> >If this really is the attitude over there, then I frankly won't be
> disappointed >to not have them in the WCHA if that's what happens.
> Nah it isn't. Most fans prolly don't even care that much as long as UNO gets
> in a  conference and plays well. UNO may draw fans and get headlines in the
> local paper, but as a point of discussion, Husker football is still king of
> the hill.
>
 
Actually,  what is needed here right now is a little common sense and
cooperation between--at the least--the two western leagues.
 
A committee on expansion should be formed between the WCHA and CCHA
(and,  ideally,  all four leagues) and criteria established for adding
teams to 1.  Division I hockey;  and 2.  Conferences.  If the CCHA
admits Omaha (and mind you, it sounds like a great program),  it will be
moving out in yet another direction outside it's proverbial
"footprint".  That further elevates costs,  expends more travel time
(and missed school),  and hurts gate (obviously not for Omaha,  but what
are they going to draw at Ferris or Northern?,  whereas at least,
there's some brand identity with schools like North Dakota in the W).
 
Right now,  the hodgepodge,  money-grab by the various leagues is a
little obvious--and not too smart in the long term.
 
As a side note,  NO school is owed membership in any conference just by
declaring "Division I".  And no conference is obligated to take a school
in just because it goes Division I.  A smart University would have its
ducks in a row as to conference membership prior to making the jump,
IMHO.
 
In a more broad vein,  and from a developmental aspect,  are we adding
far too many "Division I" teams,  without acutally having the "Division
I" players?  I think the answer is yes.  We need to develop MORE talent
in the US to meet this demand before the caliber of the game plummets
(it's not where it was in the mid-80s to early-90s) further and more
scouts, agents and pro folks are telling kids that the best competitive
opportunities aren't in college anymore (some are already saying that).
And contrary to popular opinion,  we are NOT getting the best players
out of Canada right now,  either.  In fact,  they are bemoaning the lack
of depth in their talent pool too--and their best "pro" prospects are in
Major A--as are most of ours.
 
I certainly think that in the long term,  expansion to 60-70 teams is
great for college hockey--and for American hockey. But the present "me
too" rush may have some long-term side effects that do not benefit the
game.
 
That's one man's opinion.
 
SM
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.