Page 10 of 38 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617181920 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 755

Thread: New WCHA is dead

  1. #181
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Bowling Green, Ohio
    Posts
    808

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimjamesak View Post
    F- off. Your selfish program just killed three others. These problems could’ve been negotiated and fixed but instead your program just went behind the back and stabbed three programs in the back.
    Believe what you want. The dominoes started falling at the formation of the Big Ten and the knee jerk formation of the NCHC. The leftovers of the CCHA and WCHA were forced to form the nWCHA in order too survive. Anyone who thought that the current landscape would and could continue as it stands needs a new pair of glasses. Travel costs are outrages and budgets are tight (especially for schools that are D1 in all sports). Shrinking the conference to a more manageable area makes budgetary sense. I would also be surprised if we don't see more shifting before all of this is done.

  2. #182
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Bowling Green, Ohio
    Posts
    808

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Suze View Post
    What really stinks about this whole reformation is the fact that the WCHA took the CCHA outcasts, gave them a league to play in, and now they are back stabbing. No integrity.
    The last time I checked there were more CCHA schools in the WCHA then WCHA schools. Who saved who? My guess is that the only reason the WCHA moniker survived is because of the women's league.

  3. #183

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Living from my car
    Posts
    23,683
    Quote Originally Posted by BGFan View Post
    The last time I checked there were more CCHA schools in the WCHA then WCHA schools. Who saved who?
    For the record, here is the order it shook down in 2011:
    03/21 - B1G: MN, WI, MI, MSU, tOSU, PSU
    03/23 - CCHA commissioner Tom Anastos hired as the Spartan head coach, abandons CCHA.
    05/02 - Fred Pletch named CCHA commissioner.
    07/09 - Motel 6: DU, CC, tUMD, NoDak, Omaha, Miami
    07/10 - Shamelessly campaigning to join the NCHC, WMU starts "Why Western" initiative.
    Stay in WCHA: UAA, BSU, MSU-M, MTU, SCSU
    Stay in CCHA: UA_, NMU, LSSU, FSU, BGSU
    Non-committal: WMU, ND
    **Kids, note how both the CCHA and WCHA had five schools each, six is the minimum for a conference**
    07/15 - WCHA offers NMU an invitation, NMU accepts.
    **WCHA has minimum six teams required to keep a conference, CCHA has four**
    **CCHA only school with full D1 (BGSU) for NCAA committee voting ability, WCHA has zero**
    08/23 - WCHA and CCHA meet to discuss what's best for the leagues.
    08/25 - WCHA extends invitation to remaining CCHA schools (including WMU, but minus those bums in South Bend)
    08/26 - LSSU, FSU, UA_ accept. BGSU holds out. Notre Dame still is seeking a conference home, flirting with NCHC.
    09/21 - St. Cloud does an about face, announces it's leaving the WCHA for the NCHC, taking uncommitted WMU with.
    10/04 - Bowling Green accepts WCHA invite at last minute.
    10/05 - Notre Dame announces deal with Hockey East.

    Then a year and a half later, January 17, 2013, independent UAH is added to the WCHA to make 10 teams for the 2013-14 season.

    Don't go breaking your arm patting yourself on the back thinking BGSU saved the WCHA.
    Last edited by aparch; 07-01-2019 at 10:28 AM.

  4. #184
    Old Dirty Basterd Shirtless Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    16,851

