PDA

View Full Version : Atlantic Hockey Future



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9

Jim
06-22-2012, 09:53 AM
For what it's worth, the information given in the Stafford consulting report a few months ago said that UConn was planning to phase in scholarships over three years, six a year, starting with the 2012-13 season. Their first year at 18 scholarships will be 2014-15.From what I've read and heard, UConn plans to upgrade/replace Freitas Forum in the near future as part of the deal, too. this isn't some short term "let's see if it works out" committment. This is a long term move. And as far as UCONN being BC and UMass's "petulant little brother", I think that is a bit off the mark when you consider that the Huskies were in the Big East in basketball since its founding, had something like a 20 game win streak over BC, and hadn't lost to UMass in years either. Maybe in the 1970s you could have said that. Not recently. On the hockey front, UCONN has never really tried to compete with BC. they play UMass most years since going to D1 but don't often win ( I think we have 1 win and a tie). On the football side, UConn has been 1A for a decade now and has played in bowls. UMass is not in the picture right now. There is a rivalry if that's the right word for 2 teams that don't play each other with BC in part because BC resented UCONN's infringing on their turf as the only 1A program in New England, and UConn resented the way BC left the Big East.

lmg6841
06-22-2012, 10:53 AM
St. Anselm to Atlantic Hockey in 2014 New Athletic Director will lead the way!

... Who? lol

Jim
06-22-2012, 11:28 AM
Back in the old MAAC days, there was talk of St Anselm and/or Stonehill/and/or Assumption upgrading to play in the league. I'm not sure whether that is just because they are among the few D2 programs, or because they compete with Bentley and AIC in other sports or whether there was actually some interest there. It heated up for a while when Fairfield dropped out as I recall.

ExileOnDaytonStreet
06-22-2012, 03:20 PM
Honestly, if all of the D-II schools wanted to move up and operate on a cost containment structure with AHA teams... what would stop them? I can't imagine it would lose them any more money than dinking around playing D-III schedules.

(You can't pray for a payout game in Boston, or out west, with D-III opponents)

Jim
06-22-2012, 03:39 PM
I think that might have been true back in the old MAAC days, but with games in Colorado Springs, Pittsburgh, Buffalo maybe Alabama, I'm not so sure that the cost containment model is as contained, so to speak, any more.

ExileOnDaytonStreet
06-22-2012, 03:57 PM
I think that might have been true back in the old MAAC days, but with games in Colorado Springs, Pittsburgh, Buffalo maybe Alabama, I'm not so sure that the cost containment model is as contained, so to speak, any more.Well in that scenario, there's something like 4 or 5 D-II schools that could theoretically make the leap. Would the AHA blow up to 15-16 teams?

joecct
06-22-2012, 04:14 PM
Honestly, if all of the D-II schools wanted to move up and operate on a cost containment structure with AHA teams... what would stop them? I can't imagine it would lose them any more money than dinking around playing D-III schedules.

(You can't pray for a payout game in Boston, or out west, with D-III opponents)They don't have to move up. The NCAA permits D-II ice hockey teams to play in the D-I championship since there is no D-II championship. You could do this:

Northeast-10
AIC
Bentley
St. Anselm
St. Michaels
Stonehill
Assumption
Franklin Pierce
So. New Hampshire

At that point you have 8, which gives you an AQ and a 28 game league schedule. You could then add (over their dead bodies) NE-10 members Lowell and Merrimack for a Northeast 10. :D

Then if you want to get further cute, trade RIT to the ECAC for Quinnipiac. The ECAC then divides into Ivy and Empire.
The Empire is:
Clarkson
SLU
RPI
Union
RIT
Colgate

Then poach Niagara and Canisius for a 8 team low cost travel conference.

This leaves AHA with
Air Force
Army
Robert Morris
Mercyhurst
Sacred Heart
Holy Cross
Quinnipiac

Plenty of expansion room.

Never happen.....

darker98
06-22-2012, 04:29 PM
They don't have to move up. The NCAA permits D-II ice hockey teams to play in the D-I championship since there is no D-II championship.
I believe he meant playing up to D1 in Hockey.

UAHStatman
06-22-2012, 04:47 PM
They don't have to move up. The NCAA permits D-II ice hockey teams to play in the D-I championship since there is no D-II championship.

Yes, they do. The six Division II hockey programs (all in the Northeast-10) can't play in the D-I championship. They'd have to declare themselves to be Division I and play a D-I schedule.

