>It seems to me that all of the arguments against admitting UAF are
>purely logistical.  Instead of looking at this issue solely from the point
>of view of the teams and/or the schools, how about considering the fans'
>position?  I don't know about the rest of the college hockey fans, but I
>LOVE seeing a large variety of teams play; the larger the variety, the
>better!
 
I love watching as many different opponents as well. But I know some
athletic departments in the CCHA are not as, well, worldly. For
example, one school, when asked if they wanted to increase their number
of non-conference games, said "No way. We want to play Michigan State
as often as possible, because they are the only team our fans will show
up to watch." It was a monetary decision--they make more when certain
teams show up.
 
Over time, this sort of rivalry can be built with UAF. But in the short
term, some teams will lose home dates with MSU and have to play UAF
instead.
 
Another example: maybe by adding UAF, then Michigan and Notre Dame only
get to play twice from now on. Their third game of the year has been
played at the Palace in the past. They set a record for fans the last
time they played there. Sure, they can still play a game at the Palace,
but then who loses their only home date with the other?
 
On the flip side, maybe by adding UAF, then UND and UofM could play *4*
times per year. Now *that* would be something to get two CCHA ADs
excited about and could help get UAF in. These "logistics", as boring
as they may seem. are what will get UAF in or not. Just crying that "We
deserve to be in!" will not cut it.
 
>> Is it
>> faster to fly into Detroit and then bus to Ferris, or just to fly to
>> Boston?
>     Wait a minute.  As Keith alludes to here, the distance from Fairbanks
>to ANYWHERE else in the U.S. is so great that it doesn't matter much if UAF
>is traveling to Denver or Boston.
 
My point was, that most of the Hockey East teams are near a major airport.
Some of the CCHA teams are not. Flying to Fairbanks from Chicago doesn't
sound too bad, but FSU and LSSU are pretty isolated. So, if I were to
split the 12 CCHA teams up, I would base it on their airport status:
 
Frequent Flyers division: UAF, UIC, OSU, Kent, Michigan, BG.
Bus division: FSU, LSSU, WMU, MSU, Miami, UND.
 
UIC has O'Hare, OSU has Columbus, Kent isn't too far away from
Cleveland's airport, Michigan is on the right side of Detroit to get to
DTW. BG is not too close to any airport, but it is equally close to
Detroit, Cleveland and Columbus, so teams flying into/out of BG can
have a choice to get the best fares.
 
With the "4 games within division and 2 games versus the other" model,
this might minimize flight travel. Again, this is boring stuff, but you
should be dealing in these low-level things so you can catch potential
problems BEFORE you decide to add to your league.
 
I haven't seen the UAF proposal, so I don't know if they have dealt
with things like this. I sure hope so.
 
>Given that, they must certainly have known (or should have
>known) the potential problems that existed when they admitted UAF as an
>affiliate member.
 
Yep, they did. That is why, back when UAF was announced as an affiliate
member, they explicitly said something to the effect "We welcome UAF as
an affiliate.  But we have no plans to upgrade them to anything more
than affiliate status."
 
>They ALSO should have known that UAF expected to be
>admitted as a full member after a season or two of affiliate membership.
>Otherwise UAF would never have accepted affiliate membership.  Instead,
>they would have applied to the WCHA.
 
Aha! Again, just a few months ago the league office made an
announcement that they were not considering UAF as a full member. This
was a not-so-subtle push to the Nanooks to apply to the WCHA. Also, the
major reason the UAF gave for wishing to become an affiliate was
because the NCAA independent bid had been removed, and they wanted a
chance to get an automatic bid the the NCAAs. At that time, I do not
recall UAF even boasting that this would lead to full membership for
them (but I could be wrong).
 
Again, let me say that I personally want UAF in the league. But from my
experience with folks who count in the CCHA, I don't have high hopes.
 
Keith