Nathan wrote:
>Buddy is cited as saying he hoped that if NMU and MTU join the CCHA, that
>UAF would join the WCHA and join their sister school in Alaska, saying
>that travel for the rest of the CCHA would be much easier.  The article
>ends by noteing that a 12 team CCHA would lead to divisional play, and
>Buddy indicates that scheduleing could be made workable.
 
There are a few problems here.  I don't think that too many WCHA people would
be happy having to travel to Alaska to play both Anchorage and Fairbanks,
either in the same trip or having to go to Alaska twice.  That's one of the
reasons Fairbanks joined the CCHA instead of the WCHA.  Having UAF join the
WCHA would alleviate CCHA travel problems, but give the WCHA new ones.
 
Secondly, the CCHA would have trouble with 12 teams going to divisional play.
Why?  Because there are 7 schools in Michigan, and one of the primary reasons
that NMU (and presumably MTU if they chose to follow NMU) would rejoin the
CCHA is to get games in in the LP against other Michigan schools.  Unless you
have unbalanced divisions, 7/5, which would lead to scheduling problems, you're
going to find it tough asking one of the Michigan schools not to be in the
"Michigan" division.  You're not going to get Michigan and Michigan State to
agree to be in different divisions (thus probably playing less games against
each other), and Western, Ferris, and Lake Superior all have big rivalries
with either one or both of the "big" schools (no slight intended).  And you
can't split up NMU and WMU.
 
>I had been wondering when something like this was going to come up.  I
>tend to think that it would make sense for the CCHA to pursue such an
>expansion.  These are just odd thoughts, but it seems to me that with
>divisional play.  It would establish the CCHA as the first "Super
>Conference," and might lead to even more expansion in the future.  IT
>could lead to a 14 team CCHA if other programs upgraded and wanted to
>join.
 
>If UAF didn't leave the CCHA for the WCHA, we may see Oakland step up to
>Div. 1 and join the CCHA.  It has been mentioned that they are
>considering making the jump.  And it would even the numbers out division
>wise.
 
It would, if Oakland would agree to be in the "non-Michigan" division.  It
would probably be better to have a non-Michigan school enter the league if
the CCHA picks up NMU and MTU and decides to "keep" UAF (no slight intended
here either), which I think would be the best situation.  Then you could have
UAF in the "NM" division, and set up where teams play each other 3 times in
conference and twice outside, for a total of 32 games.  (You might have to
do some playing around, as we do now, with how many teams have to play extra
games on the road to accomodate for playing UAF at home, or vice versa.)
 
That's just a suggestion, since the jump of NMU and MTU to the CCHA is in the
rumor stage.  My suggestion would be that if they are going to try to switch,
keep UAF and add one more team to make 14, such that the 7 Michigan schools
would be in the same division.  You'll probably have to go to 32 games (or
drop down to 26, which does allow you to start playing HE or ECAC teams or
even WCHA teams more often, which means you wouldn't need divisions).  Until
it's all ironed out, though, I think it's still rumor, especially since nobody
has heard anything from MTU.
 
G. M. Finniss
Michigan State University 22-7-1, 28-11-1
 
Yes, we really are banged up.  Taylor Clarke missed the second part of
Saturday's game and all of Sunday's, on top of all of the defensive injuries
we've had.  But, life goes on, and without Sunday's win, we'd be watching
the NCAA West Regional from the stands.
 
Michigan Tech in the NCAA's?  I'm still trying to adjust to Michigan State in
the NIT at 15-15 (with one win over Chaminade).
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.