UAHStatman
06-22-2012, 04:53 PM
Mike McMahon did tweet this yesterday:
https://twitter.com/MikeMcMahonET/status/215860311109021696


Have been told that some D3 schools have had preliminary discussions w/ the AHA about replacing UConn. Some intriguing names out there ...

joecct
06-22-2012, 05:16 PM
Mike McMahon did tweet this yesterday:
https://twitter.com/MikeMcMahonET/status/215860311109021696Play-ups are gone.....

The D-III school would have to move the ENTIRE athletic program to D-II and sit out a probationary period before being eligible for the AHA / NCAA postseason. Proposition 2010-100.

CARDS_rule_the_Burgh
06-22-2012, 10:33 PM
Yes, they do. The six Division II hockey programs (all in the Northeast-10) can't play in the D-I championship. They'd have to declare themselves to be Division I and play a D-I schedule.

Yes, they would still have to declare themselves DI (in men's hockey, at least, since women's is a joint DI/DII championship) and play a DI schedule (or at least have the vast majority of their schedule be DI), but the 6 DII programs, and in fact ALL DII schools, are the only ones still able to do that. Play-ups are gone, only existing teams playing up are allowed to continue doing so. The exception is in sports where a particular division does not sponsor a championship, as in the case of DII hockey, who are still permitted to play up.

Technically, the RIT women missed the deadline on this one, but were allowed to play up after significant appeal.

komey1
06-23-2012, 11:31 AM
Mike McMahon did tweet this yesterday:
https://twitter.com/MikeMcMahonET/status/215860311109021696

There are a couple DIII teams that I would love to see some up - Elmira and Utica come to mind. Norwich would be intriguing and help balance the AHA East/West again. I would not be surprised if Manhattanville had some discussion, but I don't know if I want them or what their facilities situation is since RIT left DIII.

joecct
06-23-2012, 08:16 PM
There are a couple DIII teams that I would love to see some up - Elmira and Utica come to mind. Norwich would be intriguing and help balance the AHA East/West again. I would not be surprised if Manhattanville had some discussion, but I don't know if I want them or what their facilities situation is since RIT left DIII.Komey -- you were the last D-III team to play-up. Proposition 2010-100 killed it. In order to play D-I, you gotta be a member of D-I, or play in a sport that does not offer a D-II championship.

Unless those 3 schools want to move the entire athletic program up to Division II and wait the requisite waiting period, it's not going to happen.

The relevant parts of 2010-100 (Passed March, 2011)

20.4.1 Multidivision Classification

A member of Division II or Division III may have a sport classified in Division I, provided the sport was so classified during the 2010-11 academic year. Such a classification shall continue until the institution fails to conduct the sport in Division I in any following academic year.

So no current D-II school (St. Anselm, for example) that is not currently playing up, may play up.

One more little tidbit to 2010-100. If you want to move up to D-I, you must be invited to play in a multisport conference. Guess how many multisport conferences there are in D-I ice hockey? Two -- The Big Ten and the Ivy League. Guess we're not getting anyone moving up anymore to D-I for the sole purpose of playing ice hockey.

However, for D-II schools, all is not lost.
Division I By-Law 20.8.2 has the out

20.8.2 Division II options when no Division II Championship is Conducted. An active member institution that holds membership in Division II is eligible to compete in the Division I championship in those sports for which no championship is conducted in Division II. The Division II institution shall declare its intention to compete by June 1. This declaration of intent shall be effective for a minimum of three years. (Revised: 1/10/91 effective 9/1/92)

20.8.2.1 Participation in Division I Championship. To be eligible for the Division I championship in such a sport, the Division II member institution is required to meet all Division I institutional and individual eligibility requirements and may use Division I financial aid limitations in that sport as permitted under Bylaw 20.9.1.1. (Revised: 1/10/91 effective 9/1/92)

schiegs
06-23-2012, 11:44 PM
Komey -- you were the last D-III team to play-up. Proposition 2010-100 killed it. In order to play D-I, you gotta be a member of D-I, or play in a sport that does not offer a D-II championship.

Unless those 3 schools want to move the entire athletic program up to Division II and wait the requisite waiting period, it's not going to happen.

The relevant parts of 2010-100 (Passed March, 2011)

20.4.1 Multidivision Classification


So no current D-II school (St. Anselm, for example) that is not currently playing up, may play up.

One more little tidbit to 2010-100. If you want to move up to D-I, you must be invited to play in a multisport conference. Guess how many multisport conferences there are in D-I ice hockey? Two -- The Big Ten and the Ivy League. Guess we're not getting anyone moving up anymore to D-I for the sole purpose of playing ice hockey.

