At 7:30 PM 4/18/96, Ken Pavelle wrote:
>From the perspective of:
>  - an ECAC fan
>  - Class of '92 (not too much historical perspective)
>  - freshman Hockey-L'er,
>I can't understand why the other three conferences don't just play two
>games against each other.
 
Maybe an answer can be found in what happened to cause HE to move to an
unbalanced 24-game schedule for two years until UMass joined the league.
 
At the time, HE's league schedule was 21 games - 3 games per opponent.
There was a move by some schools to increase the schedule to 28 games, 4
per opponent.  The reason was that each school had 13 NC games to fill and
they were finding it very difficult to land opponents.  The Western leagues
had very few NC games available, and the ECAC had a limit of 26 games for
Ivies and 30 for non-Ivies.  The higher profile HE teams had nowhere near
as much trouble scheduling NC games as the other teams did.
 
Some schools wanted to remain at 21 games so they could play more NC games.
The compromise was 24 games and an unbalanced schedule.
 
The key would be getting all of the conferences to agree to cut back their
conference schedules and work together to schedule more NC games.  If HE
was to move to a 16 game schedule (2x8), and no one else cut back, then HE
teams would be in a real bind to find another 162 games (18 games for each
of 9 teams).
 
I have to reiterate that it is not easy for many schools to schedule NC
opponents.  Last year, Merrimack had to count a scheduled exhibition
against McGill because it could not find a 34th game, and another game was
against another Canadian school in the Ottawa tourney.  Without a concerted
effort to make sure that everyone could get good opponents, I believe that
we would wind up with the Michigans, BUs, Minnesotas, and Harvards all
playing each other all the time.  That would not be good for the game.  I
would rather see the conference schedules remain close to what they are
than have DivI hockey become elitist.
 
I am one who believes that your team gets better by playing better teams
and that growing programs benefit by an opportunity to play established
programs.  But for a school like Merrimack, with few exceptions, the
majority of their games that fall into this category have only come in
conference.  Unless this changes by virtue of a concerted effort by all of
the leagues, I have to come out against any measure that would make it even
more difficult for Merrimack and schools in their position to schedule
games.
 
Merrimack is a program that I and many others think has a real chance to
make some waves next year, what with their strong finish and solid,
experienced returning group of players.  But their NC schedule next season
will as usual not be nearly as strong as their HE schedule.  I'm concerned
that this will both hinder their development into (hopefully) a contender
and hurt them in strength of schedule should they actually compete for an
NCAA bid.  And I know a lot of other schools are in the same boat.
 
Unfortunately, it is a catch-22...it helps to play better teams to improve
your program's visibility and performance on the ice, but you cannot often
get to play those better teams unless you have high visibility and are very
good.  This catch-22 is brought about by the current situation we have.  It
will only get worse if we cut back the conference schedules without a
simultaneous agreement by the conferences to help out everyone.
 
Several years ago when there was a large number of Independents who had
trouble finding good opponents and taking their programs to the next level,
the conferences helped out by taking these programs in and making
sacrifices in the name of the sport.  (CCHA cutting back from 4 games/opp
upon accepting Notre Dame and Kent, and then UAF; WCHA cutting back upon
accepting UAA).  Now it is time to work to help the programs within the
leagues that need help, as well as the new and up and coming programs that
we will soon have.  It will help the game to grow.  And this, I think, is
what we are really shooting for.
 
>I'm also still clueless about the whole conference thing.  Why are the four
>conferences so independent of each other?
 
I think a quick look at history would be necessary to try to explain this,
and even that may not answer all questions.
 
A long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...there were two
conferences: WCHA and ECAC.  Hockey began to expand in the 1970s and soon
the CCHA, at first a very minor conference, became quite powerful and of
significant size.  Most of the CCHA schools were ones that had recently
started up DivI programs, and they grew together into a solid entity.  And
some WCHA schools jumped to the CCHA for a few years, giving more
credibility to the new conference.
 
In 1983, five of the ECAC schools decided to leave the conference and form
a new league - HE.  Lowell and Maine soon followed.  Thus HE was really
formed in a different manner from the CCHA - established schools had a
fundamental difference of opinion on certain issues and thought it best to
create their own league.
 
Probably the short answer is that like in any college sport, the
conferences were formed as a result of schools with similar goals and
desires to play each other coming together.
 
>Where does the NC$$ fit in to all
>this?  Are the Div I independents unaffiliated with the conferences by choice,
>or because of historical/political agendas?
 
When we talk about the Indeps, the only ones to mention are really Army and
Air Force (before next year when Niagara and Mankato State will be added).
Army was in the ECAC for several years and opted to return to Indep status
because it made more sense for them given their situation.
 
Air Force is in a similar situation, but I do not know whether they would
wish to join the WCHA given the chance - maybe, but perhaps they would be
wary given the experience Army had in the ECAC.  The ECAC would seem to be
the best fit for the military schools given the similar restrictions, but
even that did not work out for Army.  I do not think things would be any
easier for USAFA in the WCHA.
 
>Who is in charge of Div. I hockey?
 
No one...and everyone.
 
Even though the schools all come under the umbrella of the NCAA, the NCAA's
involvement is really quite limited.  The NCAA does not have anything to do
with scheduling or conference alignment.  The schools are free to do what
they will, given that they follow NCAA regulations.
 
So the people with the real "power" in DivI hockey are the schools that
play it and their presidents, coaches, and athletic directors.
 
BTW, there is a lot of talk about the conferences needing to work together
to accomplish common goals.  I know that the conference leaders are quite
aware of this and realize that it is a problem.  They are trying to improve
the situation.  Conference leaders met at the NCAA Championships and will
likely do so again in the near future.  I know there are a lot of ideas
regarding improving media coverage (read: national tv) and helping the game
grow.  Part of the problem is that everyone has their own ideas.  Somehow a
consensus has to be reached on issues that are important to everyone.
Hopefully this will happen.  But it is good that they are talking and
trying to work together.  It's a start.
 
Also btw...it was mentioned that the Western conferences will be holding
their meetings in Florida in a week or so, and I know that HE will also be
down there around that time.  I don't know about the ECAC.  But chances are
that the people who are down there will meet to discuss some things.
 
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                   [log in to unmask]            *HMM* 11/13/93
>> Co-owner of the College Hockey Lists at University of Maine System  <<
*****       Unofficial Merrimack Hockey home page located at:       *****
*****   http://www.tiac.net/users/machnik/MChockey/MChockey.html    *****
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.