WCHA vs. CCHA

[Siouxtimestwo]

Since it's the middle of the week and this debate may very well be settled soon, I thought I'd ask a question that has always perplexed me while reading the boards: Why is everyone so intent on always pinning the WCHA vs. the CCHA? I watch very little of college hockey outside of the Sioux, except for an occasional Gophers or Badgers game on on a non-Sioux weekend, so I have no idea how good CCHA teams are, but the general consensus seems to be that the conference is overrated. I'm not trying to debate that, I'm just wondering why people care so much.

I know this all started in college football, taken to new levels by fans in recent years, but at least in that sport, I can see the reward for pimping ones own conference. If you somehow create the impression that your conference is better than the others, your one loss looks better than that of another team in a different conference, which might mean the difference in bringing home a national title.

In college hockey, however, we have a playoff to determine who the best team is. If UND wins the national title this year, will anyone really care how the CCHA teams fared? If UND loses to Princeton, will you really be that much more consoled by the fact that Miami lost as well? If UND loses to Denver, but Denver beats Michigan for the title are we gonna hang a banner in the Ralph to celebrate that accomplishment? It's not like the conferences have been around for 90 years so there is a sense of togetherness or brotherhood to fall back on. Weren't some of the teams that make the CCHA so mediocre just in the WCHA 10-20 years ago?

Can you imagine if this philosophy were applied to other aspects of life? "Well, I failed to reach my goals in life, but at least my friends from high school did better than the kids from that hick school down the road!"

I don't bring this up to antagonize any certain members, or to even single out us Sioux/WCHA fans. This same attitude is exhibited everywhere in college sports, and I've always just found it curious. I am ecstatic when my team wins and upset when they lose, but I'm always back for the next game. How another team does really doesn't matter to me, I'm just focused on my team. Since we have a wonderful board filled with thoughtful, intelligent members, I just thought I'd get your takes.

[Goon]

Top to bottom the WCHA is the BEST conference, its record speaks for its self, the WCHA has won something like 6 out of 8 NCAA titles. The banter back and forth is just fun. We all have our opinion, I have based mine on watching a lot of hockey I think the only channels our tv get is Fox News and Sports channels. I record most of the game that Miami and Michigan played on CSTV this year and watched a few other games and Michigan is a mirror image of UND maybe faster. Our defense and goaltending is better I would take Lammy over Sauer anyday and I would take Lammy over Zatkoff any day as well.

I personally think Miami is a paper tiger and I don't see them getting the frozen and four and if they do I welcome the UND and Miami U match up. Ryan Jones is a great forward but he has feasted on Cup Cakes. Miami was 6-3-1 against TUCS UND played like 35 TUCS.

[fightingsioux4life]

I think that the biggest problem right now is the constant carping about the Michigan Wolverines. All I hear is that Michigan is the team to beat, Michigan this and Michigan that. Michigan, Michigan, Michigan!

My question is: Who have they beat? The bottom eight teams in the CCHA are brutal. None of them would finish higher than seventh or eighth in the WCHA and probably even Hockey East. Add to that the playoff flops by other CCHA teams in recent years such as Miami (OH), Notre Dame and (yes) Michigan and you start to get the picture on how overrated the Crappy Collegiate Hockey Association really is.

Yes, I am aware that Michigan State won the NCAA title last year. But other than that, the Frozen Four has been a WCHA-Hockey East showdown for most of this decade.

[Bird Dog]

I think the point of the initial thread was not to discuss the reasoning of our arguments on the subject. It was "why do we care". I would agree with Goon in that adds some fun to the ribbing of friends of other teams. Most of the time it adds to the experience at games, watching tv, etc. with friends of other teams. There are times when it gets out of hand and ruins the whole thing. I don't know if that helps?

BD

[The Whistler]

I think the thing is the Cup Cake Hockey Association seems to think that they are a strong coference. Claiming that takes away from our conference.

So it's just bragging rights, but isn't that what sports is all about?

[Fighting Sioux Fan]

How many current CCHA teams used to be in the WCHA?

[Bird Dog]

How many current CCHA teams used to be in the WCHA?

I am not 100% sure I will get all of them but here goes.

Michigan

Michigan State

Northern Michigan

Michigan Tech

Notre Dame

Tech, MSU and UM were all original members of the MCHL (Midwest Collegiate Hockey League) along with Denver, MN, UND & CC. I attached an article below that gives a good history of the WCHA (originally MCHL).

