***EDITED FOR CONTENT AND TO FIT YOUR SCREEN***
 
-Deron Treadwell wrote:
 
> The main reason I support a new division or divisions if there will be
> growth is to try and make each conference as "regional" as possible.
>
> I heard someone talking about the possibility of UAH going Division I again
> and looking to join the CCHA.  All I could think about was that teams in the
> CCHA would not only have to go to Alaska, but to Alabama.  That doesn't seem
> fair in my opinion.  There is no other place for Alaska at this time.  What
> would help this is if teams on the West coast went Division I, where Alaska
> could join those conferences.
>
> Now granted, if a school in a conferences *region* wanted to join, they
> should be given priority and consideration, like Mankato State.  But one can
> understand the reluctance of the WCHA to take them.
>
> I also agree with Steve as well.  We shouldn't stand in the way of Division
> I expansion, because we all love this game, and it would be great to see it
> spread throughout the nation, and gain popularity.  Sure it would be
> *inconvient* for conferences to take some teams, but if they did it on a
> temporary basis, for the greater good, what would be the harm in that?
 
I understand and empathize with your position.  However, I think your
"regionalization" arguments can be taken too far.  For better or worse,
hockey is no longer a Northeastern/Upper Midwestern sport.  And let's face
it, even if the Ducks or Panthers win the next 4 or 5 Stanley Cups, there
still will not be college hockey "out West" or "down South" for another 10-15
years.  Programs like UAF/UAA and UAH need to be nurtured to the point where
they can make a case for the creation of new conferences in their respective
regions when the time comes.  In real terms, "temporary" can last a while...
 
I agree that UAF has no *regional* affiliation with the CCHA.  Heck, the only
thing "Central" about Fairbanks is that it's sort of in "Central" Alaska :)
But I think the league (and the WCHA with UAA) did the SPORT more of a favor
than it did the AK teams by demonstrating the feasibility of "radical"
expansion.  I think the travel bugs can be worked out over time.  Hawaii and
the WAC come to mind.  (Personally, I'd take a flight to Fairbanks over an
all-night bus ride through Michigan in December any time.)  As with the CCHA,
teams can make the "big" flight once every other season and live to tell
about it.
 
Moving right along, big conferences are becoming the norm in other sports,
(Big 12, SEC, etc.) to the point that some have split into two divisions.
Plus, you'll never, ever get top-to-bottom conference parity.  I don't think
that Iowa State will likely beat Nebraska soon.  Does that mean they should
be shuffled to a "lesser" conference?  Maybe just playing the Huskers is
okay, even if you lose 70-3.  (Okay, this is extreme; how many college teams
are consistently pummelled 13-1 in conference play?  Like the saying goes, on
any given night...)
 
Enough rambling for one morning.  Just trying to cut down the angle...
 
Mark
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark J. Sonnier, C.P.M.                                 Voice (907)786-6505
Purchasing Agent                                          Fax (907)786-6515
University of Alaska Anchorage           e-mail: [log in to unmask]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  UAF Hockey fans say: "With Cody Bowtell on the ice, who needs defense?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.