Big Ten Hockey Conference

Leaving aside my wacko pro/rel angle but incorporating the notions of landing Notre Dame and Miami, decimating Atlantic Hockey, and "saving" Alabama-Hunstville, here's another dream scenario:

Ivy		East  		West
===============================================
Dartmouth	Quinnipiac	Miami
Harvard		RPI		Notre Dame
Brown		Union		Robert Morris
Yale		Colgate		Mercyhurst
Princeton	SLU		Canisius
[Penn]		Clarkson	Niagara
Cornell		RIT		Alabama-Huntsville

Home-and-home within division, one game out = 26 league games. (Harvard could keep playing in its precious Beanpot.) (I'd be perfectly happy to accept a three-game OOC schedule if it meant playing such a breadth of teams, including Notre Dame and Miami, every season.) (Before the Penn renaissance, it would be a five-game OOC schedule.) 8-team playoff, so those left out could save on travel... Division champs seeded #1, #2, #3 based on an intra-league KRACH, the rest chosen and seeded based on the same ranking. (Division champs would be chosen based only on the results of the intra-division round robin, of course.) Three weeks of 2-of-3s at the higher seed to determine the champion. Or hold a championship weekend in Buffalo or Rochester. Or in Niagara Falls for all I care. (They've got the required casinos, after all.) Get used to it and like it.

Travel partnerships are by twos as listed. I haven't worked it out, but I'm guessing that RIT, Cornell, and A-H might be able to form some sort of collective travel partnership to fulfill schedule requirements, with teams forced to play matches at both Cornell and A-H in a particular year scheduling those games ad hoc. (Teams forced to play at CU and RIT in the same year would just treat it like any other weekend.) One-offs between the "collective travel partner" teams could also be scheduled whenever.

Even better, the NCAA tournament could get rid of this foolish "if you're a puny 6-team conference you get an autobid" rule and hand out a number of autobids based on league size. For example, the 21-team league above would get 21/6 = 3.5 autobids per year. (Only one autobid for you, Big Six!) Give them to all the semifinalists one year and let the consolation matchup determine who gets left out the next.

Scersk '97
let the consolation matchup determine who gets left out the next.

Pffft. Another lousy soccer import -- bids based on prior year's performance.


And yes I realize you were joking.

Question, if we're going to be the Big East of College Hockey, shouldn't all 21 teams make the conference tournament?

css228
Question, if we're going to be the Big East of College Hockey, shouldn't all 21 teams make the national tournament?

FYP

Trotsky

Scersk '97
let the consolation matchup determine who gets left out the next.

Pffft. Another lousy soccer import -- bids based on prior year's performance.


And yes I realize you were joking.

Actually, I wasn't joking, I was just being horrendously unclear.

I meant that the league (21/6 = 3.5) would receive alternately three or four autobids. In year one, all the semifinalists would receive autobids; in year two, the finalists would receive two of the autobids, and a consolation matchup would be played to determine the third. Repeat.

Scersk '97

Trotsky

Scersk '97
let the consolation matchup determine who gets left out the next.

Pffft. Another lousy soccer import -- bids based on prior year's performance.


And yes I realize you were joking.

Actually, I wasn't joking, I was just being horrendously unclear.

I meant that the league (21/6 = 3.5) would receive alternately three or four autobids. In year one, all the semifinalists would receive autobids; in year two, the finalists would receive two of the autobids, and a consolation matchup would be played to determine the third. Repeat.

If you do that would there be any room in the tournament after autobids. Heck, if D-I expands would there be even enough bids in a 16 team tournament for all of the auto-bids?

css228

Scersk '97

Trotsky

Scersk '97
let the consolation matchup determine who gets left out the next.

Pffft. Another lousy soccer import -- bids based on prior year's performance.


And yes I realize you were joking.

Actually, I wasn't joking, I was just being horrendously unclear.

I meant that the league (21/6 = 3.5) would receive alternately three or four autobids. In year one, all the semifinalists would receive autobids; in year two, the finalists would receive two of the autobids, and a consolation matchup would be played to determine the third. Repeat.

If you do that would there be any room in the tournament after autobids. Heck, if D-I expands would there be even enough bids in a 16 team tournament for all of the auto-bids?

For some of us that would be a feature, not a bug. One of us anyway.

KeithK

css228

Scersk '97

Trotsky

Scersk '97
let the consolation matchup determine who gets left out the next.

Pffft. Another lousy soccer import -- bids based on prior year's performance.


And yes I realize you were joking.

Actually, I wasn't joking, I was just being horrendously unclear.

I meant that the league (21/6 = 3.5) would receive alternately three or four autobids. In year one, all the semifinalists would receive autobids; in year two, the finalists would receive two of the autobids, and a consolation matchup would be played to determine the third. Repeat.

If you do that would there be any room in the tournament after autobids. Heck, if D-I expands would there be even enough bids in a 16 team tournament for all of the auto-bids?

For some of us that would be a feature, not a bug. One of us anyway.

Under that system Colgate would have gotten an autobid this year *well not exactly, because they wouldnt have even been in the playoff, but still it increases the odds that Qpac or Clarkson would have made the tournament*

css228

KeithK

css228

Scersk '97

Trotsky

Scersk '97
let the consolation matchup determine who gets left out the next.

