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.

WCHA Season Thread 2017-18: In Which We Try For Two Bids

Re: WCHA Season Thread 2017-18: In Which We Try For Two Bids

Shirtless Guy said:
Where Have All the Gentlemen Gone?
Click to expand...

One thing I always loved about College Hockey was that small schools could compete with big schools. Conference realignment was all about money and putting small schools in their place. Just another example of how big schools have no respect for ethics in athletics, and the small school community needs to be smarter and espouse our more positive and developmental environment to students and recruits.
 
Re: WCHA Season Thread 2017-18: In Which We Try For Two Bids

devildog said:
One thing I always loved about College Hockey was that small schools could compete with big schools. Conference realignment was all about money and putting small schools in their place. Just another example of how big schools have no respect for ethics in athletics, and the small school community needs to be smarter and espouse our more positive and developmental environment to students and recruits.
Click to expand...
There are two issues here. Big schools are perverting the recruiting process as detailed in the op-ed.

In my opinion the conference realignment is not the fault of the B1G schools, but rather the medium-sized schools wanting to feel bigger and more important. The Big Ten has a rule that when six member schools field a team in any sport, those schools must be a part of the Big Ten Conference in that sport. Penn State started their program as #6 which forced the existing 5 schools (MSU, Mich, Wisc, Minn and OSU) into forming the Big Ten hockey conference. If that was the only change things would have transitioned relatively smoothly. The WCHA and CCHA would continue to be solid 8-team leagues. But UND, DU, etc, took that as an opportunity to break away so they wouldn't have to travel to smaller towns like Houghton, Bemidji, etc. I blame the realignment on those mid-size schools in bigger markets that pushed to create the Nacho Conference.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
MTUHuskies said:
But UND, DU, etc, took that as an opportunity to break away so they wouldn't have to travel to smaller towns like Houghton, Bemidji, etc.
Click to expand...
This.

It was UND and DU's baby to stop writing welfare checks to UAA and MTU after the WCHA Final Five every year.


Miami was coerced because of ties to DU and Gwozdecki (who ironically, never coached a game in his new conference). Omaha with Blais' ties to UND. And tUMD I haven't figured out how they got suckered into rounding out the Original Motel 6 league.

We all know Jan Brady State begged not to leave the WCHA, then begged to leave the WCHA. And Western, well, Miami likely twisted their arm after BGSU said no.
 
Last edited:
Re: WCHA Season Thread 2017-18: In Which We Try For Two Bids

MTUHuskies said:
There are two issues here. Big schools are perverting the recruiting process as detailed in the op-ed.

In my opinion the conference realignment is not the fault of the B1G schools, but rather the medium-sized schools wanting to feel bigger and more important. The Big Ten has a rule that when six member schools field a team in any sport, those schools must be a part of the Big Ten Conference in that sport. Penn State started their program as #6 which forced the existing 5 schools (MSU, Mich, Wisc, Minn and OSU) into forming the Big Ten hockey conference. If that was the only change things would have transitioned relatively smoothly. The WCHA and CCHA would continue to be solid 8-team leagues. But UND, DU, etc, took that as an opportunity to break away so they wouldn't have to travel to smaller towns like Houghton, Bemidji, etc. I blame the realignment on those mid-size schools in bigger markets that pushed to create the Nacho Conference.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Realignment is fully the fault of the Big Ten schools.

The assumed rule about sponsoring a conference championship when 50% of the schools play at the varsity level? The Big Ten knew in November of 2012 that they were adding Maryland and Rutgers, so they would have 14 members in 2014. They ramrodded the league formation through to beat the "deadline" and grandfather it in to technically pre-date expansion. Berenson and Asbestos wanted to stop going to Alaska and the like, I'm sure MN and WI were happy to stop going to Anchorage too.

Once they did that, it opened the door for the Nacho.
 
Last edited:
Re: WCHA Season Thread 2017-18: In Which We Try For Two Bids

John J. MacInnes said:
Realignment is fully the fault of the Big Ten schools.

The assumed rule about sponsoring a conference championship when 50% of the schools play at the varsity level? The Big Ten knew in November of 2012 that they were adding Maryland and Rutgers, so they would have 14 members in 2014. They ramrodded the league formation through to beat the "deadline" and grandfather it in to technically pre-date expansion.

Once they did that, it opened the door for the Nacho.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting angle I have not heard before. Thanks for the insight. But even so, the Nacho didnt have to happen and did more to upset things than creating the Big Ten did.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
Re: WCHA Season Thread 2017-18: In Which We Try For Two Bids

This is not so much about realignment as it is the biggest schools looking to tilt college hockey in their direction. Lucia’s proposal to limit age and other proposed rule changes have all been meant to minimize the competitiveness of smaller schools. It’s arrogant because they think because they have more money and are bigger we should all bow down to them and agree it’s ok for them to win and us to be happy with also competing.
Thie end of the gentleman’s agreement is a back door way to allow them to get the best players, and stockpiling recruits is not in the interest of the players
If you are a recruit and a big school sends a private jet to pick you up for a campus visit who do you pick
 
Re: WCHA Season Thread 2017-18: In Which We Try For Two Bids

aparch said:
It was UND and DU's baby to stop writing welfare checks to UAA and MTU after the WCHA Final Five every year.
Click to expand...