BD

History of the WCHA

by Kurt Stutt/special to USCHO

The WCHA was born as the Midwest Collegiate Hockey League in 1951 by Colorado College, Denver, Michigan, Michigan State, Michigan Tech, Minnesota and North Dakota. After two seasons, the league changed its name to the Western Intercollegiate Hockey League, which more aptly described its geographical location.

The league was the dominant force in college hockey throughout the 1950s, winning all but the 1954 NCAA Championship. Michigan won six titles in that decade alone. But in 1958 the conference broke up, due to a disagreement over recruiting practices. Minnesota and all three Michigan schools accused Denver, North Dakota and Colorado College of recruiting overage Canadians. This practice did not violate the league's (or the NCAA's) rules, but was not in the spirit of the league. In the end, the four 'M' schools would withdraw from the league. As a consequence, there was no league play during the 1958-59 season.

The Western Collegiate Hockey Association (WCHA) was officially founded in 1959. All the schools agreed that the lack of a league hurt Western college hockey. This time, though, it would be a more informal association, allowing schools to schedule whatever opponents they wanted. Denver and Minnesota, still bitter over the previous year's feud, did not schedule each other and would not meet on the ice for over a decade.

The next seven seasons were dominated by Michigan Tech and Denver, who won four and three league titles, respectively. The conference expanded, adding Minnesota-Duluth in 1966, Wisconsin in 1969 and Notre Dame in 1971. The 1960s and 1970s would see overwhelming WCHA superiority in NCAA play, with the conference winning all the NCAA titles except for 1967, 1970-72 and 1978.

The WCHA became more formal in 1973, when the league office assumed all conference scheduling. A plan was passed in 1979 to split the conference into two divisions as a cost-cutting move, but was rescinded three months later. Then, in 1981, Michigan, Michigan State, Michigan Tech and Notre Dame all defected to the CCHA. The loss of Michigan Tech was a double blow, as they took the MacNaughton Cup, presented to the WCHA Champion every year, along with them.

The WCHA survived as a six-team league, then expanded again in 1984 when Michigan Tech returned (with the MacNaughton Cup), and brought Northern Michigan with them. The same year saw the start of an interlocking schedule with Hockey East, which lasted for five seasons. All inter-conference games counted in each conference's standings.

Recent developments saw the adoption of a single-site final four (later, five) format for the tournament, starting with 1988 in St. Paul. St. Cloud State joined as the conference's ninth member in 1990. Northern Michigan won the 1991 NCAA Tournament and North Dakota won the 1997 tournament, the 30th title for the WCHA.

Alaska-Anchorage became the tenth conference member in 1993-94, the same season that Colorado College won the first of three consecutive league titles, the first team to do so and their first titles since the 1956-57 season. Following the end of the 1996-97 season, Northern Michigan departed the WCHA, rejoining the CCHA. Mankato State participated in the WCHA tournament for the first time the following season. In 1998, Mankato State was voted in as the league's newest member, beginning play in the fall of 1999.

[Siouxtimestwo]

I think the point of the initial thread was not to discuss the reasoning of our arguments on the subject. It was "why do we care". I would agree with Goon in that adds some fun to the ribbing of friends of other teams. Most of the time it adds to the experience at games, watching tv, etc. with friends of other teams. There are times when it gets out of hand and ruins the whole thing. I don't know if that helps?

BD

Yes, you did interpret my intent correctly. And I agree, ribbing friends is one of the many pleasures of sports. I can totally understand that aspect of pinning your school against another and trading barbs, but I still don't understand what conference you're in has to do with determining which individual school is better than another. We have lots of signatures pertaining to 7>5 for obvious reasons. Minnesota is our rival and it is fun to rub in the fact that they haven't won as many titles as we have. That gives us pride and bragging rights as UND fans.

By the way, one would have to be totally biased to think the WCHA isn't by far the superior conference in all of college hockey. Looking at all the formulas and individual rankings that are available and stating otherwise would be ignorant. I take pride in the fact that UND is consistently near the top of those rankings. I could care less if any other WCHA teams are.

[Siouxtimestwo]

I think the thing is the Cup Cake Hockey Association seems to think that they are a strong coference. Claiming that takes away from our conference.

So it's just bragging rights, but isn't that what sports is all about?

