An article in Friday's Ann Arbor News had some interesting information
about the addition of UNO to the CCHA.
 
It noted that UNO needed 9 "yes" votes from the 11 CCHA members to be
admitted...and the vote was not unanimous.  Assuming everybody voted,
the vote was either 10-1 or 9-2.  The vote was secret, but the Ann
Arbor News says University of Michigan A.D. Tom Goss voted "yes".
 
 
(Does anybody else see the admission of UNO as the CCHA responding to
the continuing rumors about UMich, MichSt, theOSU and NDame leaving for
a Big(6)Ten Hockey Conference?)
 
The article goes on to state that UNO will not offer a travel subsidy
like the one UAF had to promise to gain admittance to the CCHA.
 
Another selection from the article:
 
"Niagara University made a presentation to CCHA members in April along
with Nebraska-Omaha, but (CCHA Comissioner Tom) Anastos says the league
has no plans in place for additional expansion.  He added, thouth, that
the CCHA wouldn't close the door on adding more teams eventually."
 
 
The CCHA says it will have new playoff and scheduling formats settled
on by mid-August, and seems to hint that the most likely option will
have 28 games and divisional play.
 
All of the posts here about possible divisional alignments have put UNO
and UAF in the same division.  I don't think that will ever happen,
since the league would probably want to split up the "hardship" road
trips between different divisions.  I will suggest two or three
alignment possibilities:
 
 
I.  Three divisions
 
North:  Alaska-Fairbanks, Northern Mich., Lake Superior, Ferris State
Central:  Michigan State, Western Michigan, Michigan, Bowling Green
South:  Nebraska-Omaha, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Miami
 
Schedule:  4 games vs teams in your own division; 2 games vs teams in
other division (28 games)
 
PRO:  Biggest rivalries intact with one more game per year than now
CON:  divisions don't really make sense; there's no way to make the
geography fit *and* keep the Michigan-Michigan State rivalry (the
CCHA's showcase for casual fans) intact
 
 
 
IIA.  Two divisions
 
North:  Alaska-Fairbanks, Northern Michigan, Lake Superior, Ferris
State, Michigan State, Michigan
South:  Nebraska-Omaha, Notre Dame, Western Michigan, Bowling Green,
Ohio State, Miami
 
Schedule:  3 games vs teams in your own division; 2 games vs teams in
other division (27 games)
 
PRO:  minimal disruption to current schedule; most rivalries kept
intact
CON:  Western Michigan gets cheated out of competing against its
home-state rivals; competitive difference between the two divisions (at
least at first).
 
 
 
IIB.  Two divisions
 
North:  Alaska-Fairbanks, Northern Michigan, Lake Superior, Ferris
State, Michigan State, Western Michigan
South:  Nebraska-Omaha, Notre Dame, Michigan, Bowling Green, Ohio
State, Miami
 
Schedule:  3 games vs teams in your own division; 2 games vs teams in
other division; 1 additional game vs a team in the other division (28
games)
 
PRO:  Biggest draws in league (Mich & MichSt) split between divisions
CON:  Biggest rivals in league (Mich & MichSt) split between divisions
 
the "one additional game" I mention in the schedule above will be used
to give Michigan & Michigan State their third (JLA) conference game,
will be used to give Western Michigan & Notre Dame a third rivalry
game, could be used to force UNO & UAF to play an extra game against
each other, and will be used randomly by Ferris, NMU and LSSU to play
the three Ohio schools.
 
It's radical, but I think IIB--or something very similar--will be
adopted.
 
 
This is too much fun; don't even get me started on playoff formats :-)
 
 
Alton
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.