undchris Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 What are your guys' feelings about Bemidji State being the only team to apply for membership into the WCHA. I think that the WCHA should look at getting rid of some of the bottom feeder teams (Michigan Tech and definately Alaska Anchorage). It makes more sense for Anchorage to join the CCHA with Fairbanks because the same two schools are within not even 100 miles of each other, but play in two different conferences? Boy if Bemidji pulls off the BIG upset by winning it all, that MIGHT turns some heads. I do believe though that it will be too tough to play a 11 team conference schedule, but it can be done. Just wondering what you guys thought? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I think if Bowling Green or Western Michigan end up dropping hockey, the WCHA should talk to the CCHA about accepting Anchorage, but in the meantime, they need to accept Bemidji and make it work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 MTU has a long rich history with the WCHA. Because of that I would hate to see them leave. At one time they were a powerhouse. UAA on the other hand is a geographic challenge for the WCHA and does not not have a storied history in the WCHA. I would prefer to see BSU replace UAA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 UAA and UAF in the same conference isn't going to happen because of travel costs for teams that have to go to Alaska twice in a season. UAA isn't going anywhere. Also, an 11 team conference CAN'T be done if you listen to Bruce McLeod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dden1 Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Seems like it would be hard for the WCHA to argue Bemidji isn't good enough to play in their league at this point in time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jk Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Also, an 11 team conference CAN'T be done if you listen to Bruce McLeod. It can't be done well. You could live with a little inequity and imbalance for a few years while you court a twelfth team. IMO letting BSU go under is unacceptable; it's not good for anyone. And since when do we listen to McLeod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upper Deck Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 The WCHA committee is in town on Friday for the BREC groundbreaking, meeting and a rally on campus. I would expect a great turnout and obviously, BSU is joyful with the timing and FF. Hopefully team 12 steps forward and makes it easier. Who knows what conversations are actually occurring between potential schools and the WCHA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakvindy Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 11 teams is easy. You cut to a 20 game league schedule - play five series at home and five series away. Then the traditional rivals just schedule each other to fill out the nonconference schedule. The 11th place team misses the playoffs (or you have a play-in game between 10 and 11) and then it's business as usual to the Final Five. Those talking about dumping UAA or Tech are crazy. Tech has a long history and is a founding member of the league, and there is also the MacNaughton Cup factor. As for UAA, playing up there provides the exemption and extra games which are helpful to the bottom line. Also, UAA once made an NCAA tourney run prior to coming into the league. Bemidji's run to the Frozen Four is a great story, but let's remember that they only had to win two games to do it. This is also the same team that struggled to beat Robert Morris to even get to the tournament. Success in the CHA is a lot different than success in the WCHA. To think Bemidji should just come in and displace established league members is pretty naive. I agree that Bemidji shouldn't be left to twist in the wind, but neither should UAH, and we definitely shouldn't create that problem for Tech or UAA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikejm Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Seems like it would be hard for the WCHA to argue Bemidji isn't good enough to play in their league at this point in time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I think the one thing missing in this whole equation is what can/will the NCAA do about situations like this. If they cared at all, you would think they would be stepping in to offer suggestions or solutions. It certainly would help Bemidji and other teams plights if the NCAA would extend the # of games each teams can play if they help save a program, as per their allowance for traveling to Alaska. To allow WCHA teams to add games so they don't have to lose traditional rivals would help, but I think the silence speaks volumes of what the NCAA thinks about hockey. On the positive side, there should be an additional spot in the NCAA next year for an at-large team because that league will be gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Seems like it would be hard for the WCHA to argue Bemidji isn't good enough to play in their league at this point in time. BSU's on-ice talent was never the reason for being against their admittance into the WCHA. BSU has been "good enough" to play in the WCHA for a number of years. It was other factors that were the primary obstacles to their admission. It appears that BSU cleared those obstacles a couple months ago and were likely going to be admitted even before of this Frozen 4 run. The obvious and unavoidable result of BSU in the WCHA will be less games against rivals. But the real concern to me is whether it will put the wheels in motion to a real shake-up in the WCHA. Long-term, I can