The Sicatoka Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Everyone had a hand in it and that includes everyone in the NCHC. Some instigated. Some responded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GFG Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Some instigated. Some responded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 My understanding is that Minny didn't want anything to do with a Big 10 Hockey Conference but because of the benefits they reaped from the B10 Network (especially in football) they were asked to fall on the sword to help carry hockey with Michigan and Mich St. If you want to blame/hate somebody start with Barry Alvarez, Jim Delaney, etc...Still hate the gofers though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Some instigated. Some responded. ... and the ones that instigated it knew beforehand the trickle-down effect it would have because it had been discussed everywhere. And once again if there was nothing the schools could do, then Barry Alvarez is faultless as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Why do you roll your eyes. If the Big Ten does not come about, there is no NCHC --- period!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passit_offthegoalie Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 The Mankatos and techs of the world are really the guilty party. They broke up the WCHA and invited a bunch of CCHA teams! We had no control over the formation of the NCHC, obviously, but the greedy WCHA leftover teams were only looking out for themselves when they added all those non-WCHA teams and RUINED the WCHA. Certainly the Big Ten and NCHC schools are equally blameless, according to the logic of this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I think it's funny that everyone is mad at UND and DU for the formation of the NCHC, seriously, we are fans and we have no control over this what-so-ever. Gwoz called Faison and the rest is history... I think some of this angers is missplaced. After the Big Ten schools left the WCHA, the WCHA in it's present form died. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bale31 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 The Mankatos and techs of the world are really the guilty party. They broke up the WCHA and invited a bunch of CCHA teams! We had no control over the formation of the NCHC, obviously, but the greedy WCHA leftover teams were only looking out for themselves when they added all those non-WCHA teams and RUINED the WCHA. Certainly the Big Ten and NCHC schools are equally blameless, according to the logic of this thread. BWAHAHA!! Well played! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bale31 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Why do you roll your eyes. If the Big Ten does not come about, there is no NCHC --- period!!! You're right there is not. There was no requirement for other schools to break of though, was there? I'm guessing no one FORCED the NCHC to form. Again, I'm not saying that UND was wrong to do what they did. I don't agree with the reasoning, but they didn't do anything wrong. I just wish that people would accept the fact that it didn't have to happen and no one is looking out for anyone else other than themselves....that includes UND. It's OK. College hockey programs have lost their innocence and no one is concerned about the greater good. You're right though, as soon as the Big Ten formed, it was every school for itself. No one is blameless or faultless. It is what it is and this is the new reality. Time to move on and quit placing blame on everyone else. MN had a part in it and can't blame anyone else. WI had a part in it and can't blame anyone else. UND had a part in it and can't blame anyone else. Even the schools in the new WCHA had a part in it and can't blame anyone else. It's over. It's done. Time to move on and quit blaming everyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggsy Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Blame for the BTHC can be placed squarely on Alvarez and Penn State. They rolled everyone else and put them in a position that there was no other option. BTHC forced all the NCHC schools to make a move because the CCHA was about to collapse and all those teams needed a home. So they moved first and got their pick of what was left leaving the new WCHA to pick up the scraps. That's how I see it anyways. BTHC moved so the NCHC responded the best they could. Didn't seem like they did too bad so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I think it's all a mistake - don't know why - I'll miss the Final Five at St Paul - have they decicded what kind of tournment they are going to have ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightingsioux4life Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I think it's all a mistake - don't know why - I'll miss the Final Five at St Paul - have they decicded what kind of tournment they are going to have ? That is my biggest fear as well. The Final Five right now is the best tournament in the country....bar none. It is second only to the Frozen Four in difficulty level and quality of teams. I am concerned what kind of tournament the NCHC will have and where it will be located. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bale31 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I think it's all a mistake - don't know why - I'll miss the Final Five at St Paul - have they decicded what kind of tournment they are going to have ? It's funny, one of the best things that I've heard said about this whole thing came from Troy Jutting. His comment was that college hockey is bigger and better than it's ever been before. Change is not necessarily bad, but if you are going to change, you better be damn sure that the change is for the better. Whether this is actually better for the game as a whole is yet to be seen. The jury is still out and we're all just going to have to wait and see. In any case, it's not worth the pissing match of who's right and who's wrong. We can all disagree on who the main culprits are and, frankly, there's probably a bit of truth to everyone's argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigskyvikes Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Honestly, from a Mankato perspective, MN is treating us a hell of a lot better than anyone else that's leaving the conference. They have agreed to both the "Minnesota Cup" and, for the first 2 years, a home-and-home series with Kato. I have also been told that it's probably going to morph into a 4-year agreement in which it's a home-and-home for 3 years and the 4th year MN has a home series, but they will have to pay a hefty price for that 4th year. I think that's going to be the way it works from this point forward. MN is going to have to play more return trips simply due to the fact that they aren't going to get enough schools to come in and play them without a return trip. They've got to fill up their schedule since the league is smaller and they are going to need to play more return trips. There is no upside for most schools to go to Mariucci without getting either return trip OR a very large check paid to them. I hate to break it to you guys, but if there is anyone that MSU fans are really disgusted with it's the schools in the NCHC. Minnesota has been classy through this entire transition and Lucia has done and said all the right things. I, personally, gained a whole new respect for Minnesota and the way they are going about their business. I historically haven't defended the Gophers in hockey, but after this, I can't say anything bad about the way they are going about their business. This is funny, disappointed with NCHC, but happy with what Mn is doing with all this? Did I read you correct? Who do you think started all of this!