This won't be a popular opinion on this thread, but why should they have to keep doing that? Especially when the cash cow B1G schools left.
 
Re: WCHA Season Thread 2017-18: In Which We Try For Two Bids

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
This won't be a popular opinion on this thread, but why should they have to keep doing that? Especially when the cash cow B1G schools left.
Click to expand...

Because that is what being in a league, with other teams, means. Why does the SEC keep writing checks to Vanderbilt and Mississippi State?
 
aparch said:
This.

It was UND and DU's baby to stop writing welfare checks to UAA and MTU after the WCHA Final Five every year.


Miami was coerced because of ties to DU and Gwozdecki (who ironically, never coached a game in his new conference). Omaha with Blais' ties to UND. And tUMD I haven't figured out how they got suckered into rounding out the Original Motel 6 league.

We all know Jan Brady State begged not to leave the WCHA, then begged to leave the WCHA. And Western, well, Miami likely twisted their arm after BGSU said no.
Click to expand...
I like how CC has become so irrelevant that they’re not even mentioned in this post.
 
Re: WCHA Season Thread 2017-18: In Which We Try For Two Bids

aparch said:
And Western, well, Miami likely twisted their arm after BGSU said no.
Click to expand...

Western was the throw-in. The Nacho wanted Notre Dame, who turned them down flat. That's why the horsies came in to make up the 8th spot.
 
John J. MacInnes said:
Once they did that, it opened the door for the Nacho.
Click to expand...
The NCHC was coming whether we liked to admit it or not.

The WCHA would have been hurt without Minnesota or Wisconsin, but it would have done okay-ish tournament wise for attendance, but the checks would have not been to UND and DU's liking.
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
This won't be a popular opinion on this thread, but why should they have to keep doing that? Especially when the cash cow B1G schools left.
Click to expand...
No question there needed to be changes. I am unaware of how to WCHA front office operated, but there seemed to be some underlying resentment from the NCHC schools and the WCHA.

They didn't even negotiate for changes, just upped and left for their new conference they had in their back pocket.
 
aparch said:
This.

It was UND and DU's baby to stop writing welfare checks to UAA and MTU after the WCHA Final Five every year.


Miami was coerced because of ties to DU and Gwozdecki (who ironically, never coached a game in his new conference). Omaha with Blais' ties to UND. And tUMD I haven't figured out how they got suckered into rounding out the Original Motel 6 league.

We all know Jan Brady State begged not to leave the WCHA, then begged to leave the WCHA. And Western, well, Miami likely twisted their arm after BGSU said no.
Click to expand...
DU and UND started the mess.
CC got dragged in because big brother (DU) said so.
Duluth got in because they had just won the National Championship and opened a new arena.
Omaha got in on the Blais connection, the market size, and a new arena.
Miami made it six because of the Gwoz connection, their recent success, and a new arena.
Western was in with Andy Murray and some cash.
St. Cloud was in because Notre Dame said no (how the Nacho ever convinced themselves ND would join them was beyond me).
 
Jimjamesak said:
DU and UND started the mess.
CC got dragged in because big brother (DU) said so.
Duluth got in because they had just won the National Championship and opened a new arena.
Omaha got in on the Blais connection, the market size, and a new arena.
Miami made it six because of the Gwoz connection, their recent success, and a new arena.
Western was in with Andy Murray and some cash.
St. Cloud was in because Notre Dame said no (how the Nacho ever convinced themselves ND would join them was beyond me).
Click to expand...

Yep, that's what I recall. The motel 6 we're the base. Western came after whoring themselves out. "Why Western" indeed.
 
aparch said:
The NCHC was coming whether we liked to admit it or not.

The WCHA would have been hurt without Minnesota or Wisconsin, but it would have done okay-ish tournament wise for attendance, but the checks would have not been to UND and DU's liking.
Click to expand...
This. Once Minnesota and Wisconsin left NoDak and DU were ready to drop the dead weight of UAA, Tech, Kato, and Bemidji. Remember, the original idea was to grab ND, BU, and BC to form a conference. DU and NoDak had stars in their eyes and thought their pants were bigger than they were, before they were reminded they aren’t even mid-majors in the grand scheme of college athletics and had to go to plan B.

To be fair, Wisconsin pretty much tolerated everyone but Minnesota in the same vein as DU tolerated us. Minnesota at least gave a **** about the other Minnesota schools.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top