> This generally leads me to this question:  How does any real or percieved
> "dismissiveness" compare to early attitudes towards the CCHA when it was
> an up and comeing conference?
>
> It seems to me that not more than a year
> ago people were scoffing at the very idea of there being more than a
> couple of new D-1 schools in the next ten years, much less an entire
> conference.
>
> And while yes there are going to be distinct differences in the level of
> play, that they are making the effort should be a reaffirming thing to
> those that were concerned with the future of our game-nameing things like
> Kent and UIC dropping hockey.
 
People are missing most of the point -- they aren't going to try and be equal
to the other leagues.  They are going to be like America East is to basketball,
or any number of other analogies.
 
Hockey needs this.  You need major conferences and minor conferences.  You need
more teams for each other to play.  You need a 16-team tournament.
 
Anyone who doesn't see the wonderful merit in a new conference isn't looking
hard enough.
 
Adam Wodon - AC Productions
Host: "Around the Rinks" - The only National College Hockey talk show
Listen 24 hours/day, 7 days/week at:
http://www.audionet.com/sports/shows/rinks/
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.