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by aparch View Post
    For the record, here is the order it shook down in 2011:
    03/21 - B1G: MN, WI, MI, MSU, tOSU, PSU
    03/23 - CCHA commissioner Tom Anastos hired as the Spartan head coach, abandons CCHA.
    05/02 - Fred Pletch named CCHA commissioner.
    07/09 - Motel 6: DU, CC, tUMD, NoDak, Omaha, Miami
    Stay in WCHA: UAA, BSU, MSU-M, MTU, SCSU
    Stay in CCHA: UA_, NMU, LSSU, FSU, BGSU
    **Kids, note how both the CCHA and WCHA had five schools each, six is the minimum for a conference**
    Non-committal to stay in CCHA: WMU, ND
    07/15 - WCHA offers NMU an invitation, NMU accepts.
    **WCHA has minimum six teams required to keep a conference, CCHA has four**
    **CCHA only school with full D1 (BGSU) for NCAA committee voting ability, WCHA has zero**
    08/23 - WCHA and CCHA meet to discuss what's best for the leagues.
    08/25 - WCHA extends invitation to remaining CCHA schools (minus those bums in South Bend)
    08/26 - LSSU, FSU, UA_ accept. BGSU holds out.
    Notre Dame still is seeking a conference home, flirting with NCHC.
    09/21 - St. Cloud does an about face, announces it's leaving the WCHA for the NCHC, taking uncommitted WMU with.
    10/04 - Bowling Green accepts WCHA invite at last minute.
    10/05 - Notre Dame announces deal with Hockey East.

    Then a year and a half later, January 17, 2013, independent UAH is added to the WCHA to make 10 teams for the 2013-14 season.

    Don't go breaking your arm patting yourself on the back thinking BGSU saved the WCHA.
    without the snark in there a little bit, I appreciate the posting of the timeline.
    Michigan Tech Legend, Founder of Mitch's Misfits...Posted by Yager on 12/18/09: Remember, remember, the 18th of October (2003).

    Sports Allegiance: NFL: GB MLB: MIL NHL: MIN CB: UW CF: UW CH: MTU FIFA: USA MLS: MIN EPL: Everton

  5. #185

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Living from my car
    Posts
    23,683
    Quote Originally Posted by Shirtless Guy View Post
    without the snark in there a little bit, I appreciate the posting of the timeline.
    The snark makes it easier to accept after all these years.
    Kidding. There is always some confusion about the steps, even I needed to look up the order.

    Also, edited to add in the stupid Why Western campaign. . So much for that National Championship by the end of the decade.

  6. #186
    Follow me on Twitter: @EdTrefzger Ed Trefzger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    2,710

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Shirtless Guy View Post
    As for St Thomas, I don't want to dig back and quote the right comments but St. Thomas can most certainly play up in hockey right now if they want, in that case they wouldn't get scholarships...and if they choose to elevate to D2, there is no reason they wouldn't be able to elevate hockey to D1 immediately and be on pair with the rest of the WCHA save for BGSU (full D1).
    The NCAA made the moratorium on new D-III teams permanent after allowing RIT's women to move up, so St. Thomas would need to move all of its sports to D-II to play D-I hockey.

  7. #187
    Old Dirty Basterd Shirtless Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    16,851

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Ed Trefzger View Post
    The NCAA made the moratorium on new D-III teams permanent after allowing RIT's women to move up, so St. Thomas would need to move all of its sports to D-II to play D-I hockey.
    Moratorium on playing up without scholarships? Geez, the NCAA is such a racket...
    Michigan Tech Legend, Founder of Mitch's Misfits...Posted by Yager on 12/18/09: Remember, remember, the 18th of October (2003).

    Sports Allegiance: NFL: GB MLB: MIL NHL: MIN CB: UW CF: UW CH: MTU FIFA: USA MLS: MIN EPL: Everton

  8. #188
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Calumet, MI
    Posts
    75

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    .
    yeah, its sad. the act of leaving those three schools out is sad. i agree.

    however, this was inevitable...

    these seven schools are being pro-active and actually giving these three schools in a way a chance, by force, to get their act together. and maybe too for the NCAA to do something. noting as well that they are "exploring" a new conference; that if these three schools have something to show in the next year, maybe they will be back together, in special UAH. i also see the UAA program folding into the UAF (which is the flagship institution).

    also that during the frozen four the commissioner for atlantic hockey said they were pursuing a new member to make it 12. i think that UAH was that team... and i think they are a much better fit in AH then the WCHA.

    the creation of the B1G and the NACHO are/were much, much more damaging then what just happened...

    the B1G/NACHO moves were nothing short of a narcissistic greed based move.

    what these seven schools did however was a matter of survival. people need to understand that.

    besides bowling green, all these schools have small D-II budgets...

    this shake up needed to happen... and i am glad we are not getting caught with our pants down.

    its going to be one hell of a year in regard to this.