Pffft. Another lousy soccer import -- bids based on prior year's performance.


And yes I realize you were joking.

Actually, I wasn't joking, I was just being horrendously unclear.

I meant that the league (21/6 = 3.5) would receive alternately three or four autobids. In year one, all the semifinalists would receive autobids; in year two, the finalists would receive two of the autobids, and a consolation matchup would be played to determine the third. Repeat.

If you do that would there be any room in the tournament after autobids. Heck, if D-I expands would there be even enough bids in a 16 team tournament for all of the auto-bids?

For some of us that would be a feature, not a bug. One of us anyway.

Under that system Colgate would have gotten an autobid this year

That's the chance you take when the league is dumb enough to let everyone in the playoffs.

I've stated my preferences about post season selection enough times through the years so I won't rehash them again. Do a search if for some god forsaken reason you care.

KeithK

css228

KeithK

css228

Scersk '97
Actually, I wasn't joking, I was just being horrendously unclear.

I meant that the league (21/6 = 3.5) would receive alternately three or four autobids. In year one, all the semifinalists would receive autobids; in year two, the finalists would receive two of the autobids, and a consolation matchup would be played to determine the third. Repeat.

If you do that would there be any room in the tournament after autobids. Heck, if D-I expands would there be even enough bids in a 16 team tournament for all of the auto-bids?

For some of us that would be a feature, not a bug. One of us anyway.

Under that system Colgate would have gotten an autobid this year

That's the chance you take when the league is dumb enough to let everyone in the playoffs.

I've stated my preferences about post season selection enough times through the years so I won't rehash them again. Do a search if for some god forsaken reason you care.

Actually, there would be around 10 autobids spread amongst the various conferences, which seems about right to me. This is an area in which I tend toward Keith's position, that it's best to limit contenders for the national championship to teams that have won at least some tournament or "regular-season championship" during the season. Or, god forbid, made it past the quarterfinals. (I don't think that's Keith's position exactly, but it's the flavor to which I would subscribe.)

By limiting the playoffs to eight teams from a twenty-one team league, I would think that whichever four teams made the semis would be likely to do well in the national tourney.

Scersk '97

KeithK

css228

KeithK

css228

Scersk '97
Actually, I wasn't joking, I was just being horrendously unclear.

I meant that the league (21/6 = 3.5) would receive alternately three or four autobids. In year one, all the semifinalists would receive autobids; in year two, the finalists would receive two of the autobids, and a consolation matchup would be played to determine the third. Repeat.

If you do that would there be any room in the tournament after autobids. Heck, if D-I expands would there be even enough bids in a 16 team tournament for all of the auto-bids?

For some of us that would be a feature, not a bug. One of us anyway.

Under that system Colgate would have gotten an autobid this year

That's the chance you take when the league is dumb enough to let everyone in the playoffs.

I've stated my preferences about post season selection enough times through the years so I won't rehash them again. Do a search if for some god forsaken reason you care.

Actually, there would be around 10 autobids spread amongst the various conferences, which seems about right to me. This is an area in which I tend toward Keith's position, that it's best to limit contenders for the national championship to teams that have won at least some tournament or "regular-season championship" during the season. Or, god forbid, made it past the quarterfinals. (I don't think that's Keith's position exactly, but it's the flavor to which I would subscribe.)

By limiting the playoffs to eight teams from a twenty-one team league, I would think that whichever four teams made the semis would be likely to do well in the national tourney.

True, but what has the ECAC actually done to deserve 4 bids in recent times? I think that the NCAA would just be better off replacing the PWR with KRACH if you're going to do that.

Scersk '97

KeithK

css228

KeithK

css228

Scersk '97
Actually, I wasn't joking, I was just being horrendously unclear.

I meant that the league (21/6 = 3.5) would receive alternately three or four autobids. In year one, all the semifinalists would receive autobids; in year two, the finalists would receive two of the autobids, and a consolation matchup would be played to determine the third. Repeat.

If you do that would there be any room in the tournament after autobids. Heck, if D-I expands would there be even enough bids in a 16 team tournament for all of the auto-bids?

For some of us that would be a feature, not a bug. One of us anyway.

Under that system Colgate would have gotten an autobid this year

That's the chance you take when the league is dumb enough to let everyone in the playoffs.

I've stated my preferences about post season selection enough times through the years so I won't rehash them again. Do a search if for some god forsaken reason you care.

Actually, there would be around 10 autobids spread amongst the various conferences, which seems about right to me. This is an area in which I tend toward Keith's position, that it's best to limit contenders for the national championship to teams that have won at least some tournament or "regular-season championship" during the season. Or, god forbid, made it past the quarterfinals. (I don't think that's Keith's position exactly, but it's the flavor to which I would subscribe.)

By limiting the playoffs to eight teams from a twenty-one team league, I would think that whichever four teams made the semis would be likely to do well in the national tourney.

In this fantasy world, I think you'd also want to give leagues half-bids with a play-in, like they do for world cup qualifying. E.g., if the ECAC super-conference has 3.5 bids, the loser of the consy plays the loser of the Central Atlantic College Hockey America title game for the last spot in the NCAAs.

