Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
cberkas

College Hockey Expansion

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, ArchyAlum11 said:

Saint Thomas is an academic focused school that is not going to move up to d2 - d1.

It goes without saying that their endowment could influence, if not support the transition, "academic focused" or otherwise. Not to mention, this prospectus has a possibility of creating quite the buzz among its alumni base and the greater Twin Cities area as an already prominent household institution. Solid education supported by one hell of an athletic experience. Maybe not right now, but the idea is attractive long-term. I wouldn't let your definitive pessimism get in the way too much.

 

8 minutes ago, Rebel_Sioux said:

I was reading last night- very exciting development. Even if it's a number of years down the road, it would be a welcomed move in an opportunistic expansion market.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ArchyAlum11 said:

Saint Thomas is an academic focused school that is not going to move up to d2 - d1.

Not meaning to sound all SiouxVolley, but I think St Thomas will declare they are moving up to D! within the next 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

No meaning to sound all SiouxVolley, but I think St Thomas will declare they are moving up to D! within the next 5 years.

I think so too.  Getting kicked out of the MIAC has opened a lot of eyes to the possibilities of what St. Thomas could be.  It's an opportunity, and the perfect excuse to move up.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Yote 53 said:

I think so too.  Getting kicked out of the MIAC has opened a lot of eyes to the possibilities of what St. Thomas could be.  It's an opportunity, and the perfect excuse to move up.

WCHA for hockey (if the decide to do D1 hockey), Pioneer League for football, and Summit league for everything else.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SiouxSherm94 said:

It goes without saying that their endowment could influence, if not support the transition, "academic focused" or otherwise. Not to mention, this prospectus has a possibility of creating quite the buzz among its alumni base and the greater Twin Cities area as an already prominent household institution. Solid education supported by one hell of an athletic experience. Maybe not right now, but the idea is attractive long-term. I wouldn't let your definitive pessimism get in the way too much.

 

I was reading last night- very exciting development. Even if it's a number of years down the road, it would be a welcomed move in an opportunistic expansion market.

Well they are going to have massive sticker shock if they choose to go D-1 or even D-2 ... I might be be a little biased as 90% of St. Thomas alums I have dealt with have been elitist jerks, I don't see them moving up to D2 I see them going D-1 if the move up because competing against D-2 schools would be under them. So lets say the go D1, in addition to scholarship money, they are going to need to spend a ton of money Building all new facilities, both training and stadium. St. Thomas Football stadium only seas 5000, Basketball 1800, Hockey 1400. Even for D2 these  are pretty small and are not going to attract recruits. So yea hope they are willing to kiss a big chunk of that endowment bye bye to build all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will see if I can get all of this from over on USCHO regarding the chance of a veto override in Alaska:

There was a pissing match earlier about whether the special session should be in Juneau or Wasilla.  The Democrats felt it should be in the capital, Juneau, the Republicans and Governor wanted it in Wasilla.  Sounds like the Governor called it in Wasilla.

Only 38 members are present in Wasilla.  They need 45 votes out of 60 to override, or 75% of the total legislative body.

No one has spoken in favor of the governor's veto. Even Republicans are bashing him.

Doesn't look like the veto will get overridden, unless the 22 sitting in Juneau show up in the next two days in Wasilla......

Edit:  I might have my towns flip flopped, trying to follow all of the twists and turns is mind boggling......  Either way, 22 members of the body stayed where they wanted the special session.  By not having a quorum, any vote taken does not count.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would the full legislature meet outside of the capital?  Dumb situation.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Why would the full legislature meet outside of the capital?  Dumb situation.

The only explanation I can think of is partisan politics......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Millsy said:

We will see if I can get all of this from over on USCHO regarding the chance of a veto override in Alaska:

There was a pissing match earlier about whether the special session should be in Juneau or Wasilla.  The Democrats felt it should be in the capital, Juneau, the Republicans and Governor wanted it in Wasilla.  Sounds like the Governor called it in Wasilla.

Only 38 members are present in Wasilla.  They need 45 votes out of 60 to override, or 75% of the total legislative body.

No one has spoken in favor of the governor's veto. Even Republicans are bashing him.

Doesn't look like the veto will get overridden, unless the 22 sitting in Juneau show up in the next two days in Wasilla......

Edit:  I might have my towns flip flopped, trying to follow all of the twists and turns is mind boggling......  Either way, 22 members of the body stayed where they wanted the special session.  By not having a quorum, any vote taken does not count.....

I wasn't aware you could do that....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Millsy said:

The only explanation I can think of is partisan politics......

Absolutely.  It sounds like only the ultra-conservative group of Republicans are in Wasilla.  Just dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toledo seems like the perfect MAC school to have DI hockey.

It has a downtown >7000 seat arena for its minor league team which is almost drawing capacity crowds.

Bowling Green is about 30 minutes south.

Their area youth and HS hockey is popular.

https://www.toledoblade.com/sports/walleye/2019/07/10/state-of-the-sport-toledo-area-continues-to-embrace-hockey/stories/20190704011

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rebel_Sioux said:

Penn adding hockey could start an Ivy hockey league with seven members.

The rest of the ECAC would have to grab some upstate NY Atlantic Hockey members, like Niagara and Canisius.

The AHA could get back to 12 with Navy, Liberty and UAH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SWSiouxMN said:

I wasn't aware you could do that....

Turns out they can't.  The governor wanted it in Wasilla, a conservative hotbed and supporter of the governor.  Leaders on both sides of the aisle said that wasn't allowed.  So, 38 legislators showed up in Juneau for the vote.  22 Republicans and the governor holed up in a middle school in Wasilla avoiding the vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, SiouxVolley said:

Penn adding hockey could start an Ivy hockey league with seven members.

The rest of the ECAC would have to grab some upstate NY Atlantic Hockey members, like Niagara and Canisius.

The AHA could get back to 12 with Navy, Liberty and UAH.

Why would they add hockey with seven, but not six?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AlphaMikeFoxtrot said:

Why would they add hockey with seven, but not six?

The ECAC would have to go to 14 or 16, which is just too large for one autobid and unwieldy for scheduling.  Divide it in two for two autobids.

The Ivy League has said it would never do that much like the Big Ten.   As if they are to be believed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, SiouxVolley said:

The ECAC would have to go to 14 or 16, which is just too large for one autobid and unwieldy for scheduling.  Divide it in two for two autobids.

The Ivy League has said it would never do that much like the Big Ten.   As if they are to be believed?

the Ivy League is 8 members, if Penn Adds hockey it would more or less shame Columbia into adding hockey, as Columbia would be the only school without a hockey program. Its way different than the big ten, they would now have all there members except one in a single league. As opposed to the Bigten which had only a few members and decided to start a hockey conference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember right one reason Hockey East was formed was the thought of a Ivy League hockey conference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, SiouxVolley said:

The ECAC would have to go to 14 or 16, which is just too large for one autobid and unwieldy for scheduling.  Divide it in two for two autobids.

The Ivy League has said it would never do that much like the Big Ten.   As if they are to be believed?

 

4 hours ago, ArchyAlum11 said:

the Ivy League is 8 members, if Penn Adds hockey it would more or less shame Columbia into adding hockey, as Columbia would be the only school without a hockey program. Its way different than the big ten, they would now have all there members except one in a single league. As opposed to the Bigten which had only a few members and decided to start a hockey conference.

 

3 hours ago, cberkas said:

If I remember right one reason Hockey East was formed was the thought of a Ivy League hockey conference. 

