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. >