ETA: I had an idea some years back when there were four conferences that you would rank each league by RS and playoff finishes, give auto-bids to the top teams on the eight lists, then use individual pairwise comparisons to fill in the tournament field: first take the best second-place team out of the eight, replace them with the third team on their list, and repeat the process with those eight, etc.

If the emphasis is on only the best teams making the national tournament, the solution is to cut back autobids and cut back the tournament field. Assuming 1 autobid per conference (the current 5 + the future BTHC), a 12 team tourney would still allow 6 at large teams (translation: 4 from the WCHA and BTHC, 1 from HE, and 1 from the ECAC or CCHA). I don't advocate that at all but that's the direction they'd move if that was their goal.

I think 16 with 1 auto per conference is great. My only changes would be scrapping the regionals and having the first two rounds be best-of-3 at the top seed barns with reseeding and stopping the practice of having the Frozen Four in stupid places.

Trotsky
If the emphasis is on only the best teams making the national tournament, the solution is to cut back autobids and cut back the tournament field. Assuming 1 autobid per conference (the current 5 + the future BTHC), a 12 team tourney would still allow 6 at large teams (translation: 4 from the WCHA and BTHC, 1 from HE, and 1 from the ECAC or CCHA). I don't advocate that at all but that's the direction they'd move if that was their goal.

I think 16 with 1 auto per conference is great. My only changes would be scrapping the regionals and having the first two rounds be best-of-3 at the top seed barns with reseeding and stopping the practice of having the Frozen Four in stupid places.

THE 2012 FROZEN FOUR! COMING TO A RIDICULOUS LOCATION IN FLORIDA NOWHERE NEAR YOU!

css228

Trotsky
If the emphasis is on only the best teams making the national tournament, the solution is to cut back autobids and cut back the tournament field. Assuming 1 autobid per conference (the current 5 + the future BTHC), a 12 team tourney would still allow 6 at large teams (translation: 4 from the WCHA and BTHC, 1 from HE, and 1 from the ECAC or CCHA). I don't advocate that at all but that's the direction they'd move if that was their goal.

I think 16 with 1 auto per conference is great. My only changes would be scrapping the regionals and having the first two rounds be best-of-3 at the top seed barns with reseeding and stopping the practice of having the Frozen Four in stupid places.

THE 2012 FROZEN FOUR! COMING TO A RIDICULOUS LOCATION IN FLORIDA NOWHERE NEAR YOU!

But somewhere near me . Now that The Tampa Bay Lightening are making the playoffs for the first time in many years, we will see how well ice in Tampa holds up in very warm 80 + degree weather. Actually, it has been unseasonably humid the last week or two (humid as in causing T-storms).

css228

Trotsky
If the emphasis is on only the best teams making the national tournament, the solution is to cut back autobids and cut back the tournament field. Assuming 1 autobid per conference (the current 5 + the future BTHC), a 12 team tourney would still allow 6 at large teams (translation: 4 from the WCHA and BTHC, 1 from HE, and 1 from the ECAC or CCHA). I don't advocate that at all but that's the direction they'd move if that was their goal.

I think 16 with 1 auto per conference is great. My only changes would be scrapping the regionals and having the first two rounds be best-of-3 at the top seed barns with reseeding and stopping the practice of having the Frozen Four in stupid places.

THE 2012 FROZEN FOUR! COMING TO A RIDICULOUS LOCATION IN FLORIDA NOWHERE NEAR YOU!

Neat looking building, as I drove right past it on my way to the airport last week. For a second, I thought I was going to drive right into it, as the crosstown expressway banks right next to it. It was in the upper '80s, so I guess if the Lightning are playing now...

I think my favorite part of the Anaheim FF (1999) was that there was a freak cold snap and it got into the 40s that weekend, IIRC.

Trotsky
If the emphasis is on only the best teams making the national tournament, the solution is to cut back autobids and cut back the tournament field. Assuming 1 autobid per conference (the current 5 + the future BTHC), a 12 team tourney would still allow 6 at large teams (translation: 4 from the WCHA and BTHC, 1 from HE, and 1 from the ECAC or CCHA). I don't advocate that at all but that's the direction they'd move if that was their goal.

I think 16 with 1 auto per conference is great. My only changes would be scrapping the regionals and having the first two rounds be best-of-3 at the top seed barns with reseeding and stopping the practice of having the Frozen Four in stupid places.

Of course, we'd want to leave room for upsets by "mid-majors," like Butler, VCU, and Bemidji State (Ouch!).

Swampy
Of course, we'd want to leave room for upsets by "mid-majors," like Butler, VCU, and Bemidji State (Ouch!).

The Colonial Athletic Conference has sent more basketball teams to the Final Four over the last decade than the ECAC has sent hockey teams to the Frozen Four.

Rita

css228

Trotsky
If the emphasis is on only the best teams making the national tournament, the solution is to cut back autobids and cut back the tournament field. Assuming 1 autobid per conference (the current 5 + the future BTHC), a 12 team tourney would still allow 6 at large teams (translation: 4 from the WCHA and BTHC, 1 from HE, and 1 from the ECAC or CCHA). I don't advocate that at all but that's the direction they'd move if that was their goal.

