.

At SCSU let's say you have 4 home games to schedule and you get Colgate to come to one series and Crest to come to the other. I won't bother looking at the attendance numbers the last time you guys hosted Colgate but instead will assume it was 4,000 people. Then I'll assume that each of those 4,000 people paid 20 dollars a ticket. New math tells me that is 160,000/series. Then Crest comes to town and only draws 2,000 both nights. Oh shoot ... only another 80,000 into the coffers. Just the Colgate weekend is bigger than the Final Five check that everyone creams their jeans about.