    GO TECH GOLD!
    .

  9. #189

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Living from my car
    Posts
    23,683

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Anyone familiar with the AHA by-laws and the window teams need to announce leaving without penalty? Should we be expecting an announcement before October regarding any potential teams leaving? Or can they play it a little closer to the vest than our Western schools?

  10. #190
    Drunkard
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Promised Land
    Posts
    17,552

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    I can’t roll my eyes enough about the usual “Big Ten ruined college hockey” nonsense.

    Prior to the BTHC, the West was a bloated mess of two oversized conferences and no room in the inn for new blood.

    And make no mistake: there needs to be new blood for college hockey to thrive. If nothing else has been consistent over the history of college hockey, it's programs failing for a variety of reasons. There are too many reasons that college hockey struggles that have nothing to do with the BTHC. The BTHC wasn’t a relevant concern when UIC or Kent St or any of those programs folded, and it had nothing to do with why BGSU’s balls were on the bandsaw before and after realignment.

    Fortunately, we've had more programs arise than fold over the years, and the size of D1 has grown in recent decades because of that (by about a dozen programs on aggregate over the last 25 years). For every UIC, Kent State, Findlay, Wayne State, Northern Arizona etc., we've had a Mankato, a St Cloud, RIT, UNO, and then some.

    We need new programs now just as we did when MnSt, SCSU, Bemidji, UNO, Lowell, et al came knocking on D1’s door.

    To court those new programs, we need space. ASU is the exception, not the rule here. We needed space, and that required realignment. It takes a special brand of delusion to think that Penn State (or Illinois or whomever) was going to come aboard and try to squeeze in to the old alignment (if the old WCHA and CCHA would let them).

    The old WCHA and CCHA were awesome. They were tradition. I miss them in many ways, but I can’t sit here and pretend like the BTHC wasn’t a solution to a problem: we are always at the risk of losing program but we had run out of space to put new ones.

    (Maybe some of you think the old WCHA and CCHA could've functioned as 14-16 team superleagues, but I beg to differ)

    The BTHC gave us a third western conference, with room to grow. Stop pretending like that hasn't been a good thing, especially since we've now had more chatter of growth potential in college hockey than we've seen in ages. It was the MAAC, except it's and has room to grow.

    I don't want to see the Alaska schools fail any more than the rest of you, but I'm not going to whine about the BTHC causing it (indirectly, with pretty much every western college hockey program playing a role in the outcome since the BTHC was announced), when it seems like Alaskan economics are playing a larger role as it is.
    Last edited by ExileOnDaytonStreet; 07-01-2019 at 11:19 AM.

  11. #191
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    36

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    I can't dispute the choices made by the devious 7. They each have the right to decide how to advance their program in the way they think best. Presumably, they have taken their action in a reasoned and responsible way taking the bylaws of their conference into consideration. It will have a huge impact on the Alaska programs and a lesser impact on UAH. However, I remain disappointed with the lack of communication and respect that they have shown the 3 "red-headed step children" that they abandoned. Communication shows respect. They have behaved poorly.

  12. #192
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,821

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    The program that effed everything up would say that. We love a niche sport. Who cares about new blood, seriously? To thrive? What are you expecting to happen? What improvement have you seen since the realignment happened? Stop pretending that the Big Ten hasn't been a good thing? LMAO TV airtime is going down and the Big Ten Network people admit it's because no one other than Minnesotans watch.

    Fans don't travel because it's now a flight instead of a road trip. Conference "rivals" don't have local kids you watched play in HS. There is no trash talking at work.

    The big programs were putting up profits just fine that are a great little bonus to the athletic department income statements.