I think 16 with 1 auto per conference is great. My only changes would be scrapping the regionals and having the first two rounds be best-of-3 at the top seed barns with reseeding and stopping the practice of having the Frozen Four in stupid places.

THE 2012 FROZEN FOUR! COMING TO A RIDICULOUS LOCATION IN FLORIDA NOWHERE NEAR YOU!

But somewhere near me . Now that The Tampa Bay Lightening are making the playoffs for the first time in many years, we will see how well ice in Tampa holds up in very warm 80 + degree weather. Actually, it has been unseasonably humid the last week or two (humid as in causing T-storms).

Hey now, I remember that ice being able to last 5 periods of hockey a few years back when the Caps lost to Tampa on 2OT Easter Sunday the year Tampa won the Cup. I don't remember if it was good, bad, or horrible ice, but they survived 5 periods.

Via CHN, interesting article from kypost.com on the idea of merging the WCHA and CCHA.

Jim Hyla
Via CHN, interesting article from kypost.com on the idea of merging the WCHA and CCHA.

Interesting that Jackson also suggested (at least mentioned it), giving it a little more weight than the usual "I have no article but I do have a deadline" fluff piece. One sentence, though:

The NCAA allowed this to happen by allowing the Big Ten to break up two of its top three conferences.

The NC$$ did not "allow this to happen." It's an automatic trigger as soon as six BT members have programs. The NC$$ couldn't do squat about it (though of course they wouldn't have, as they are just a fig leaf for the factory schools' control of college athletics' revenue).

Jim Hyla
Via CHN, interesting article from kypost.com on the idea of merging the WCHA and CCHA.

That's not horrible. But it does require Air Force to play in a different confernce from Army. If that was their legitimate reason for their leaving CHA (and I have my doubts), that will have to be overcome.

Jeff Hopkins '82

Jim Hyla
Via CHN, interesting article from kypost.com on the idea of merging the WCHA and CCHA.

That's not horrible. But it does require Air Force to play in a different confernce from Army. If that was their legitimate reason for their leaving CHA (and I have my doubts), that will have to be overcome.

The base idea doesn't require either AF or UAH, those are just the writer blue-skying. The 18-team base conference could work, particularly with a 3x6 configuration.

Since it's all speculation anyway: if they were going to combine and realign what would stop them from saying "we're actually 3 conferences with interlocking schedules (and 3 autobids)"? They couldn't play a combined post-season tournament but... win-win-win for them.

(I suppose we could argue the same for the current ECAC, with the same proviso). What makes a conference a conference?

Trotsky
The NC$$ did not "allow this to happen." It's an automatic trigger as soon as six BT members have programs. The NC$$ couldn't do squat about it (though of course they wouldn't have, as they are just a fig leaf for the factory schools' control of college athletics' revenue).

I read that the Big Ten required 6 teams to form a sports conference and that the NCAA required a minimum 6 team conference to qualify for an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament. I wasn't aware of the automatic trigger though - where did you learn about this? Just curious.

The author also suggests that ND could choose to join the Big Ten which obviously won't happen due to their lucrative independent football gig.

Good to see hockey getting covered in the mighty KYPost!

RatushnyFan

Trotsky
The NC$$ did not "allow this to happen." It's an automatic trigger as soon as six BT members have programs. The NC$$ couldn't do squat about it (though of course they wouldn't have, as they are just a fig leaf for the factory schools' control of college athletics' revenue).

I read that the Big Ten required 6 teams to form a sports conference and that the NCAA required a minimum 6 team conference to qualify for an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament. I wasn't aware of the automatic trigger though - where did you learn about this? Just curious.

I think we're talking about the same thing using different language. I was referring to the Big Ten rule that once you hit 6 you must play as the BT. The NCAA requirement allows a 6-team BT to get a bid but it isn't a factor in the Exodus from the WCHA and CCHA as far as I can see, other than a possible inducement to the other BT members to encourage PSU to move up.

The main point was the author seemed to be suggesting the NC$$ owed something to the CCHA and WCHA for helping break them up, something I think is totally false (though I would like the CCHA in particular to get all the breaks they can to keep Lake Superior State, etc at D-1.)

If AH and the WCHA are set and HE has their "cozy schedule arrangement," I wonder whether Hagwell, who "declined to comment" whether he has spoken with Notre Dame (I doubt they would return his call), has any sort of idea what to do to benefit the ECAC?

The CCHA clubs are:

Notre Dame
Alaska
the "southern small schools": Bowling Green, Miami
the "central small schools": Ferris State, Western Michigan
the "northern small schools": Northern Michigan, Lake Superior State

Look at that conference if Notre Dame leaves. Guh!

Atlantic Hockey's western teams are:

Air Force (Colorado Springs)
Niagara
RIT
Canisius (Buffalo)
Mercyhurst (Erie PA)
Robert Morris (western border of PA)

The AH eastern schools are:

Bentley
Holy Cross
Army
Sacred Heart
UConn (who everybody thinks will eventually go to HE)
American International (who everybody thinks will eventually go bankrupt if they aren't already)

Trotsky
I was referring to the Big Ten rule that once you hit 6 you must play as the BT.

