Re: WCHA Pushing To Team With Big Ten, NCHC For Conference Tournaments
It seems as though that no one wants to admit that things aren't all that rosyexcept those from the wcha (although with a bit too much bitterness for my liking). It's ok to admit mistakes and this certainly seems like one. Now it's time to fix what's wrong and, in my opinion, nothing should be off the table.
When all of this stuff started troy jutting, of all people, said something that I haven't forgotten. His comment was, "change isn't necessarily bad. College hockey is as good as its ever been. So, if you're going to change it, you **** well better be sure that it's a change for the better." Can anyone honestly say that this had been a change for the better of colege hockey? I'm not so sure we can. And if it hasn't changed for the better, don't shouldn't the leaders of the conferences and schools put their egos aside to change it for the better?
I guess my question is how do we know if college hockey has "changed for the better?" Is there some sort of tool we're using to measure that?
I noticed something interesting as I looked at the attendance statistics on USCHO for the 2012-13 season, compared with the current season. Out of 59 teams in Div. I hockey (ignored ASU), 24 teams have had their average attendance increase, while 35 saw it decrease. But what's more interesting is when you break the teams down by conference.
In Hockey East (I've included Conn and Notre Dame in HE), 5 went up in attendance, seven down. In the ECAC it was exactly the opposite, 7 up and 5 down. The AHA saw 5 go up and 6 go down. In the B1G it was 3-3.
In other words, in each conference about half the teams increased and half decreased.
This is where it got interesting.
In the WCHA, three went up (Mankato, Tech and BG) while 7 went down. In the NCHC, only North Dakota increased its attendance, with the other 7 showing declines.
What do
I think this shows? Teams in the NCHC and WCHA counted on the attendance boosts brought on by the appearance of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and Michigan St. in their arenas. I don't think the creation of the NCHC had anything to do with shifts in attendance or interest at these western schools, either by increasing attendance at the NCHC schools or decreasing it at the WCHA schools.
I think that if we want to help college hockey, two things need to happen. First, each conference has to take a close look at whether a conference tournament makes sense financially, as opposed to playoff games on campus at the higher seeds.
Second, I think it's incumbent upon the "name" schools in college hockey (and I mean
all of them) to make a conscious effort to be willing to schedule away non-conference games with many different programs, not just traditional rivals.