  13. #193
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    12,831

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Shirtless Guy View Post
    Moratorium on playing up without scholarships? Geez, the NCAA is such a racket...
    It was actually a vote by D-III membership. The teams in before the vote got grandfathered. RIT women actually came after the vote, but that had more to do with Title IX equity. The thinking was that these D-I programs were contrary to the principles of D-III (that you are a student at a university and a sport is an extracurricular) and could result in an unlevel playing field for the other D-III sports a play-up school offers.

  14. #194

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    45.52 N, 122.67 W
    Posts
    3,198
    Quote Originally Posted by UMD21 View Post
    If you read all the posts you’ll see that we’re really not, at least WMU. Just throwing out possibilities. But perhaps a main reason the NCHC sounded so good to the two teams was no trips to Alaska or Alabama. With those trips off the table or reduced, perhaps going into a league better fitting their geography would help. I may have not been to those schools but I imagine playing other Michigan teams would be a better draw/rivalry than CC, SCSU, UND...
    DU and UMD have been hammering it out the past few years for top spot so while they may be very competitive towards eachother, it’s still no SCSU-UMD rivalry.
    My $0.02...

    Travel wasn’t the reason the NCHC formed, it was revenues. In the old WCHA there was a sense that Anchorage and Tech were leeching off the more successful programs without doing much in return. That’s where the whole “like minded” stuff comes in.

    Ever since realignment happened, I believe there has been at least one NCHC team that has made the trip to either Fairbanks or Anchorage. Speaking for UAF, since realignment happened we’ve seen Denver (x2, they are coming up in October), WMU, Omaha, and St. Cloud (x2) in the Carlson Center. UAA has hosted Colorado College, North Dakota, and St. Cloud. Point being that every NCHC team except UMD and Miami has been to Alaska since realignment, some more than once. I know it’s different than an obligation to go annually or every other year, but the NCHC teams clearly aren’t afraid of making the trip.

    Like everything else in life, follow the money. The big dogs (UND, DU) in the NCHC formation saw they could increase their revenues by culling the herd.

  15. #195
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Marquette, MI
    Posts
    6,676
    Quote Originally Posted by DrunkTrainPolka View Post
    .
    yeah, its sad. the act of leaving those three schools out is sad. i agree.

    however, this was inevitable...

    these seven schools are being pro-active and actually giving these three schools in a way a chance, by force, to get their act together. and maybe too for the NCAA to do something. noting as well that they are "exploring" a new conference; that if these three schools have something to show in the next year, maybe they will be back together, in special UAH. i also see the UAA program folding into the UAF (which is the flagship institution).

    also that during the frozen four the commissioner for atlantic hockey said they were pursuing a new member to make it 12. i think that UAH was that team... and i think they are a much better fit in AH then the WCHA.

    the creation of the B1G and the NACHO are/were much, much more damaging then what just happened...

    the B1G/NACHO moves were nothing short of a narcissistic greed based move.

    what these seven schools did however was a matter of survival. people need to understand that.

    besides bowling green, all these schools have small D-II budgets...

    this shake up needed to happen... and i am glad we are not getting caught with our pants down.

    its going to be one hell of a year in regard to this.

    GO TECH GOLD!
    .
    Actually, word has it that Navy could be the next AHA team. It was reported on the pod cast on USCHO yesterday.

  16. #196
    R!!!!...I!!!!!...T!!!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    2,003

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by huskyfan View Post
    I wonder if we are taking on Arizona? I would love to see them in our league.
    The Wildcats are getting NCAA hockey, too? Wow!

    Can't we all just get along?
    Always remember... This is just a game we're talking about here. Let's not take it all too seriously.

  17. #197

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Living from my car
    Posts
    23,683

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Still waiting on Minot and Moorhead to make their announcement too...