I know this has been debated endlessly on USCHO and various people have (or think they have) different information, but I'm 95% certain that the rule is that the B10 may not sponsor a sport unless at least 6 member schools participate in it. In other words, 6 schools playing hockey is a necessary condition to allow a BTHC, but that alone is not sufficient to cause the conference to form automatically. After all, the B10 Council of Presidents still has to vote to approve the conference in June - if the rule was automatic, no vote would be required.

Robb

Trotsky
I was referring to the Big Ten rule that once you hit 6 you must play as the BT.

I know this has been debated endlessly on USCHO and various people have (or think they have) different information, but I'm 95% certain that the rule is that the B10 may not sponsor a sport unless at least 6 member schools participate in it. In other words, 6 schools playing hockey is a necessary condition to allow a BTHC, but that alone is not sufficient to cause the conference to form automatically. After all, the B10 Council of Presidents still has to vote to approve the conference in June - if the rule was automatic, no vote would be required.

That said, the moment the Big Ten conference is formed by whatever number of schools, all the Big Ten schools must be members. From the Minnesota fans I've heard on the topic, there's some discontent from them with having to move to a BTHC both within the fans and their Athletic Department. It sounds as though they would rather have been in the WCHA, but had to come along with the other 5 and are just putting a good public face on.
*also I don't hate the authors suggestions except for the fact that the ECAC would be doing nothing to take advantage of a changing College Hockey landscape and getting better. I think we all agree that ECAC needs to be more competitive so our teams (specifically Cornell) will have more success in the national tournament*

css228
also I don't hate the authors suggestions except for the fact that the ECAC would be doing nothing to take advantage of a changing College Hockey landscape and getting better. I think we all agree that ECAC needs to be more competitive so our teams (specifically Cornell) will have more success in the national tournament

I'm all for improving the conference but in this case I'm not sure what they could do -- to the extent there may be opportunities for expansion, it would be expanding to include financially wobbly programs -- making a problem our problem.

Cornell might have an opportunity to do something for themselves if the smaller BT means that frees up NC games for their 4 traditional powers. I hope that happens -- the occasional NC game vs Michigan or Wisconsin would be wonderful, even if it was always on the road (do it for the kids, Mike).

And if they want to admit Alaska you know we'd all make that roadtrip at least once.

Cornell defects from the Ivy League and joins the Big Ten.

You're welcome.

Trotsky
And if they want to admit Alaska you know we'd all make that roadtrip at least once.

Many of us already started pricing flights for a trip to Colorado Springs next season; what's another 3000 miles?

Josh '99

Trotsky
And if they want to admit Alaska you know we'd all make that roadtrip at least once.

Many of us already started pricing flights for a trip to Colorado Springs next season; what's another 3000 miles?

Ithaca-Fairbanks roundtrip for next January on CheapFlights: $1053.

Lauren '06
Cornell defects from the Ivy League and joins the Big Ten.

You're welcome.

There is nothing new under the sun.

To focus our discussion, I rather hastily threw together this, based on the file available in Wikimedia Commons here.



I see Northern Michigan looking attractive to the WCHA, a potential three-team Upper Peninsula (the UP) conference (Tech, Northern, and LSSU) or four-team UP plus Alaska divison, and a five-team Michohiana conference or division. I think a smaller-time CCHA would be doable as a 9-team, two-division conference; indeed, if Michigan Tech were to jump in order to make that possible, they might be able to get back on track in a weaker CCHA.

Alabama-Huntsville still looks very much left out in the "warm," as much as LSSU, as Jeff Jackson implied, could be left out in the cold if Northern goes elsewhere. If Notre Dame goes elsewhere, Miami is also in a tough spot.

A couple of other things occur to me, though. Robert Morris used to be in the 18-scholarship CHA, and has been now shoehorned into 11-scholarship Atlantic Hockey. Would they want to jump? That would make a six-team Michohiana plus RMU autobid conference or a 10-team CCHA (with Tech) that would be best split into two divisions. (Tough on Ferris, though.) If you wanted to dismember AH, the five-team Michohiana plus RMU, Mercyhurst, Canisius, and Niagara looks somewhat contiguous. Would Canisius and Mercyhurst want to go to 18 scholarships? If that happens, can we kick out Quinnipiac and take RIT? Will Al-Huntsville make another year?

That's pretty neat.

Wow, looking at that map reminds me of how much the Big Ten is fucking up what is (was) a very tidy conference distribution. Thanks, football.

I'm always amazed at how we can complain about another conference, such as the Big Ten, if they don't do what we want. If the Ivys were in ECAC and and a couple in HE, and Penn and Columbia decided to start hockey teams, would we scream that we're breaking up the ECAC to make an all Ivy conference?

Jim Hyla
I'm always amazed at how we can complain about another conference, such as the Big Ten, if they don't do what we want. If the Ivys were in ECAC and and a couple in HE, and Penn and Columbia decided to start hockey teams, would we scream that we're breaking up the ECAC to make an all Ivy conference?

You get amazed by really trivial things, then.

