mksioux

Good Gawd. Moorhead has no business fielding a DII football program, let alone a DI hockey program. There is no support at the university, in the community, or amongst the alumni for Moorhead State athletics. Never has been, never will be. I actually hope Moorhead goes for it and gets into the WCHA. That may be the impetus needed for UND and Denver to get the hell out.

Great news! Thanks Cheesemover. I'll be there.

Michigan Tech is in the WCHA. I think Star was referring to Lake Superior State, Northern Michigan, Ferris State, and Western Michigan who play in the CCHA. Those are the Michigan schools left behind with Notre Dame in the CCHA. Most people on this board are aware Michigan Tech has a really good engineering reputation. I'm not sure about the rest of the Michigan schools.

I agree and have said that all of this scheduling alliance talk by the Big Ten is nothing more than public relations. They want it to appear that this change is not as big as it really is. And it was clearly emphasized by the league office as talking points, as every single person associated with the Big Ten stressed it in their official statements. In the short-term, the scheduling alliance means little. In the long-term, this scheduling alliance means nothing.

A good idea to be sure. Unfortunately, McLeod is not going to let it happen. http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophers/blogs/118471889.html At best, you will see a 10-game scheduling alliance, which means Minn and UND will play every-other-year. Which means Minn. is in Grand Forks once every four years. If it's an 8-game scheduling alliance, it would be once every five years.

I'm sure someone will respond to this better than me, but this comment seems like the typical "think small" problem that has been pervasive in North Dakota over the years. First of all, North Dakota is not a "little guy" in college hockey. That's a bordeline preposterous statement. North Dakota is annually second in national attendance, has the nicest facilities, a national television deal, and a great on-ice tradition that produces as many NHL players as anyone. There is a big difference between North Dakota and the much of the rest of the WCHA, especially after the new Ralph. North Dakota has been on the move the past 10 years growing its product and there is no reason to go the other way now. Simply resigning to the fact that we are a "little guy" will surely make it so. And this doesn't even begin to address the institutional angle to this. UND, as an insitution, is trying to grow in reputation and status. The move to DI is as much about institutional profile as it is about athletics. Kelley commented that a big reason he liked the Big Sky is that he wants UND to be affiliated with like institutions, or even better institutions. You are viewed in large part by the company you keep. That is the institutional goal of conference affiliation that Presidents focus on, as much or more than the actual sports. Of course, with hockey, there aren't as many programs geographically to have a conference that is completely in-line with your institutional make-up. But UND, as a hockey program, and as an institution, benefited tremendously from alligning itself with Big Ten schools over the years. It is a major blow to lose your Big Ten presence in your most visible sport. However, if UND has an opportunity to allign with institutions like Notre Dame and Miami (both excellent institutions), it would go a long way in making-up for the loss of the Big Ten schools. And to your last comment, I'm not a big fan of Bruce McLeod, but he's not the only person you look at in judging the long-term vision of a conference. A conference is only going to think as big as the membership. The WCHA has pulled up the NSIC schools (and props up Michigan Tech). They built and renovated arenas and invested in their programs to keep up with (or get into) the WCHA. They have been good followers in the WCHA, but they are never going to be the driving force for thinking big and long-term vision. On-ice performance this season aside, the WCHA is losing two of its leading programs, two programs that have forced the rest of the WCHA to invest in hockey. Programs that, along with UND and Denver, have set the bar in the WCHA. If you want UND to be in a conference that "thinks big" and has long-term vision, it needs to allign itself with member institutions that have the same institutional goals and vision that UND has. I just don't see that being the WCHA anymore.

Any word from Joe Senser's and whether it will be able to pull in the game on its satellite dish?

I never said their thoughts on the subject would stop it from happening. Im interested in their reaction to it. Whats going on behind the scenes? I can understand why UND is not quick to release a formal statement for the reasons you mention. But good reporters can usually get to the bottom of whats going on without official statements, or sometimes in spite of official statements. I understand that Hak may be too preoccupied to comment this week (although this weekends games didnt stop Blais from commenting), but Im talking about long-term reporting over the past year, not specifically this week. And while I'm interested in Hakstol's thoughts, I'm more intersted in what Faison and Kelley think about it.

Good article and insight by the UNO beat writer Chad Purcell. Big Ten hockey? Big chill Brad does a super job covering Sioux hockey, but I've not been impressed with his coverage of this issue. We've known the BTHC was coming for more than a year now. We know if there is going to be any reactionary conference allignment movement, North Dakota is going to be a major player. Yet I still have no idea where the UND coaches and administration stand on this issue. Are they standing firm with the WCHA or are they "weighing their options?" You'd think a young budding journalist would be all over this angle of the story.

This is about maintaining visibility, exposure, recruiting advantages, and staying a DI national power. It's also about aligning yourself with your institutional peers, or more specifically who you want to be considered as your institutional peers. I'm sorry, but staying in a NSIC/DII dominated league is not the way to achieve any of these goals. This is not about being a charitable organization. The BTHC killed the close-knit relationship amongst the college hockey community. UND needs to adapt to the new reality and sink or swim. Big win? I think I'd rather agree with Dean Blais who "doesn't see any positives" for the WCHA out of this. And Dean is the only person I've seen quoted so far that I can trust is going to say exactly what he believes. The rest of the prepared quotes from the other people came straight from a public relations firm.

