bale31

It's possible, but it's probably about a 1 in 64 chance that you would be able to put together a less likable group of schools.

This truly is the most awful group to choose from. If no one would win, many many people would be very happy.

You may be waiting a while

Who is that?

I have found tickets. If I could lock this thread, I would.

We welcome you on the bandwagon. Eveeyone looks good in purple.

Ooops...it's actually $48 on Stub Hub, but still looking for $50

Looking for 4 tix in the lower deck at the Sioux Falls Regional. I'm seeing $40 for a lot of these tix on Stub Hub, but I'm willing to potentially pay $50 per seat. Not trying to be a dick and low balling people, but I probably won't go if I don't get the price I'm looking for. DM me if you are interested.

Pretty sure they have a guarantee for those games too. At least the did for MSU football a couple years ago.

Right....but you're thinking logically. The NCAA isn't going to take on that philosophy. They are going to look at individual schools and tell them they need to guarantee $XXX,XXX regardless of the size of the arena. That could potentially mean ratcheting up the cost of tickets or the school is going to have to cough up the money on their own. I'm not saying I agree with that philosophy, that's just the philosophy that's historically been taken on.

I get that, but they make requirements of individual schools. The NCAA covers themselves and forces the schools to take the risk.

I had a big long response to that earlier and then remembered that very important detail. It's not necessarily just about whether they can sell tickets. It's about the guaranteed money. It's a heck of a lot harder to justify those costs when you have a 2,000 arena rather than a 10,000 or even 4,000 seat arena. I'm certain any #1 seed COULD sell out their arena, but would it be enough to cover the costs of hosting the NCAA?

In any case, it's as close to a home ice advantage as anyone will get this or many other years. It sucks for other teams and it is an unfair advantage for a lower ranked team to have, but it is the system that was set up. UND has nothing to apologize for and I suspect those writers that are mentioning it are only doing it because they know it gets under UND fans' skin. The reality is that UND is one of a few schools that is willing and able to rationalize bidding and hosting a regional. It's good for larger OR wealthier schools, but can be a real hindrance for a lot of schools that don't have the large fan base or where money isn't an issue. All that being said, I'd still love for MSU to end up in Sioux Falls along with UND. The atmosphere will be great in any game that UND plays and that should be the ultimate goal. Make it a good event for the players and fans. I'd prefer that the high seeds host regionals, but this is what we've got for now.

I have to say, this line of thinking really confuses me. No one really gave a damn about Bemidji and the stability of the WCHA 5 years ago. Why the concern now? Admittedly, as an MSU fan, I would love to see us go to the NCHC. It would revive our fan base and be much more entertaining. I was very against the conference re-alignments when they happened. I still think much of it was a huge mistake, but I came to realize that every school MUST think of what's best for themselves. There is too much money involved and that money is too centralized for any school to worry about anyone else. The "good of college hockey" went out the window long ago.

While I don't doubt the Omaha opening prompted them to announce this now, I highly doubt that it is the sole reason for this. Hastings only has 1 year left on his contract and we all know how coaches use that to leverage new contracts. Also, 10 year contracts are almost unheard of. There is no way that they just started talking about this in the last week. Lastly, this is coming along with additional investments in the program including total cost of attendance, bigger recruiting budgets, and more facility upgrades. Reading the tea leaves...id guess this has been in the works for months in an effort to bolster the case to join the nchc. My understanding is the administration was caught very off guard when they didn't get approved. In my opinion they understand that apathy is starting to set on and they need to get with umd, scsu, and und as soon as possible to stem the tide. That's just my thought though.

Pretty sure that isn't happening. Mankato isn't in a financial position to be able to guarantee ticket sales to a game we may not be in.

Holy crap. These guys have a serious persecution complex. Only big ten hockey teams could have the best funding, excellent facilities, their own tv network, and every other advantage you can think of and still complain oabout how the deck is stacked against them. They are quickly moving from being disliked to having a collective eye roll every time they talk.

To an extent, I am too. I think this is the future of the WCHA for the next few years though. Too many schools that aren't truly committed and those that are had some pretty big losses from last year until this year. Next year I suspect bsu will drop off significantly and msu and mtu will dominate. There will be a surprise team, but I would expect teams 4-10 to perform much the same as this year. In fairness though, if bsu, mtu and bgsu play like they did in conference all the time, that non conference record looks a lot better. They aren't as bad of teams as their records indicate. Non-conference just means so much when you only have 6 games. You can afford one or two teams to lay eggs, but not 9 of 10 and that happened this year.

The non-conference schedule happened. Kato is the only team that played well in nonconference and ended with a 4-2 record. Bemidji was AWFUL in nonconference, but was a different team in the conference. They had the league wrapped up with 2 weeks left. The conference was worse non conf than the AHA. The reality is that if your conference sucks against all other conferences, no one has a shot at an at large bid.

You're splitting hairs. the agreement still stands. mn gets 4 home games, the other schools get 2. The schools agreed to the home and homes and nothing substantially changed with that agreement other than the timing.

that's not really true. the other schools (and maybe the gophers themselves) asked to have home and homes presumably to flatten their revenues from year to year.

I dunno, man. If the report of swinginger a stick at a fan in the crowd, let alone a 10-year-old is true, there is now other side. That's trash no matter how you look at it.

I'm sorry. I don't believe this line of thinking. The NCHC is now starting to think about the other schools in the WCHA? Really? Theyve thrown caution to the wind in every other circumstance and now they're looking out for other schools? The more likely option is that they looked at it and realized that the arena situation in Arizona wasn't what would benefit the league the most. That's ok, by the way if they feel they need to look out for themselves. I just can't buy that the leaguest that hasn't given a damn about the "have nots" in any other situation has now stopped and said , "you know this wouldnt be good for those schools that we ran away from and didn't care about for the last 5 years, so let's not steal another program." I'm sorry, I just don't buy it. The Alaska situaton may play into it, but more in the sense of, "why change things now when they are just going to change in 2 years anyway".

I can understand that from a UND fan point of view (not necessarily the administration though). I suspect that those that argue that they think Kato should do "what's best for college hockey", whatever that means, say it only because they don't want to say they don't like mankato and think we are a lesser school. While I disagree with you, at least you have the guts to come out and say it.

in fairness, isn't that what some people in the threads in the last 3 weeks want Mankato and Bowling Green to do?