Ben Flickinger wrote:
 
>
>Well, they get an even # of teams, meaning they don't have to have any off
>weeks.
 
Yes, an even number of teams until they admit Niagara (or whomever)....also,
there is no plan in place to deal with the scheduling of the (now) twelve
teams.  I think the point I was trying to make was missed here; there has
not been--as of yet--any evidence of a clear plan for the future in regard
to expansion in the CCHA.
 
>And I believe the new commissioner is handling the UNO matter, not
>Beagan.
 
The proverbial ball was rolling under Beagan; in some ways, Anastos
inherited this one.  And my point about Beagan was about his penchant for
expansion.
 
 
>
>exactly, they're college kids. You really think they'd rather be in class
>studying World Lit or something than on a bus or airplane going to play
>hockey? Come on, it's a no brainer. I also can't see how scheduling 12 teams
>would be harder than 11.
 
I don't see this as a no-brainer.  I'm looking at the geography of the
conference, and many, many coaches have complained of the nightmarish travel
schedule.  I'm not pulling this criticism out of thin air.
 
As for scheduling 12 rather than 11 teams, it seems to me the the CCHA has a
tough enough time scheduling each team to play every other one three times
in the season as it is...I think there may be unforseen scheduling difficulties.
 
 
>
>>Expansion for the sake of expansion itself seems
>>foolish to me.
>
>Who says this is expansion for the sake of expansion?
 
Well, then, if you know of the CCHA's overall plan in regard to expansion,
perhaps you can forward it to me, because I've never been able to get a
straight answer out of anyone about it--and, believe me, I've been trying.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.