We still don't know how many games per year this scheduling alliance will be, but we now know it will involve all 10 remaning WCHA schools equally. That's the final nail for maintaining a real Sioux-Gopher rivalry.

Ummm, I think that's pretty much what I said. Minnesota and Wisconsin are not going to enter into a scheduling alliance with the WCHA that would commit them to more than the 28 conference games they have now. With 20 Big Ten conference games, that means 8 games per year against WCHA teams under the scheduling alliance. That means Minnesota and Wisconsin will travel for no more than 4 games per year against WCHA schools. My point is that while the talking points about scheduling alliance sounds good, there really isn't going to be much to it. There will not be enough games to maintain traditional rivalries.

Option 5. I may tweak a team or two, but I like that concept the best. It simply amazes me how many Sioux fans on this board are perfectly content staying in a watered-down WCHA.

Wisconsin made their policy consistent with the NCAA sanctions list a few years back. In other words, if you are in compliance with the NCAA's policy on Indian nicknames, then you are in compliance with Wisconsin's scheduling policy. UND was not on the NCAA sanctions list in 2010-11, hence Wisconsin would schedule UND. Starting next year, UND could very well be on the NCAA sanctions list, meaning Wisconsin would not schedule UND for any non-conference competition. Minnesota's policy is independent of the NCAA sanctions list. It remains to be seen whether a formal "scheduling alliance" with the WCHA will be a way around these policies.

That was obviously the Big Ten's "talking points" of the day. Every single person affiliated with the Big Ten made sure to reference a "strong" non-conference alliance with the CCHA and WCHA. But Minnesota and Wisconsin will only need 8 non-conference games against the WCHA schools to get back to their current number of conference games (28). That's a whopping 4 series per year for the 10 reamining WCHA teams. Assuming it's a balanced scheduling alliance, do the math, and that means UND will play Minn and Wisc once every 2.5 years (a home series once every 5 years). And this, of course, is assuming they will play UND at all given their nickname policies.

Nobody's talking about taking the gas pipe (I hope!). Minnesota and Wisconsin are gone and there's nothing that can be done about that. But given the two choices of (1) looking at all options and being proactive to minimize the fall-out, and (2) being content and comfortable in the left-behind WCHA, I prefer the former.

I'm not sold. If UBC does find its way to the WCHA, I think you are exaggerating its impact. No way UBC would be able to deliver a TSN contract. An entire nation of Canadian hockey fans are not going to suddenly prefer NCAA hockey to Canadian major juniors just because UBC joins the NCAA. I think a regional Vancouver television contract would be the best to hope for in that situation, and I'm not even sure if UBC and NCAA hockey carries enough weight for that. Also, I just don't see the BTHC being the catalyst for expansion, except for maybe within the Big Ten itself.

More power to you, but judging by the overwhelming demand for Gopher tickets (which allows the UND ticket office to charge premium ticket prices for that series), I suspect a lot of Sioux fans will care.

Sorry top break it to you, but Minnesota will not have to beg anyone to schedule them. Mankato, Duluth, St. Cloud, and Bemidji will practically be falling all over themselves to keep Minnesota on their schedules. The rest of the WCHA schools will still want Minnesota on their schedules too. Minnesota will be turning away WCHA schools, not the other way around.

Here it is. It'll be interesting to see whether the formal announcement will cause UND officials to make any kind of a statement. If so, I hope it's not unequivocal support for the WCHA. For long-term viability as a perennial national power, UND can't stay in what will be left of the WCHA. If the WCHA is unable to expand and replace Minnesota and Wisconsin with Division I replacements, a breakaway conference needs to be explored. I note expansion is not part of McLeod's "three-prong approach" to the situation.

That doesn't mean anything. The average poster on this board is more up to speed on conference developments than Wayne is.

There is not consensus on this board about who was telling the truth in that situation.

I don't know much about this Plains Daily publication, but they seem to be kicking the Herald's butt on coverage on this issue. I absolutely love when the media provides direct access to the sources of their stories, rather than forcing you to rely exclusively on their filter. The Plains Daily has posted video of testimony on this issue from both sides. There is also video on http://www.plainsdaily.com/of their interviews with various people involved in the issue. (and no, I don't work for plains daily or have any affiliation with them...) Eunice Davidson Clips of Mark Dosch, Phillip Mueller, Curt Kreun, Lonny Winrich, Al Carlson, Jerry Kelsh, RaeAnn Kelsch Clips of Richard Marcellais, Mac Schneider, Dick Dever, David Hogue, Joe Miller

I wasn't implying anything other than your disdain for the legislature is misplaced. As far as the government is concerned, the legislature is the closest thing to the people there is. If you think they are self-important blowhards, I suggest you get involved in politics and get them voted out. That is the beauty of the legislature, the members that comprise that body are accountable to the people. I have no opinion on whether the SBoHE should be abolished. But I do know that if the SBoHE fights the legislature on this issue, there's a much better chance of that happening.

While being a self-important blowhard is not a good trait in general, if anyone in state government should have the right to act self-important it is the legislature because they are the closest and most accountable to the people. I'd much rather have a self-important legislature than a self-important Supreme Court or a self-important SBoHE or a self-important President of a University.