krangodance Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 anybody know the results yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Reading between the lines on Brad's blog, it looks like the results weren't favorable for Omaha. I think there was some heavy resistance regarding entrance fees and post season revenues. I think McLeod screwed the pooch, but I have no proof on this. McLeod needs to right the fire or we'll be courting Alaska Fairbanks and trust me.... HELL NO (though it would be better than UAH). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Reading between the lines on Brad's blog, it looks like the results weren't favorable for Omaha. I think there was some heavy resistance regarding entrance fees and post season revenues. I think McLeod screwed the pooch, but I have no proof on this. McLeod needs to right the fire or we'll be courting Alaska Fairbanks and trust me.... HELL NO (though it would be better than UAH). It sounds like there have been some new developments since Brad's blog: link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdahl Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 The Bemidji Pioneer has a bit different take... WCHA to continue negotiations with Omaha “He’s going to present options the WCHA agreed on during the conference call,” Goeb said. “The league has now given (McLeod) more direction on what’s acceptable as far as terms of a possible agreement. “The ball is in UNO’s court now. It’s they’re call if they want to accept the recommendations.” Contrary to previous media reports, there was no actual “straw poll” Wednesday in which a vote was taken on terms of a possible agreement between Omaha and the WCHA. Instead discussions were held concerning what terms the league athletic directors felt comfortable in offering. The terms could include such items as league entrance fees, the sharing of postseason revenues and when the team would join the league. UNO has not at this point applied to join the WCHA. Bemidji State made a formal application in March. In April the league decided to put BSU’s application on hold while it searched for a 12th team in order to better address league scheduling issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 Reading between the lines on Brad's blog, it looks like the results weren't favorable for Omaha. I think there was some heavy resistance regarding entrance fees and post season revenues. I think McLeod screwed the pooch, but I have no proof on this. McLeod needs to right the fire or we'll be courting Alaska Fairbanks and trust me.... HELL NO (though it would be better than UAH). What I read into it that they are in negotiating phase. Trev holds the cards and the WCHA is going to have to sweeten the pot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZSIOUX Posted June 25, 2009 Share Posted June 25, 2009 im guessing and its all about money right now and how much various things will cost or not cost omaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikejm Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 "WCHA teams each earned about $91,000 from the 2009 league playoffs, said McLeod." Noice money!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersioux Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 I can understand why UNO would bargin for a reduced entry fee and its share of the money right away. It would be interesting to see if BSU would be willing to pay UNO's entry fee. I would think that they would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoggy Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 I can understand why UNO would bargin for a reduced entry fee and its share of the money right away. It would be interesting to see if BSU would be willing to pay UNO's entry fee. I would think that they would. I can see Mankato not being too thrilled about UNO getting a sweet deal. Not that MSUM would vote against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 I can see Mankato not being too thrilled about UNO getting a sweet deal. Not that MSUM would vote against it. I agree, but MSUM was in a different position than UNO, wasn't they? Who had the leverage when MSUM was going through the motions, the WCHA or MSUM? UNO has the leverage here.... as much as a school can hold it. There still is the possibility that the WCHA says no dice and BSU loses out hardcore. 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.