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigskyvikes Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Really, what was MN supposed to do? Drop out of the Big Ten for "the good of college hockey"? Come on, let's be realistic about it. I'm not going to get in a pissing match, but why was it only up to MN to do "what is good for college hockey"? What about UND, DU, CC, MIami, SCSU, UMD, UNO and WMU? All of those schools had the ability to help a lot of other schools. It's disingenuous to act as though their hands were tied and this was something that they had to do. It's something they wanted to do. And that's fine. It's their right to do that and if they are better off for it, it's all good. But, please, let's stop acting as though college hockey programs are above the money-grab that all college athletics have become. There is no such thing as acting for "the good of college hockey". MN and WI aren't immune from that and neither is UND or anyone else in the NCHC. I know that you guys automatically think cynically about MN, and that's fine. But they have been making the best of a bad situation. Yes, the Big Ten started everything, but, realistically, they weren't going to be able to stop it without screwing over every other athletic program that they have. The only option that was available was to go with the flow, join the Big Ten and preserve as many of the relationships as possible. Yes, that might mean that they default to the other MN schools, but they're doing exactly what they've always said they would do. They are being stewards of the game in the state of Minnesota. Maybe it's a PR ploy and maybe they truly believe that's their role. I don't know and, frankly, it doesn't matter. They are doing what's best for hockey in the state of Minnesota. All that being said, what's done is done. I think MSU will actually come out of this in a pretty good position. It's not where I would like us to be, but we'll be fine. Let's be realistic! When they left the WCHA, it changed the voting process in WCHA. The no money schools would have the more power, where do you think that would get UND, DU, etc.....? What choice did they realistically have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxAlum01 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 MN and Wisoconsin leaving the WCHA, put UND and DU in this position. UND and DU have to look out for what's best for them....and they did. You need to direct this towards the Big 10, not UND and DU. End of story. It is what it is...lets move on. What's the timeframe for announcing the NCHC tourney location? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bale31 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 This is funny, disappointed with NCHC, but happy with what Mn is doing with all this? Did I read you correct? Who do you think started all of this!? I'm disappointed with everyone. The difference in my mind is that the NCHC schools had a choice. MN didn't. They weren't going to be able to damage the other sports at MN just to stay in the WCHA. That's not even a choice. You can say the NCHC schools were backed into a corner and I would disagree. I think they took the easy way out when they saw the opening. Reasonable minds can disagree about this. The fact is, many of us outside the NCHC see a lot more to be unhappy about from the NCHC schools than MN. You can argue that it's unfounded, but again, there is a lot of reasons this happened and it's NOT just the Big Ten. Yes, they started it, but it didn't HAVE to continue on this path forward. It's done. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightingsioux4life Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I'm disappointed with everyone. The difference in my mind is that the NCHC schools had a choice. MN didn't. They weren't going to be able to damage the other sports at MN just to stay in the WCHA. That's not even a choice. You can say the NCHC schools were backed into a corner and I would disagree. I think they took the easy way out when they saw the opening. Reasonable minds can disagree about this. The fact is, many of us outside the NCHC see a lot more to be unhappy about from the NCHC schools than MN. You can argue that it's unfounded, but again, there is a lot of reasons this happened and it's NOT just the Big Ten. Yes, they started it, but it didn't HAVE to continue on this path forward. It's done. So in other words, UND and Denver are just supposed to take what is dished out to them and shut their mouths? Sorry, that ain't how it works. Neither program wanted to get stuck in a watered-down WCHA where the small schools would out-vote them on everything. You might have even had some sort of scholarship cap introduced and it would have passed because most of the schools in the WCHA would benefit from such a rule. Then UND and Denver would have had to live with the cap or leave and there might not be a viable conference option for them. The NCHC came together at this moment in time and you have to jump on board before the train leaves the station. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND Alum Fan Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I'm disappointed with everyone. The difference in my mind is that the NCHC schools had a choice. MN didn't. They weren't going to be able to damage the other sports at MN just to stay in the WCHA. That's not even a choice. You can say the NCHC schools were backed into a corner and I would disagree. I think they took the easy way out when they saw the opening. Reasonable minds can disagree about this. The fact is, many of us outside the NCHC see a lot more to be unhappy about from the NCHC schools than MN. You can argue that it's unfounded, but again, there is a lot of reasons this happened and it's NOT just the Big Ten. Yes, they started it, but it didn't HAVE to continue on this path forward. It's done. On the last page and this page you have had 5 entries where you said you were done being mad and people should stop blaming each other. You are still blaiming. It's time for you to stop!!!!!! