No, after reading the various posts regarding more Non-conference games and giving it considerable thought, I strongly favor more, not less conference games. We experienced that for many years and conference play is so dramatically better than non-conference games that it's no contest (in deciding which way to go). However, I do strongly support the present arrangement of some premier tournaments (typically over the holidays) which match International or Interconference schools.
 
In the debate, consider these issues:
 
During the last weekend of the year, the WCHA had three extremely meaningful series and two so called "meaningless" series. However, three of the four games in the "meaningless" series were very close and hard fought.
 
The home and home series are very important. Both the teams and fans learn to "know" the other team. That simply doesn't happen with non-conference teams. And, regardless of what happens each team is playing for something - be it only a statistic in a forever record. Also, I think it's very important for a team to have a "second chance" at a previous competitor -- many unexpected results occur because of this (i.e. Northern Michigan beating Minn-Duluth or Wisconsin coming alive in the second half, or Minn. collapsing, etc.). Much of that would be neutralized with a reduced conference schedule.
 
By increasing non-conference games, you likely will increase the unbalanced schedule. Probably, that cost Wisconsin home advantage in the playoffs this year and a position place last year. I'm just using one example that's relevant to other recent posts. I'm sure that there're many others.
 
No one doubts I would venture to say, that opening the schedule up would greatly benefit the larger schools over the smaller ones. Although CC has been a premier team over the last three years, how likely is it that they would be routinely "considered" for the big Interconference games when their student body is less than most teams have for fans (roughly 1900)? Nor, am I especially an exponent of "equality" in such matters. I think that we need an appropriate mix of the "business" side with fairness side in rules and scheduling. Going to either extreme is not beneficial to college hockey in general and, perhaps, the mix is about right now. It would seem that we would want all games played to be as meaningful as possible plus, in general, to best improve and enhance the overall college hockey environment. Big ticket "showcases" certainly do this, but would "little" ones? And, is the extra cost, etc. really worth seeing another school that probably won't be seen again for many years?
 
Just a few thoughts that after having been on the other side, I've become an ardent "conference" proponent -- it's SO much better than the "old" way.
 
Lowell King
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.