However, for D-II schools, all is not lost.
Division I By-Law 20.8.2 has the out

See, you're letting cold hard facts go and ruin perfectly good idle speculation.

FlagDUDE08
06-24-2012, 07:27 PM
Yes, they would still have to declare themselves DI (in men's hockey, at least, since women's is a joint DI/DII championship) and play a DI schedule (or at least have the vast majority of their schedule be DI), but the 6 DII programs, and in fact ALL DII schools, are the only ones still able to do that. Play-ups are gone, only existing teams playing up are allowed to continue doing so. The exception is in sports where a particular division does not sponsor a championship, as in the case of DII hockey, who are still permitted to play up.

Technically, the RIT women missed the deadline on this one, but were allowed to play up after significant appeal.

Significant appeal? All you had to do was utter two words: Title... Nine.

Humanoid
06-24-2012, 09:43 PM
Significant appeal? All you had to do was utter two words: Title... Nine.

WOOOOO!!!! TITLE IX!!!! WOOO!!!!! I LOVE WOMENS BASKETBALL AND WITHOUT TITLE IX I'D NEVER HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO WATCH MY FAVORITE WNBA STARS ON ESPN!!!!!

...said no one ever

(please note this is not to make fun of women's sports. I'm merely making the point that Title IX has afforded us the ability to do lots of things in the names of bending rules. Like keeping the WNBA around).

Humanoid
06-24-2012, 09:48 PM
See, you're letting cold hard facts go and ruin perfectly good idle speculation.

I always thought the NCAA allowed a D3 or D2 school to play at the D1 level in ONE sport solely to protect teams like Clarkson and RPI in the D3 world. Unless this ruling reversed it.

I'll throw this out there -- since D2 schools are allowed to play at the D1 level if the sport doesn't offer a D2 championship, there are always going to be names floated around. Those D2 schools don't really have a function. They play the sport, but it's so in limbo that it becomes very murky. Not having a national championship doesn't make any sense.

That said, the name that gets floated around A LOT is Assumption. Stonehill is also the name I always hear a lot of. And should St. A's ever offer the sport, they would do it at the D1 level. But Assumption is the name I've heard thrown around as a possibility. Located so close to Holy Cross, it would make for an interesting rivalry, and Buffone Rink is actually a decent facility (it's nicer on the inside than the JAR and AIC's rink. Not saying much there but it's worth noting).

Humanoid
06-24-2012, 09:52 PM
Also just a note on Stonehill, they play at the Foxboro Sports Center (I believe), which is considerably far from campus but a nice venue. The South Shore Kings play junior hockey there. Seating is an issue, but they have stands and a central interior area which can be used for press/seating. It's routine used by the EJHL for its jamborees up here with Iorio Ice Arena in Walpole. On stands alone, I don't think it fits the seating criteria for college in at least one of its rinks, but if you include the interior, common seating with the windows overlooking the ice, it absolutely does.

It's also the coldest rink I've ever been in my life. Maybe it's because it was 5:25 AM in January. But I've never frozen as much as I did at that rink.

kingdobbs
06-24-2012, 10:58 PM
I always thought the NCAA allowed a D3 or D2 school to play at the D1 level in ONE sport solely to protect teams like Clarkson and RPI in the D3 world. Unless this ruling reversed it.

I'll throw this out there -- since D2 schools are allowed to play at the D1 level if the sport doesn't offer a D2 championship, there are always going to be names floated around. Those D2 schools don't really have a function. They play the sport, but it's so in limbo that it becomes very murky. Not having a national championship doesn't make any sense.

There's been a big push in recent years to "close the borders" around the various divisions to keep them viable and their missions clear, primarily to stem the tide of Division II programs upgrading to Division I under basically the bare minimum standards to try and cash in on hoops* money. This new regulation does, at least by the letter, forbid schools from "playing up" unless their team was already there when the rules change was passed.

*Football, of course, offers higher absolute payouts, but the expense of the sport itself is a barrier for entry. A basketball team can be funded very cheaply, and can be very highly profitable for a low-level operation given payday games and the NCAA tourney disbursements.


That said, the name that gets floated around A LOT is Assumption. Stonehill is also the name I always hear a lot of. And should St. A's ever offer the sport, they would do it at the D1 level. But Assumption is the name I've heard thrown around as a possibility. Located so close to Holy Cross, it would make for an interesting rivalry, and Buffone Rink is actually a decent facility (it's nicer on the inside than the JAR and AIC's rink. Not saying much there but it's worth noting).

St. A's does offer the sport, though. (http://www.saintanselmhawks.com/sports/mice/index)