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I'm disappointed with everyone. The difference in my mind is that the NCHC schools had a choice. MN didn't. They weren't going to be able to damage the other sports at MN just to stay in the WCHA. That's not even a choice. You can say the NCHC schools were backed into a corner and I would disagree. The biggest question I have had and I posed to my buddy that's a fan of BSU.... Why is it not okay for the 6-8 schools that formed the NCHC to improve their lot in college hockey, but it’s ok for the B1G to improve their lot? Let’s not kid ourselves, that’s what they’re doing as well. They are marketing it under the guise of having too because they now have six teams in the B1G. It's teams like Wisconsin that didn't want to play the small schools in college hockey. Teams like UND have in the past, they also travel to other parts of the country to play non-conference games when other teams in the WCHA wont. However, if you noticed Wisconsin was very up front about want to play their B1G brothers more and Wisconsin even entertained joining the CCHA a few years back. My question is; why is UND, DU, C.C. expected to prop up the rest of the teams in the WCHA when Wisconsin and UMN get a free pass? They are doing the same thing that the aforementioned teams are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 As I said, this started with Jim Delaney, Barry Alvarez, and the Big Ten Network. The last one (BTN) is also able to be spelled as "$$$$$". The WCHA without Minnesota and Wisconsin, well, here it is: The no money schools would have the more power, where do you think that would get UND, DU, etc.....? What choice did they realistically have? So DU and UND make the same "$$$$$" decision Minnesota and Wisconsin did. But DU and UND did it in reaction to the first move. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bale31 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 So in other words, UND and Denver are just supposed to take what is dished out to them and shut their mouths? Sorry, that ain't how it works. Neither program wanted to get stuck in a watered-down WCHA where the small schools would out-vote them on everything. You might have even had some sort of scholarship cap introduced and it would have passed because most of the schools in the WCHA would benefit from such a rule. Then UND and Denver would have had to live with the cap or leave and there might not be a viable conference option for them. The NCHC came together at this moment in time and you have to jump on board before the train leaves the station. That's a lot of ifs, ands and buts. I'm not saying that anyone should have taken what's dished out to them. The point is that there were choices to be made and everyone made the choices that were best for their institution at that point in time. That includes the Big Ten schools, the NCHC schools and, to a degree, the WCHA/CCHA schools. No one is immune to the consequences of their decisions. On the last page and this page you have had 5 entries where you said you were done being mad and people should stop blaming each other. You are still blaiming. It's time for you to stop!!!!!! I'm not blaming anyone. Again, everyone has made their decisions and that's fine. What I am saying, though, is that the NCHC schools did make a decision that was best for them with a complete disregard for the schools they left behind. The Big Ten isn't the only group that did that, there are a lot of people involved. The biggest question I have had and I posed to my buddy that's a fan of BSU.... Why is it not okay for the 6-8 schools that formed the NCHC to improve their lot in college hockey, but it’s ok for the B1G to improve their lot? Let’s not kid ourselves, that’s what they’re doing as well. They are marketing it under the guise of having too because they now have six teams in the B1G. It's teams like Wisconsin that didn't want to play the small schools in college hockey. Teams like UND have in the past, they also travel to other parts of the country to play non-conference games when other teams in the WCHA wont. However, if you noticed Wisconsin was very up front about want to play their B1G brothers more and Wisconsin even entertained joining the CCHA a few years back. My question is; why is UND, DU, C.C. expected to prop up the rest of the teams in the WCHA when Wisconsin and UMN get a free pass? They are doing the same thing that the aforementioned teams are. They aren't expected to. You're right, everything changed the day the Big Ten formed. That's not up for debate. My point is and always has been that the NCHC schools did have a decision to make. They made a decision that I may not like, but they had that right and they took that opportunity to push themselves forward (or at least what they think is forward at this point). That's the decision they made, but just because the Big Ten left first, doesn't mean that their hands were forced into making a decision. I admit, I look at MN different from the rest of the Big Ten schools. In my heart of hearts, I think MN wanted to stay in the WCHA. I think in a perfect world, they would have kept status quo. Unfortunately, they didn't seem to have a real choice in all of this. They have a MUCH bigger picture to keep in mind. Maybe I'm being played by PR and they really couldn't care less, but that's how I'm looking at it. Their actions in supporting MSU since this all happened speak a lot louder than anything that I've seen from any other school. They have gone out of their way to help us through the transition in a financial sense since this was announced. So, yeah, I'm a bit biased towards them, but actions speak louder than words for me. And their actions tell me that they weren't for this change and are trying to help those of us left behind as much as possible. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bale31 Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 As I said, this started with Jim Delaney, Barry Alvarez, and the Big Ten Network. The last one (BTN) is also able to be spelled as "$$$$$". The WCHA without Minnesota and Wisconsin, well, here it is: So DU and UND make the same "$$$$$" decision Minnesota and Wisconsin did. But DU and UND did it in reaction to the first move. And that's exactly my point. NCHC schools made the EXACT same decision. Putting all the blame in one place is misguided. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 And that's exactly my point. NCHC schools made the EXACT same decision. Putting all the blame in one place is misguided. Instigator. Reaction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gma loves hockey Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I'm not into the politics of the change and will miss the old WCHA. To me, the best reason for the change is to GET NEW REFS! 1 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.