not believe Minnesota will be content in a conference with four in-state Division II schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagard Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 The obvious and unavoidable result of BSU in the WCHA will be less games against rivals. But the real concern to me is whether it will put the wheels in motion to a real shake-up in the WCHA. Long-term, I can not believe Minnesota will be content in a conference with four in-state Division II schools. Unless it became an issue with the "U" admin, it won't be a problem. The games with UMD/SCSU/MSUM are typically some of the most fun games as a fan. These games are far better attended than games vs. OSU or MichSt. Of course all the tickets are sold so who knows if anyone cares. The beauty of the 20 game league schedule is that the "U" would then probably schedule at least six of the eight remaining games at home so they would get more $$$. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceberg Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 What are your guys' feelings about Bemidji State being the only team to apply for membership into the WCHA. Alabama-Huntsville applied to both the WCHA & CCHA Move Northern Michigan into the WCHA, give us Bemidji & give the CCHA Alabama since its closer to Ohio & Indiana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceberg Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 It makes more sense for Anchorage to join the CCHA with Fairbanks because the same two schools are within not even 100 miles of each other, but play in two different conferences? 100 miles? try 365 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FIRE HELMET GUY #26 Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Alabama-Huntsville applied to both the WCHA & CCHA Move Northern Michigan into the WCHA, give us Bemidji & give the CCHA Alabama since its closer to Ohio & Indiana Thats the plan that makes the most sense to me too. I cannot imagine UAH in the WCHA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoggy Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 UAA and UAF in the same conference isn't going to happen because of travel costs for teams that have to go to Alaska twice in a season. I think you could stay in Alaska for a week or like half week and play the four games. Then you'd only have to go once every three years. Though getting the extra couple games has to be a nice benefit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoggy Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Unless it became an issue with the "U" admin, it won't be a problem. The games with UMD/SCSU/MSUM are typically some of the most fun games as a fan. These games are far better attended than games vs. OSU or MichSt. Of course all the tickets are sold so who knows if anyone cares. The beauty of the 20 game league schedule is that the "U" would then probably schedule at least six of the eight remaining games at home so they would get more $$$. And that's the biggest problem right there. MN will never travel, so would extra games with a school like UND happen? At UND? My guess is UW will stay at home plenty as well. If UND was smart they'd do the same. The other problem with the 20 game schedule is essentially WCHA teams would really only be scheduling WCHA teams. Every other conference would have too many league games to schedule these 'extra' WCHA non-conference games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverman Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 The WCHA committee is in town on Friday for the BREC groundbreaking, meeting and a rally on campus. I would expect a great turnout and obviously, BSU is joyful with the timing and FF. Hopefully team 12 steps forward and makes it easier. Who knows what conversations are actually occurring between potential schools and the WCHA. Let's hope they see that letting BSU in the WCHA is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I've given you people the answer key once already. Too bad it seems (via USCHO thread) that UNO and NMU are happy where they're at (CCHA). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverman Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I think the one thing missing in this whole equation is what can/will the NCAA do about situations like this. If they cared at all, you would think they would be stepping in to offer suggestions or solutions. It certainly would help Bemidji and other teams plights if the NCAA would extend the # of games each teams can play if they help save a program, as per their allowance for traveling to Alaska. To allow WCHA teams to add games so they don't have to lose traditional rivals would help, but I think the silence speaks volumes of what the NCAA thinks about hockey. On the positive side, there should be an additional spot in the NCAA next year for an at-large team because that league will be gone. Does the NCAA allow extra games for any team that travels to play teams in Alaska? IMHO, this seems like a no brainer to help college hockey grow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagard Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 And that's the biggest problem right there. MN will never travel, so would extra games with a school like UND happen? At UND? My guess is UW will stay at home plenty as well. If UND was smart they'd do the same. The other problem with the 20 game schedule is essentially WCHA teams would really only be scheduling WCHA teams. Every other conference would have too many league games to schedule these 'extra' WCHA non-conference games. The "U" travels to Michigan every other year and seems to go