Bragging rights are one of the fun things about being a sports fan. My point is, the tournament is coming up, so our team has a chance to beat CCHA teams, then we can brag. If all we can brag about is how our rivals beat teams from the CCHA, what in the hell are we bragging about? How does St. Cloud beating Michigan in the regional give us as Sioux fans anything to brag about?

[BleedsSiouxGreen]

I think that most people care because when it comes to the tourney selection, some of these cup cake teams get a #1 seed when they really shouldn't. Michigan is actually a very good team this year and does deserve to be a 1 seed, but Miami on the other hand is seriously over rated and they were rewarded a 1 seed as well. I watched the Miami Michigan game on CSTV and Miami didn't look anywhere near as good as Michigan. Other than that, its just a little banter between fans and also bragging rights.

[sagard]

For the CCHA to be closer to the WCHA's equal they need some of their recent "great" teams like Ferris of '03, Miami of '06, Notre Dame '07, Miami again this year to be for real.

For comparison Mich/MichSt are the best they have and the are pretty much a wash with the Gophers and UW. After that it really isn't a comparison. OSU's token Frozen Four appearance is matched by UMD. The have no answer for the UND, Denver and CC.

[AZSIOUX]

ill go with ncaa title wins in the last 11 years for recent success and recent domination for the WCHA thw WCHA didnt do much in the 90's except the sioux in 1997

2007 Michigan State -CCHA

2006 Wisconsin

2005 Denver

2004 Denver

2003 Minnesota

2002 Minnesota

2001 Boston College - HE

2000 North Dakota

1999 Maine - HE

1998 Michigan - CCHA

1997 North Dakota

[farce poobah]

A big part of it comes from the days when their big-name schools were in the WCHA.

Some of us really liked seeing Michigan come to Grand Forks every year. They played with an edge, the Sioux always played with an edge, and it was like smoking at a refinery. Sooner or later something was going to blow up. Epic, epic battles. One game in 1979 lasted 3 1/2 hours ... it was 9-8, there were 3-4 fights, and it went into overtime.

I liked watching Michigan State back then, but for different reasons. They were so hapless you didn't know what would happen next. In the playoffs (79 or 80, I forget), a Michigan State guy skates out to the blue line, wipes out, and knocks over the goalie and another teammate. In addition to the largest roar a visiting team ever got in GF, it was fodder for the wipeout that was yet to come. The games weren't even close.

Notre Dame was just sad. This school with all the great sports traditions, and a bunch of schmucks playing for their hockey team. Er, um, sorry Don.

Other than those 3 (plus Ohio State who never was in the WCHA), its a bunch of classic underdogs that are underresourced, underpaid, overworked. I'm happy to see any of them rise up and bite the big dogs in the butt - it just hardly ever happens.

[Oxbow6]

I think Michigan is as good as anyone. If Miami doesn't make it thru their regional, there is one of your answers. St. Cloud is the softest team I'v seen play this year. 5 on 5 they are average at best. Also will have some comparisions after CC/MSU. On the big ice and at home, that game should be CC by a wide margin.

[HeidiSioux62]

I think part of it for me is the "national" press who can't seem to look past a win/loss record or the # of points a player has and actually "look" at the competition being played against. While I think Porter is good (VERY GOOD), I have to wonder what his point total would look like (and the team's record) playing against the likes JPL, Bachman, Manino, Kangas (of late), Weslaski, Stalock, Tesleck, etc. night in and night out. I'm sure he would still be one of the top (if not the top), but I don't think he would be as dominant as he is in the CCHA. I also don't think Michigan would have the record they have getting constantly beat up in the WCHA (and I would bet money that Miami would be middle of the pack).

[nodak hockey fanatic]

By the way, one would have to be totally biased to think the WCHA isn't by far the superior conference in all of college hockey. Looking at all the formulas and individual rankings that are available and stating otherwise would be ignorant. I take pride in the fact that UND is consistently near the top of those rankings. I could care less if any other WCHA teams are.

By the way, I couldn't care less, but it should be "i couldn't care less" And we all know the WCHA is the cream of the crop as college hockey goes, but Michigan is tough this year. I just hope when we meet them in the national championship game, someone reminds Sauer how the Sioux dropped 8 on him last year as we ended their season

[Oxbow6]

By the way, I couldn't care less, but it should be "i couldn't care less" And we all know the WCHA is the cream of the crop as college hockey goes, but Michigan is tough this year. I just hope when we meet them in the national championship game, someone reminds Sauer how the Sioux dropped 8 on him last year as we ended their season

Great point. Was at that game and he was b-r-u-t-a-l!! Not that it was JPL best game either.

