I can assure everyone that you don't have to play in the same conference to
maintain a rivalry.  There is certainly no problem with the intrastate
rivalry with Alaska and that school to the south.

Jim

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Erik Biever <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> A few comments:
>
> The Wisconsin - Minnesota hockey rivalry dates back to 1922 and is quite
> well known.  The cute reference to 'UMTC' doesn't add clarity.
>
> Michigan Tech has made it clear that it doesn't intend to leave the WCHA.
>
> Air Force has made it clear that it doesn't want to join the WCHA.  Coach
> Frank Serratore's comment on travel:  "We're not the Bus Force."
>
> -- Erik
>
> Rowe, Thomas wrote:
>
>> OK, OK - all smoke.  You are never going to get serious league realignment
>> because folks like their traditional rivalries.  What would the world of
>> hockey be without Wisconsin v. Minnesota (UMTC)?  But if the CHA is going to
>> disappear and those teams have to go someplace, maybe some minor realignment
>> becomes possible?
>>
>> Note first that the East has it cozy.  Density of teams, short travel
>> distances - it really doesn't make much sense to try to divvy them up
>> differently.  Second, Alabama is an outlier and you really can't do much
>> about that.  Likewise, the two Alaska teams are forever isolated.
>>  Interestingly, especially when you consider great circle routes, travel
>> distances to and from them don't change much regardless of which conference
>> they belong to so it doesn't make any sense to do something with them.  But
>> why should Air Force be in the ATL conference other than that's where a
>> traditional rival (Army) is?  Geographically it doesn't make much sense.
>>  That's the most obvious move to me.  So here is what I think:
>>
>> Start with the 5 big conferences as they currently exist and make these
>> changes:
>>
>> ATL loses Air Force but adds Niagra, Robert Morris and Alabama.  That
>> brings them to 12 teams.
>>
>> CCHA loses UN-Omaha but adds Michigan Tech.  For MTU this adds travel time
>> for league play, but UN-O saves more than MTU loses.  OTOH, this isn't
>> necessary so is the least important change proposed.
>>
>> WCHA loses MTU, but adds Air Force, BSU, and UNO.
>>
>> With or without the UNO-MTU switch, this yields 4 leagues of 12 teams (HE
>> is unaffected) and may be the best we can do geographically.  Of course,
>> convincing folks to make these changes is another problem, but can anyone
>> suggest a better realignment?
>>
>> Tom Rowe
>>
>> .
>>
>>


-- 
Jim Dixon
(907) 479-4306 home
(907) 474-7099 work
**************************