Okay, folks, let's see if we can address this without cheap shots.  I think
that we all need to think very hard about what we are getting ourselves
into before we willy-nilly endorse every school that comes along to join
Division I hockey and become a part of established conferences.  And before
it comes up, I'm not simply trying to exclude any small school and I'm not
trying to horde all of the hockey excitement for those privileged few who
already have it.  If your responses can't rise above that level, then
kindly butt out of the discussion.
 
In any system, you need to maintain a balance between changing to keep
fresh and holding on to some tradition and continuity.  Ezactly what that
balance is, well that can be hard to determine.  The way people are
talking, though, we should be willing to accept 15-25% expansion in DivI
hockey and anyone who stops to question if this is a good idea is shouted
down.  Well, I'm saying that I'm not sure that this is a great idea, at
least not if the plan is also to fit the new schools into existing
conferences.
 
The first problem I see is dilution of talent.  If such a dilution was
spread equally among the teams, this wouldn't cause me a lot of grief; I'd
still find the game exciting even if the average talent level was lower.
Unfortunately, it won't be spread evenly.  In the WCHA, Minnesota and
Wisconsin won't feel the pinch nearly as strongly as anyone else.  Already,
the Gophers have a huge edge in recruiting the players they want; if you
don't think that this causes a lot of resentment, ask the folks in Duluth
how they feel about Dave Spehar going from Duluth East to Minnesota next
year.  St. Cloud State joining the league has hurt the Bulldogs recruiting.
This problem will only become worse if they are also competing with
Mankato, Bemidji, NDSU and Nebraska-Omaha.  Professional sports get around
this problem by holding a draft; this forces the opportunities to acquire
talent to even out (though those of us who skip past Timberwolves headlines
every day can testify to the fact that these opportunities are not always
seized upon).
 
This is not to say that the smaller schools will remain perpetually
uncompetitive.  But it will reinforce the big schools ability to be at or
near the top every year.  Either that, or you'll get a number of schools
whose programs more closely resemble that of Ferris State (never better
than mediocre) or Kent State (crash and burn) than those that resemble Lake
Superior State.  We already have programs that are struggling to cope with
the changes in Canadian Junior hockey that are keeping more top players up
there.  (At least that's the reason given by some of the Northern Michigan
people for what has happened to the Wildcat program.)
 
One way to avoid some of these problems is to expand more slowly.  If you
flood the pool of teams, all of this is magnified.  Give the hockey world a
chance to absorb the new entrants before flooding more in.
 
Eric Burton's comment about Nebraska-Omaha not building a football program
was not well phrased, and I don't know anything about the situation there
to know if what I'm about to say fits them specifically or is just good to
keep in mind generically.  If they don't even have club hockey yet, I don't
think that it's at all unreasonable to ask them to step up in increments.
Dragging in information form another thread, we seem to have established
that this is precisely what Lake State did.  Again, build slowly.
 
There has been a lot of comment about how the competitive balance in the
CCHA is tightening up.  In addition to the fact that we ought to wait and
see if we have a one or two year phenomenon on our hands, take a close look
at the developments.  UIC and Ferris are still struggling and Miami has
regressed since Gwozdecky left.  The major improvement has been by Notre
Dame and Ohio State.  These are not exactly small schools.  They have made
a committment that involves resources that a lot of smaller schools will
have trouble matching.
 
This brings us to the subject of unintended consequences.  On the surface
of it, expanding hockey so that there are more fans enjoying it sounds like
an unimpeachably good thing.  But I wonder if NHL fans in Quebec and
Winnipeg (and perhaps Edmonton and Ottawa and here in Minneapolis) still
think so.  If college hockey really takes off, some of the same financial
pressures are going to be brought to bear.  It will open the sport up to
people who have no idea who Mass-Lowell, Lake Superior State or Colorado
College are.  But boy do they know Michigan and Notre Dame and Wisconsin;
these schools are on TV all the time.  Sure, it's a different sport, but
they have name recognition.  I think that we are already nearing the point
where the six really big western schools (Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio
State, Notre Dame, Wisconsin and Minnesota) might be better off financially
if they split into their own super-conference.  They might soon be able to
secure a TV contract on the strength of their names.  If those of out there
don't like this idea, then you ought to be careful about pushing changes
that make it more likely.  Weakening the competition in the established
leagues and diluting the traditional bonds while at the same time expanding
the amount of interest in college hockey in general may be a step in the
wrong direction.
 
As I said, I think everyone needs to step back and really think through the
consequences of rapid expansion.  You might not like where it heads.
 
J. Michael Jackson
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.