[Goon]

St. Cloud is the softest team I'v seen play this year. 5 on 5 they are average at best. Also will have some comparisions after CC/MSU. On the big ice and at home, that game should be CC by a wide margin.

Their players are what I consider pretty, they don't like to hit and they are not physical in my opinion. The gophers took it to the Huskies and Tigers this weekend at the final five. I am actually shocked that Don Lucia team would play that way. UND took it to the Tigers as well this weekend. Play physical and you win. The games that UND has not played Physical they have not won.

One thing that I found in yestedays INCH podcast was that the WCHA doesn't travel comment came up again. I am not sure why that keeps coming up because UND travels every season. UND will be traveling to the GLI next season and will probably have an opportunity to take out both MSU and Michgian.

[Sioux_Hab-it]

By the way, I couldn't care less, but it should be "i couldn't care less" And we all know the WCHA is the cream of the crop as college hockey goes, but Michigan is tough this year. I just hope when we meet them in the national championship game, someone reminds Sauer how the Sioux dropped 8 on him last year as we ended their season

If they chose to get into a shoot out with St Cloud watch for double digit scores.

[Goon]

If they chose to get into a shoot out with St Cloud watch for double digit scores.

If I am Clarkson I come out and Smash SCSU in the mouth.

[Siouxtimestwo]

By the way, I couldn't care less, but it should be "i couldn't care less" And we all know the WCHA is the cream of the crop as college hockey goes, but Michigan is tough this year. I just hope when we meet them in the national championship game, someone reminds Sauer how the Sioux dropped 8 on him last year as we ended their season

You got me there. And to think I'm a teacher. I guess that's what I get for staying up past my bedtime and posting on a school night.

[Siouxtimestwo]

I think part of it for me is the "national" press who can't seem to look past a win/loss record or the # of points a player has and actually "look" at the competition being played against. While I think Porter is good (VERY GOOD), I have to wonder what his point total would look like (and the team's record) playing against the likes JPL, Bachman, Manino, Kangas (of late), Weslaski, Stalock, Tesleck, etc. night in and night out. I'm sure he would still be one of the top (if not the top), but I don't think he would be as dominant as he is in the CCHA. I also don't think Michigan would have the record they have getting constantly beat up in the WCHA (and I would bet money that Miami would be middle of the pack).

Thanks for actually replying to my initial inquiry, Heidi, and not just continuing to brag how Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Denver recently won titles or the fact that St. Cloud St. would destroy Miami on a Fighting Sioux website. I must admit, I don't read INCH or USCHO often enough to notice any favoritism. When it comes to teams outside the WCHA, I pretty much just see what other posters 'in the know' on our website have to say and take their word for it. As a UND alum, I'm actually quite surprised by the amount of national attention our university gets, considering our size, affiliations, and location. There have been quite a few articles in magazines like Sports Illustrated and websites like ESPN.com praising the tradition of Sioux hockey, but I'm sure schools like Michigan & BC, just to name two, do indeed get more pub due to their reputation, name recognition for casual fans, and prominent alumni.

I agree with what you say about how many CCHA teams would fare in the WCHA. I guess rankings just don't matter to me that much. Whether you're a 4 seed or a 1 seed, you've got to win 4 games to win the title. I wanted UND to be a 1 seed this year in order to avoid CC in their home rink, but the reality is, if we wouldn't have been good enough to beat CC in Colorado Springs, then we wouldn't have had Miami to blame for "stealing" our no. 1 seed. It would have had a lot more to do with us losing to Denver in the F5 and losing to CC in the tournament. We control our own destiny in the tournament, just like every other team. If deep down under that inflated record Miami(or any other school) really is a sheep in wolf's clothing, then they won't be successful in the tournament, regardless of seeding. Michigan, which most everyone seems to agree is a legitimate title contender, appears to have the path of least resistance to the Frozen Four, but once there they still have to beat 2 of the 4 best teams in college hockey to win it all, which is what college hockey is all about.