"We" have every right to complain about whatever. It's harmless complaining on an internet board, Sheez. I'm not advocating picking up our pitchforks and torches and doing anything about it. I only mentioned that we had a conference distribution that made sense, and this move was shattering that. I'm not blaming the Big Ten for doing this, because it means Big Buck$. That doesn't mean I can't bitch about it. And the fact that just about every college hockey journalist and blogger who knows the sport is struggling to come up with a realignment solution that makes logical sense to deal with this development is just proof of the magnitude of such a move.

And yeah, I think a lot of us would scream if the scenario you described above happened, because a lot of us do care about the ECAC and its history. Did you tsk-tsk all the people who were upset at the Hockey East divorce in the '80s? Because you know, people shouldn't complain if that's what teams want to do, because why would we care about setting off a long-lasting weakening of our conference and teams?

The conference "rule" that if a Big Ten conference is formed, teams have to leave their existing conference. An Ivy Like arrangement could've been made where the WCHA and CCHA could stay in tact, and the BTHC schools just play a heightened cross-conference schedule. It sucks that Minnesota et al. are being forced to leave some great conference rivalries that have been established for decades. I have every right to express that opinion, and I don't care how freaking "amazed" that makes you.

RichH

Jim Hyla
I'm always amazed at how we can complain about another conference, such as the Big Ten, if they don't do what we want. If the Ivys were in ECAC and and a couple in HE, and Penn and Columbia decided to start hockey teams, would we scream that we're breaking up the ECAC to make an all Ivy conference?

You get amazed by really trivial things, then.

"We" have every right to complain about whatever. It's harmless complaining on an internet board, Sheez. I'm not advocating picking up our pitchforks and torches and doing anything about it. I only mentioned that we had a conference distribution that made sense, and this move was shattering that. I'm not blaming the Big Ten for doing this, because it means Big Buck$. That doesn't mean I can't bitch about it. And the fact that just about every college hockey journalist and blogger who knows the sport is struggling to come up with a realignment solution that makes logical sense to deal with this development is just proof of the magnitude of such a move.

And yeah, I think a lot of us would scream if the scenario you described above happened, because a lot of us do care about the ECAC and its history. Did you tsk-tsk all the people who were upset at the Hockey East divorce in the '80s? Because you know, people shouldn't complain if that's what teams want to do, because why would we care about setting off a long-lasting weakening of our conference and teams?

The conference "rule" that if a Big Ten conference is formed, teams have to leave their existing conference. An Ivy Like arrangement could've been made where the WCHA and CCHA could stay in tact, and the BTHC schools just play a heightened cross-conference schedule. It sucks that Minnesota et al. are being forced to leave some great conference rivalries that have been established for decades. I have every right to express that opinion, and I don't care how freaking "amazed" that makes you.

Rich, first I wasn't responding just to you, if I was I would have quoted, or linked to you. My "amazement" was in general. Second, I don't know how you can say you're not blaming the Big Ten when you say "how much the Big Ten is fucking up what is (was) a very tidy conference distribution." Maybe I misinterpreted what you meant, if so I'm sorry. It's just I've heard a lot of Big Ten bashing and wanted to respond. Also I didn't yell and scream about HE leaving. As I previously posted, there was some thought that the Ivys had something to do with that, as they had threatened to pull out first and the HE teams decided that forming HE before the Ivys left was the best route.

Trotsky

Josh '99

Trotsky
And if they want to admit Alaska you know we'd all make that roadtrip at least once.

Many of us already started pricing flights for a trip to Colorado Springs next season; what's another 3000 miles?

Ithaca-Fairbanks roundtrip for next January on CheapFlights: $1053.

The numbers I saw were a lot cheaper, but I'm not sure if that's because I picked Anchorage or because my point of origin was NYC.

Josh '99

Trotsky

Josh '99

Trotsky
And if they want to admit Alaska you know we'd all make that roadtrip at least once.

Many of us already started pricing flights for a trip to Colorado Springs next season; what's another 3000 miles?

Ithaca-Fairbanks roundtrip for next January on CheapFlights: $1053.

The numbers I saw were a lot cheaper, but I'm not sure if that's because I picked Anchorage or because my point of origin was NYC.

I'm going with Anchorage on that one. A quick peak for late January DC->Anchorage comes in starting at $500. Yup, Fairbanks definitely a bit more expensive.

Besides, Fairbanks is pretty boring as cities go. Anchorage is a neat little town, though I didn't see it in the middle of hockey season...

CowbellGuy
Besides, Fairbanks is pretty boring as cities go. Anchorage is a neat little town, though I didn't see it in the middle of hockey season...

The city of Anchorage itself reminded me of Californian suburban sprawl. However, the suburban city parks were quite nice. I even saw a moose in one.

Californian suburban sprawl = touristy fishing village?

CowbellGuy
Californian suburban sprawl = touristy fishing village?

Touristy fishing village = Seward or Homer, both of which I quite liked.

Hmm. I may be supplanting Anchorage recollection with that of Seward. Still Anchorage is a decent town.

The BTHC chips continue to fall apparently.