  18. #198
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Bowling Green, Ohio
    Posts
    808

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by aparch View Post
    For the record, here is the order it shook down in 2011:
    03/21 - B1G: MN, WI, MI, MSU, tOSU, PSU
    03/23 - CCHA commissioner Tom Anastos hired as the Spartan head coach, abandons CCHA.
    05/02 - Fred Pletch named CCHA commissioner.
    07/09 - Motel 6: DU, CC, tUMD, NoDak, Omaha, Miami
    07/10 - Shamelessly campaigning to join the NCHC, WMU starts "Why Western" initiative.
    Stay in WCHA: UAA, BSU, MSU-M, MTU, SCSU
    Stay in CCHA: UA_, NMU, LSSU, FSU, BGSU
    Non-committal: WMU, ND
    **Kids, note how both the CCHA and WCHA had five schools each, six is the minimum for a conference**
    07/15 - WCHA offers NMU an invitation, NMU accepts.
    **WCHA has minimum six teams required to keep a conference, CCHA has four**
    **CCHA only school with full D1 (BGSU) for NCAA committee voting ability, WCHA has zero**
    08/23 - WCHA and CCHA meet to discuss what's best for the leagues.
    08/25 - WCHA extends invitation to remaining CCHA schools (including WMU, but minus those bums in South Bend)
    08/26 - LSSU, FSU, UA_ accept. BGSU holds out. Notre Dame still is seeking a conference home, flirting with NCHC.
    09/21 - St. Cloud does an about face, announces it's leaving the WCHA for the NCHC, taking uncommitted WMU with.
    10/04 - Bowling Green accepts WCHA invite at last minute.
    10/05 - Notre Dame announces deal with Hockey East.

    Then a year and a half later, January 17, 2013, independent UAH is added to the WCHA to make 10 teams for the 2013-14 season.

    Don't go breaking your arm patting yourself on the back thinking BGSU saved the WCHA.
    I don't recall saying that BGSU saved the WCHA. My implication was that the CCHA "outcasts" saved the WCHA. BGSU held out because it was looking for other options, including saving the CCHA if possible. Once it was obvious that they had no other choice, they joined the WCHA (but retained all of the rights to the CCHA moniker). However, the stipulation was always present that, when and if the right opportunity or conditions came along they would take a good, long look at it. They NEVER hid that fact. Do I feel bad for the remaining programs? I already said as much. I won't, however, apologize for any school looking to better their current situation. If this is the solution they came up with then I'm all for it.

  19. #199
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Posts
    7,505

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by Squarebanks View Post
    My $0.02...

    Travel wasn’t the reason the NCHC formed, it was revenues. In the old WCHA there was a sense that Anchorage and Tech were leeching off the more successful programs without doing much in return. That’s where the whole “like minded” stuff comes in.

    Ever since realignment happened, I believe there has been at least one NCHC team that has made the trip to either Fairbanks or Anchorage. Speaking for UAF, since realignment happened we’ve seen Denver (x2, they are coming up in October), WMU, Omaha, and St. Cloud (x2) in the Carlson Center. UAA has hosted Colorado College, North Dakota, and St. Cloud. Point being that every NCHC team except UMD and Miami has been to Alaska since realignment, some more than once. I know it’s different than an obligation to go annually or every other year, but the NCHC teams clearly aren’t afraid of making the trip.

    Like everything else in life, follow the money. The big dogs (UND, DU) in the NCHC formation saw they could increase their revenues by culling the herd.
    A major problem was that in the old WCHA, once Minnesota and Wisconsin left, the schools that were spending a lot of money on hockey were in a distinct minority compared with those operating on a more bare bones budget. Then, at the WCHA meeting, those small schools negotiated a new deal with the Commissioner, someone that schools like UND and DU were unhappy with because he shared the same view as the small schools in terms of spending money. That was the final straw and pushed DU, UND, CC and UMD to say they had enough.

    So, in essence, Tech managed to kill the WCHA twice.
    That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

  20. #200
    Has Anger Issues FadeToBlack&Gold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    A Headshrinker's Office
    Posts
    32,350

    Re: New WCHA is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by SJHovey View Post
    So, in essence, Tech managed to kill the WCHA twice.
    Michigan Tech: "Working with scraps and guys from places so remote that Houghton seems like a metropolis"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •