Glen informs us:
 
>  With Alaska Anchorage joining the WCHA (affiliate 92-93, full 93-94),
>the 93-94 schedule will have each team playing 7 others 4 times, and
>playing the other 2 twice in the 93-94 season.
 
 
Very interesting. I am not sure exactly how the games are going to be scheduled,
but let me speculate. (Or, this is how I would do it...)
 
Each of the 10 teams can play 2 games at 8 of the 9 remaining sites. Likewise,
each team will host a 2-game series against 8 of its 9 opponents. For example,
Minnesota could play everyone on the road except Denver and host everyone except
North Dakota. That would give them 4 games against CC, NMU, MTU, UMD, SCSU,
WU and UAA and only 2 versus DU and UND.
 
That's 16 home and 16 away games, 32 total. Eight of the 9 non-Alaska teams
 would
each be playing two games up north and would therefore have *4* non-conference
games to schedule. One of the non-Alaska teams would not get to travel to UAA
and would only have 2 games left of their 34 for non-league play.
 
Alaska-Anchorage would have 32 games scheduled as well. I do not know if the
exception-for-playing-in-Alaska rule applies to them. I imagine that it does
NOT, so they would only 2 non-WCHA games to play with.
 
Now, my opinions. Too many league games. Although having 2 of 10 teams with
only 2 NLGs is better than 9 of 9, the WCHA has a chance to break from tradition
and reduce western league schedules. They didn't do that. The eastern teams will
 have
greater opportunity to play WCHA teams, although there won't be more total NC
 games.
The old way, there were 2x9 (WCHA) + (approx.) 30 (UAA) = ~48 games for those 10
 teams
to schedule against everyone else. With this plan, we have 8x4 + 2x2 = 36. The
 other
teams will have an easier time scheduling the Colorados and St. Clouds, but
 forget
about playing Anchorage anymore.
 
A lot of travelling to Alaska. Eight teams each year make the trip, meaning
that, over the next 9 years, a team like Michigan Tech has to travel to AK
eight times. This is pretty gruelling. In the past, even the most frequent
AK visitors went there every other year. (UAA's schedule becomes LESS
 gruelling.)
 
It isn't balanced. What if Minnesota and Wisconsin turn out to be the top 2
 teams
and somebody does not have to play either one a 3rd and 4th time? Sure, you can
base the byes on *past* records, but I can see some folks complaining about
unequal schedules. Instead of raw points, maybe a strength of schedule measure
could be used to help determine the league standings? [half smiley]
 
Also, not everyone has to play in every building. In my Minnesota example way
 above,
the Denver fans never get to see the Golden Gophers. If I were a WCHA coach, I
would want to NOT play at Lakeview Arena, fer sure.
 
A final beef. The cycle is too long. It will take 9 (or is it 18?) years for
everything to balance out. The CCHA's is only 2 years, so after that, the league
can make changes. The WCHA cycle will most likely never be completed.
 
This is still a pretty good plan! If you go 6x4 + 3x2 = 30, then you could
also have an unbalanced home/away schedule. If you go 5x4 + 4x2 = 28 you have
6-8 NLGs, which is good, but the schedule becomes even more unbalanced.
 
I am excited to see how it works out, especially because Anchorage will be a
full member.
 
Keith