CHN and several other sources report a WCHA divorce for 2013:
[www.collegehockeynews.com]

The new league will contain (at least):
CC
Denver
UMD
North Dakota
UNO
Miami

IYSAHOEIYA:

ECAC (12) no change
HE (10) no change
AH (12) no interest (except John)
BTHC (6) Mich, Wis, Minn, OSU, PSU, Mich State
"Hockey West" (8) CC, Den, UMD, NoDak, UNO, Mia, WMU*, NDU*
Rump CCHA (5) Ferris, NMU, UAF, LSSU, BG
Rump WCHA (5) UAA, St. Cloud, Bemidji, Mankato, MTU
Still Screwed (1) UAH

Trotsky
IYSAHOEIYA:

ECAC (12) no change
HE (10) no change
AH (12) no interest (except John)
BTHC (6) Mich, Wis, Minn, OSU, PSU, Mich State
"Hockey West" (8) CC, Den, UMD, NoDak, UNO, Mia, WMU*, NDU*
Rump CCHA (5) Ferris, NMU, UAF, LSSU, BG
Rump WCHA (5) UAA, St. Cloud, Bemidji, Mankato, MTU
Still Screwed (1) UAH

I like how this is coming into focus. The thing I think is apparent at this point is to make a Michigan-Minnesota (Michisota? MI-MN? MichMinn?) conference.

Michisota	Hockey West
   UMD		    CC
   WMU		    DU
   FSU		    UND
   NMU		    UNO
   LSSU		    Mia
   SCSU		    ND
   BSU		    BGSU
   MSU-M	    UAA
   MTU		    UAF
		    UAH(?)

Hockey West would obviously be more of a "flying" conference anyway so I moved the Alaska schools there. I guess you could put them in the MI-MN conference and subsidize their travel instead. I think that's rather elegant.

RichH

Trotsky
IYSAHOEIYA:

ECAC (12) no change
HE (10) no change
AH (12) no interest (except John)
BTHC (6) Mich, Wis, Minn, OSU, PSU, Mich State
"Hockey West" (8) CC, Den, UMD, NoDak, UNO, Mia, WMU*, NDU*
Rump CCHA (5) Ferris, NMU, UAF, LSSU, BG
Rump WCHA (5) UAA, St. Cloud, Bemidji, Mankato, MTU
Still Screwed (1) UAH

I like how this is coming into focus. The thing I think is apparent at this point is to make a Michigan-Minnesota (Michisota? MI-MN? MichMinn?) conference.

Michisota	Hockey West
   UMD		    CC
   WMU		    DU
   FSU		    UND
   NMU		    UNO
   LSSU		    Mia
   SCSU		    ND
   BSU		    BGSU
   MSU-M	    UAA
   MTU		    UAF
		    UAH(?)

Hockey West would obviously be more of a "flying" conference anyway so I moved the Alaska schools there. I guess you could put them in the MI-MN conference and subsidize their travel instead. I think that's rather elegant.

Why would UMD play in the second tier Mini-Mi conference when they can play with the bigger boys in Hockey West?

Chris '03
Why would UMD play in the second tier Mini-Mi conference when they can play with the bigger boys in Hockey West?

Yeah, I guess to implement this, one would have to suspend the fact that there are egos and strong/weak concepts. I thought of moving NoDak to Mini-Mi since they're right on the Minn border anyway. The state-pride aspect of especially the "state of hockey" is a powerful selling point. Also remember that Notre Dame, Omaha, and Miami (and even UMD to an extent) have only recently become "national powers." It's conceivable any of them could drop back into the obscurity pool. It happened to '90s powerhouse LSSU.

The BTHC has forced this situation that there will be redistribution of the powers on some scale. I think the sport would be better off not making yet another "big boy" conference. Doing so creates a "reject" conference, right?

Why am I reminded of the movie "Twins" at this point?

If the Left Behind of the CCHA and WCHA merge (and kick out the Alaskans since with greatly diminished revenues they won't be able to afford them), they might be able to produce decent teams with a fairly high rate of churn, in the same way that the ECAC does. If they did it right away, it's possible they might even save Notre Dame, making them that much stronger.

I think the best way to save alaskan schools is to cross your fingers that UBC and Simon Fraser or two other NW/Canadian schools go D-I. You could then run an 8 or 12 team league with divisions that minimize travel through insular conference scheduling within divisions.

Chris '03

RichH

Trotsky
IYSAHOEIYA:

ECAC (12) no change
HE (10) no change
AH (12) no interest (except John)
BTHC (6) Mich, Wis, Minn, OSU, PSU, Mich State
"Hockey West" (8) CC, Den, UMD, NoDak, UNO, Mia, WMU*, NDU*
Rump CCHA (5) Ferris, NMU, UAF, LSSU, BG
Rump WCHA (5) UAA, St. Cloud, Bemidji, Mankato, MTU
Still Screwed (1) UAH

I like how this is coming into focus. The thing I think is apparent at this point is to make a Michigan-Minnesota (Michisota? MI-MN? MichMinn?) conference.

Michisota	Hockey West
   UMD		    CC
   WMU		    DU
   FSU		    UND
   NMU		    UNO
   LSSU		    Mia
   SCSU		    ND
   BSU		    BGSU
   MSU-M	    UAA
   MTU		    UAF
		    UAH(?)

Hockey West would obviously be more of a "flying" conference anyway so I moved the Alaska schools there. I guess you could put them in the MI-MN conference and subsidize their travel instead. I think that's rather elegant.