[Siouxtimestwo]

Since it's the middle of the week and this debate may very well be settled soon, I thought I'd ask a question that has always perplexed me while reading the boards: Why is everyone so intent on always pinning the WCHA vs. the CCHA? I watch very little of college hockey outside of the Sioux, except for an occasional Gophers or Badgers game on on a non-Sioux weekend, so I have no idea how good CCHA teams are, but the general consensus seems to be that the conference is overrated. I'm not trying to debate that, I'm just wondering why people care so much.

I know this all started in college football, taken to new levels by fans in recent years, but at least in that sport, I can see the reward for pimping ones own conference. If you somehow create the impression that your conference is better than the others, your one loss looks better than that of another team in a different conference, which might mean the difference in bringing home a national title.

In college hockey, however, we have a playoff to determine who the best team is. If UND wins the national title this year, will anyone really care how the CCHA teams fared? If UND loses to Princeton, will you really be that much more consoled by the fact that Miami lost as well? If UND loses to Denver, but Denver beats Michigan for the title are we gonna hang a banner in the Ralph to celebrate that accomplishment? It's not like the conferences have been around for 90 years so there is a sense of togetherness or brotherhood to fall back on. Weren't some of the teams that make the CCHA so mediocre just in the WCHA 10-20 years ago?

Can you imagine if this philosophy were applied to other aspects of life? "Well, I failed to reach my goals in life, but at least my friends from high school did better than the kids from that hick school down the road!"

I don't bring this up to antagonize any certain members, or to even single out us Sioux/WCHA fans. This same attitude is exhibited everywhere in college sports, and I've always just found it curious. I am ecstatic when my team wins and upset when they lose, but I'm always back for the next game. How another team does really doesn't matter to me, I'm just focused on my team. Since we have a wonderful board filled with thoughtful, intelligent members, I just thought I'd get your takes.

I'm quoting my initial post since most glanced at the title and interpreted it as a debate about which conference is superior, which was nowhere near my original intention.

[passit_offthegoalie]

A lot of people think that the CCHA is top-heavy and the top teams have inflated stature in the media and in the Rankings because they play against lesser teams. Whereas every WCHA team is really solid and won't roll over . Thats kind of how I feel about it anyway.

The answer to your question is that people think the WCHA has more parity and that the top teams in the WCHA(UND,UW,UM,DU,CC, token MN team) are generally better than the top teams in the CCHA(Miami, MSU, Notre Dame, Michigan last year), therefore the top CCHA teams don't deserve all the hype they get.

[vikes80]

Thanks for actually replying to my initial inquiry, Heidi, and not just continuing to brag how Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Denver recently won titles or the fact that St. Cloud St. would destroy Miami on a Fighting Sioux website. I must admit, I don't read INCH or USCHO often enough to notice any favoritism. When it comes to teams outside the WCHA, I pretty much just see what other posters 'in the know' on our website have to say and take their word for it. As a UND alum, I'm actually quite surprised by the amount of national attention our university gets, considering our size, affiliations, and location. There have been quite a few articles in magazines like Sports Illustrated and websites like ESPN.com praising the tradition of Sioux hockey, but I'm sure schools like Michigan & BC, just to name two, do indeed get more pub due to their reputation, name recognition for casual fans, and prominent alumni.

I agree with what you say about how many CCHA teams would fare in the WCHA. I guess rankings just don't matter to me that much. Whether you're a 4 seed or a 1 seed, you've got to win 4 games to win the title. I wanted UND to be a 1 seed this year in order to avoid CC in their home rink, but the reality is, if we wouldn't have been good enough to beat CC in Colorado Springs, then we wouldn't have had Miami to blame for "stealing" our no. 1 seed. It would have had a lot more to do with us losing to Denver in the F5 and losing to CC in the tournament. We control our own destiny in the tournament, just like every other team. If deep down under that inflated record Miami(or any other school) really is a sheep in wolf's clothing, then they won't be successful in the tournament, regardless of seeding. Michigan, which most everyone seems to agree is a legitimate title contender, appears to have the path of least resistance to the Frozen Four, but once there they still have to beat 2 of the 4 best teams in college hockey to win it all, which is what college hockey is all about.

I completly agree with all of that. Getting to the Frozen Four isnt what its all about. Not even just to the championship game. You have to be in it to win it and 2nd place is just the 1st loser. The only thing i dislike about the NCAA's is the 1 n done format. So yes you have to "usually" play the best teams to win it all but there is alot of luck involved in a 1 n done format because the best "team" doesnt always win.