out east every second or third year. With eight extra games I'd expect them to travel typically one of the four series. Probably to UND or UW when the Gophers hosted the conference series. Our fan base wants UND at home every year, so if traveling is the only way to make it happen I'm sure Don and the boys would make the trip. Unbalanced league schedules are worse in my opinion. Compounding unbalanced league schedules with the goofy (but fun) final five format the WCHA league is not currently setup in a fair manner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZSIOUX Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 The "U" travels to Michigan every other year and seems to go out east every second or third year. With eight extra games I'd expect them to travel typically one of the four series. Probably to UND or UW when the Gophers hosted the conference series. Our fan base wants UND at home every year, so if traveling is the only way to make it happen I'm sure Don and the boys would make the trip. Unbalanced league schedules are worse in my opinion. Compounding unbalanced league schedules with the goofy (but fun) final five format the WCHA league is not currently setup in a fair manner. this has been discusses before and i think there was some sort of BS reason the gophers dont travel as they dont. 1 tourney to michigan isnt considered traveling. they never go out east, very rare to see that. i think its funny actually they dont. i loce that the sioux will play any east coast team in thier backyard and do so every year. fun to see as a sioux fan and wcha fan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakvindy Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Does the NCAA allow extra games for any team that travels to play teams in Alaska? IMHO, this seems like a no brainer to help college hockey grow. Teams that leave the Continental US for games have those exempted. It is true for all sports. It's why teams will play Hawaii in football and why you have basketball tourneys like the Maui Classic and Great Alaska Shootout. It applies to Puerto Rico as well. A local team has to be involved though, be it in the game or at least the tournament. So for example, Duke and Georgetown couldn't just randomly schedule a game in Hawaii and not count it against the game limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzerman19 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 The challenge is and always will be $. The other challenge is the superordinate goals of college hockey i.e. parity and expansion of the sport. There is certainly precedent for teams switching conferences ala Northern Michigan and Michigan Tech being part of the WCHA as well as the CCHA at various times. Facilities are a challenge, as is population base, but Houghton isn't exactly a metropolis. A Big 10 conference is often considered, but the historical strength and tradition of rivalries such as UND with WI and UMN pose definite challenges in terms of loss of revenue and dilution of a highly regarded league. The F5 is the most successful conference tournament in part due tot he willingness of fanbases like UMD, UND, and SCSU making many trips. What do you do with Bemidji State? It is really a tough question given scheduling limitations. It certainly makes sense for them to compete with the other MN schools... There has to be a way to make it work. Traditionalists I know aren't fans of MSU and SCSU even being in the WCHA, but they have certainly been competitive and have earned the right to be in the conference. BSU has now won more NCAA tournament games than SCSU! NDSU wants to get hockey going...We can't really throw an unestablished program into the mix though. WHat about the private schools in the region with a history of success on the DIII level? There is certainly precedent among the private schools out east ala BC. I know we won't solve this problem on this forum, I am just grasping at straws. It is a shame if BSU is not welcomed into the WCHA after a F4 finish... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rochsioux Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Let's see if we can make an 11-team conference schedule workable while keeping to 28 league games. Group the "natural rivalries" as follows. UND - MN - Wisc (with 11 teams one group needs to have 3 teams). DU - CC AA - Mankato SCSU - BSU UMD - MTU Note: These are the current rivalries with BSU replacing UND. Play each team twice with an additional series against your rival(s) and play a total of 28 league games (same number of league games as today). After scheduling each team twice and the rivals for another two games each, UND, MN, Wisc are at 24 games and the other eight teams are at 22 games. UND-MN-Wisc can each schedule two of the other eight teams each year so they will play a home/home series once every 4 years with the other eight teams. That gets those three teams to 28 games. The other eight teams will play three additional series. Once every four years they will get a home/home with UND, MN, Wisc. Slightly more than one out of three years they get a home/home with the other six non-rival teams. Seems workable to me and as a Sioux fan has the benefit of restoring yearly home/home series with MN and Wisc. I think it is fair to put these three in one grouping given their history with each other and the fact they lead the league in attendance by a large margin over the other eight teams. I believe UND/MN has played more games against each other than any other rivalry in college hockey. I would like to get this back to four times every year and not water it down any more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.