Hey, D-III. Want another headache?

On Mar 31, 2009, at 4:21 PM, Moller Edward N wrote:

> Or they could follow the easiest choice of all, which is drop the
> program.  This might be their only choice, because I don't see how any
> conference could justify absorbing them "for the good of the game."
> Unless your name is Notre Dame non-conference affiliation is suicidal,
> particularly in this economic environment.  And if I were a taxpayer
> from the Great State of Alabama I would be asking why we were  
> supporting
> such an endeavor in the first place.
>
> It may seem sacriligious on this forum that a poster with such a  
> strong
> allegiance to college hockey would support such a move, but I don't
> think A-H is loaded with options here.  Maybe they could scale back to
> D-III?
>
> One more thing.  The two Alaska schools can't join one league, because
> their opponents would resist two trips to the Last Frontier in one
> season.
>
> ________
> Edward N. Moller
> Controller and Assistant Treasurer
> Mount Ida College
> 777 Dedham Street
> Newton, MA  02459-3323
> Tel  617-928-4515
> Fax 617-928-4581
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Mount Ida College provides a diverse community of learners a  
> challenging
> education that blends the liberal arts with professional preparation.
> We dedicate our energy, imagination, and resources to empowering all
> students to achieve academically and contribute responsibly in a
> changing world.
> P Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: - Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hampton, Nathan E.
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:46 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: is the WCHA paying attention?
>
> Imagine being at Alabama-Huntsville. You have a choice to join a
> conference that requires a trip to ALASKA, Colorado (twice), Minnesota
> (five times if including Bemidji), North Dakota, Wisconsin, and the  
> UP.
> Another option is to join some other conference requiring you to go to
> New York, Massachusetts, and other New England areas, particularly to
> maintain whatever CHA rivalries may exist. Which would you choose not
> only in terms of travel cost but other amenities?
>
> Now imagine you are a player being recruited by UA-H. Are you more
> likely to go there if they are part of the WCHA or if they are part of
> the alternative option? I would think your probability of going  
> there is
> enhanced by the latter option.
>
> So should UA-H be part of the WCHA for the good of college hockey? The
> only way for them to be part of the WCHA is to apply, which is  
> something
> they probably would not bother to do.
>
> Nathan
>
>
> On 3/31/09 1:21 PM, "David Parter" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Clearly, the best choice is to have the WCHA absorb the two CHA  
>> teams.
>
> Well, no. That is not clearly the best choice. That is a convenient
> choice for everyone else. If "take them for the good of college  
> hockey"
> is the argument, the same argument can be made for some conference
> realignment, "for the good of college hockey."
>
> Scheduling an 11-team league in a fair manner, given the various
> constraints is almost impossible. It is not clear that scheduling a
> 12-team league with the same constraints is really any easier.
>
> This would all be a lot easier if the WCHA arenas were all within
> slapshot distance of each other, but they aren't.
>
> Even ignoring financial cost, is Alabama-Huntsville a good fit for the
> WCHA? I don't know. Sometimes it is hard to figure out what the WCHA
> really is, given the mix of schools.
>
> Bemidji has a much stronger case -- location, tradition, similarity to
> the other Minnesota state schools...
>
> But lets talk about financial cost. For some of the WCHA teams, their
> budget depends on the "big draw" games for home ticket sales (I  
> believe
> some schools charge more for the tickets to those games too). Diluting
> that further by adding teams that displace high income home games  
> could
> be a disaster.
>
> Does adding either school make the WCHA more attractive to sponsors  
> and
> TV? Bemidji is probably attractive enough to sponsors who are  
> already ok
> with the various Minnesota schools. TV? Again, BSU probably works  
> in the
> Minnesota/North Dakota (Grand Forks) market as well as anyone.
> Huntsville? Not so much.
>
>    --david
>
> ps: and the obligatory Big 10 conference talk, since no one else took
> the bait: it doesn't really help other than forcing realignment (or at
> least change) on the WCHA and CCHA.
>