I mean ECAC routinely sends more than one team but I agree that the size is too big for an easy schedule. I agree that Hockey East has some tradotionally strong academic schools as well but Hockey East is getting pretty big too. I think an Ivy Legaue hockey conference could add value to the east coast. However, that does increase the number of total autobids by 1 or 2 (depending on the WCHA's ability to survive). At what point does it become realistic to discuss expanding the tournament again? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hockey East schools broke off from the ECAC as they didn’t want to be limited by rules perpetrated by the Ivy’s, like starting later and limited emphasis.  Hockey East schools wanted more emphasis on hockey like the then WCHA, so they even made an interlocking schedule with the WCHA for a few years.  Hockey East was not nearly as big then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rebel_Sioux said:

 

 

I mean ECAC routinely sends more than one team but I agree that the size is too big for an easy schedule. I agree that Hockey East has some tradotionally strong academic schools as well but Hockey East is getting pretty big too. I think an Ivy Legaue hockey conference could add value to the east coast. However, that does increase the number of total autobids by 1 or 2 (depending on the WCHA's ability to survive). At what point does it become realistic to discuss expanding the tournament again? 

If the Alaskas and UAH fold up shop, it would take a considerable amount of schools to add hockey before they look at expanding again.  If I recall correctly, they are already over the 25% (16 out of 60) guideline that the NCAA typically uses.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2019 at 12:47 PM, ArchyAlum11 said:

Saint Thomas is an academic focused school that is not going to move up to d2 - d1.

Moorhead State - Is the school that makes the most sense as it would be in partially untapped market, and could likely play its games at scheels arena until they could build there own facility in Moorhead. However I don't know how much will there is on campus to give it another shot... haven't seen that NHL feasibility study reach out to try and help them or any of the other smaller schools.

Crookston's  big issue is its small size and close proximity to UND, also the only arena in crookston is the one that the Eagles played in in there d-3 days even after renovation only seats 1200, the Current WCHA requires a Minimum of 2500 seats in an arena, and I'd imagine the New conference is going require at least the same amount and possibly others things.

UMC’s last year with a varsity hockey team was 2008-09. The new rink in Crookston was opened the following year in 2009. The old rink where UMC played was demolished, not renovated. There’s a dike protecting the city where the rink once stood just off Highway 2 as it crossed the Red Lake River. 

That said, I don’t see UMC having the funds to re-start a varsity hockey team without dropping other sports. Football? 

And unless rules have changed again, D3 is not an option and was one of the main reasons the sport was initially dropped... the NCAA didn’t allow a D2 school to field a team at a lower classification. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, choyt3 said:

UMC’s last year with a varsity hockey team was 2008-09. The new rink in Crookston was opened the following year in 2009. The old rink where UMC played was demolished, not renovated. There’s a dike protecting the city where the rink once stood just off Highway 2 as it crossed the Red Lake River. 

That said, I don’t see UMC having the funds to re-start a varsity hockey team without dropping other sports. Football? 

And unless rules have changed again, D3 is not an option and was one of the main reasons the sport was initially dropped... the NCAA didn’t allow a D2 school to field a team at a lower classification. 

Pretty sure for hockey the rule is schools can either play up or down, but if they play down they cannot offer scholarships for hockey and have to abide by funding restrictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
0
 Advanced issues found
 
 
 
10 hours ago, choyt3 said:

That said, I don’t see UMC having the funds to re-start a varsity hockey team without dropping other sports. Football? 

They can't drop football, finally won a game last year. Things are starting to look up! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2019 at 10:21 PM, choyt3 said:

UMC’s last year with a varsity hockey team was 2008-09. The new rink in Crookston was opened the following year in 2009. The old rink where UMC played was demolished, not renovated. There’s a dike protecting the city where the rink once stood just off Highway 2 as it crossed the Red Lake River. 

That said, I don’t see UMC having the funds to re-start a varsity hockey team without dropping other sports. Football? 

And unless rules have changed again, D3 is not an option and was one of the main reasons the sport was initially dropped... the NCAA didn’t allow a D2 school to field a team at a lower classification. 

UMC moved up to DII in 1999-2000 from NAIA, so they were a DII team before hockey was dropped.

https://www.crk.umn.edu/news/university-minnesota-crookston-discontinue-hockey-program

But rules changes made it DII impossible in the Midwest DIII league couldn’t take a DII member anymore.

If St Thomas, Bemidji St, Mankato and even MInot St and Mary were added, the finances become much cheaper.  It was impressive that Crookston could even afford hockey in DII with most of the teams in Wisconsin and further east, but the state of Minnesota will require WIH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...