Why would UMD play in the second tier Mini-Mi conference when they can play with the bigger boys in Hockey West?

For the autobid?

RichH

Chris '03
Why would UMD play in the second tier Mini-Mi conference when they can play with the bigger boys in Hockey West?

Yeah, I guess to implement this, one would have to suspend the fact that there are egos and strong/weak concepts. I thought of moving NoDak to Mini-Mi since they're right on the Minn border anyway. The state-pride aspect of especially the "state of hockey" is a powerful selling point. Also remember that Notre Dame, Omaha, and Miami (and even UMD to an extent) have only recently become "national powers." It's conceivable any of them could drop back into the obscurity pool. It happened to '90s powerhouse LSSU.

The BTHC has forced this situation that there will be redistribution of the powers on some scale. I think the sport would be better off not making yet another "big boy" conference. Doing so creates a "reject" conference, right?

Why am I reminded of the movie "Twins" at this point?

I don't think any of this is, on balance, for the benefit of the sport. I also think HE might be a possibility for ND.

Long-term, if the BTHC is a success, one has to wonder how if other, non-hockey conferences like the BE might respond.

The new conference with Denv., CC, No. Dak., UMD, UNO, Miami as founding member is officially announced.
[www.nhl.com]

Trotsky
IYSAHOEIYA:

Help out an old timer who can't even find the significance of IYSAHOEIYA with Google or Yahoo.

David Harding

Trotsky
IYSAHOEIYA:

Help out an old timer who can't even find the significance of IYSAHOEIYA with Google or Yahoo.

If You're Scoring at Home..or Even If You're Alone

jkahn
The new conference with Denv., CC, No. Dak., UMD, UNO, Miami as founding member is officially announced.
[www.nhl.com]

Interesting that Notre Dame is not there.

Jeff Hopkins '82

jkahn
The new conference with Denv., CC, No. Dak., UMD, UNO, Miami as founding member is officially announced.
[www.nhl.com]

Interesting that Notre Dame is not there.

Not there yet. Seems they're playing the field to see what works best for their interests between HEA, CCHA leftover, and the new conference. I just can't see Notre Dame in HEA though or in the CCHA remainder league. There's also the (very?) outside chance the big east is thinking about a hockey conference...

Conventional wisdom seems to be that WMU's fate is tied to Notre Dame's decision too as they'd be the likely 8th to the new conference if it snags ND.

Chris '03
There's also the (very?) outside chance the big east is thinking about a hockey conference...

Is any other school talking about starting a program, other than Syracuse? More importantly any other football schools talking about hockey? There seems to be lots of chatter about the football schools breaking off.

ithacat

Chris '03
There's also the (very?) outside chance the big east is thinking about a hockey conference...

Is any other school talking about starting a program, other than Syracuse? More importantly any other football schools talking about hockey? There seems to be lots of chatter about the football schools breaking off.

There are a ton of moving parts and big east hockey is not likely in the short term cards. The push for a lax league and the formation of a tv network would both suggest that they would consider hockey if the conditions were right, which they probably aren't right now. They see what the B10 network has become and are likely to follow the $$.

Now, of course, there are only 3 big east teams that play men's hockey: PC, UConn, and ND. I wouldn't rule out UMass coming over despite their recent move to MAC football. SU has the potential to add a men's team down the road. They'd need to pull in at least another affiliate to make it work (BGSU?) and there's really little in it for ND except potential tv and east coast exposure, which they already get a decent amount of.

I don't see why HEA would want to take on a geographic outlier like ND. They're most likely to go to the new conference, especially with the rumors that Alaska and NMU may desert the CCHA too.

Chris '03

ithacat

Chris '03
There's also the (very?) outside chance the big east is thinking about a hockey conference...

Is any other school talking about starting a program, other than Syracuse? More importantly any other football schools talking about hockey? There seems to be lots of chatter about the football schools breaking off.

There are a ton of moving parts and big east hockey is not likely in the short term cards. The push for a lax league and the formation of a tv network would both suggest that they would consider hockey if the conditions were right, which they probably aren't right now. They see what the B10 network has become and are likely to follow the $$.

Now, of course, there are only 3 big east teams that play men's hockey: PC, UConn, and ND. I wouldn't rule out UMass coming over despite their recent move to MAC football. SU has the potential to add a men's team down the road. They'd need to pull in at least another affiliate to make it work (BGSU?) and there's really little in it for ND except potential tv and east coast exposure, which they already get a decent amount of.

I don't see why HEA would want to take on a geographic outlier like ND. They're most likely to go to the new conference, especially with the rumors that Alaska and NMU may desert the CCHA too.

Basketball, and to a much lesser extent football, makes the Big East run. I can't see it taking in UMass for hockey but not b-ball, and I don't see b-ball happening. Marcus Camby is long gone.

Looking for something entirely different I stumbled on this newspaper article claiming Penn Sate Ice Hockey Team Not Anticipated.

David Harding
Looking for something entirely different I stumbled on this newspaper article claiming Penn Sate Ice Hockey Team Not Anticipated.

Not to mention the Ivy group becoming a football league (page 6)....

Not only the schools are changing conferences. Two players leave Mercyhurst for Penn State.