Generic Off Season Thread

[jtn27]

The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

[RichH]

The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

There are probably several reasons for it.  One that comes to mind is to prevent teams from just jumping up and down between the Divisions for short periods of time based on their current talent level.

[Trotsky]

The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

Not sure, but IIRC a consequence of the rule when RIT elevated was that games against RIT did not count towards PWR because the opponent was not tournament-eligible.

Is Penn State going to be ineligible for the BTHC tournament?

[nyc94]

The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

Not sure, but IIRC a consequence of the rule when RIT elevated was that games against RIT did not count towards PWR because the opponent was not tournament-eligible.

Is Penn State going to be ineligible for the BTHC tournament?

I skimmed through the NCAA rules and it sounds like a team does not have to be eligible for the NCAA tournament to participate in a conference tournament. However, if an ineligible team wins the conference championship then the conference does not have an autobid for that year and all other teams are considered at-large.  Maybe this is why Atlantic Hockey kept RIT out of their conference championship in their second year as no AH team was likely to get an at-large bid.

edit:

31.3.4.2 Requirements—National Collegiate Championship.

•  To be eligible for automatic qualifi-

cation in a National Collegiate Championship, a member conference must meet the following general require-
ments: (Adopted: 1/9/06 effective 8/1/06)
(a) Have at least six active members that sponsor the applicable sport in any division (Note: A provisional
member in the process of becoming an NCAA member cannot be used to meet the requisite number.);
(b) The six active members must have conducted conference competition together for the preceding two
years in the applicable sport;
(c) There shall be no waivers of the two-year waiting period; and
(d) Any new member added to a conference that is eligible for an automatic bid shall be immediately eligible
to represent the conference as the automatic qualifier.

[Aaron M. Griffin]

The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

Not sure, but IIRC a consequence of the rule when RIT elevated was that games against RIT did not count towards PWR because the opponent was not tournament-eligible.

Is Penn State going to be ineligible for the BTHC tournament?

I skimmed through the NCAA rules and it sounds like a team does not have to be eligible for the NCAA tournament participate in a conference tournament. However, if an ineligible team wins the conference championship then the conference does not have an autobid for that year and all other teams are considered at-large.  Maybe this is why Atlantic Hockey kept RIT out of their conference championship in their second year as no AH team was likely to get an at-large bid.

Thanks for answering, Rich. Also, I doubt that Penn State will win the B1G Hockey Championship its first year. It would be interesting if they won. It would seem like a huge snub to deny Penn State entry into the national tournament if they pulled it off as unlikely as it is that they will. So, I doubt that it will be an issue. I was curious about next season because it seems like Penn State has created a schedule that has at least some PWR potential if Penn State can manage a few upsets with Michigan State, RIT, Union, and Wisconsin announced as opponents already.

[Aaron M. Griffin]

I refuse to remind others and myself of the results of a particular game that appears in the subject line of the previous thread where we discussed future ECAC venues, so, I moved the conversation to here. Adam Wodon had this to offer for where the ECACs should move: Lake Placid.

[redice]

but at least the brand name "Lake Placid" — and the "Herb Brooks 1980 Olympic Arena" — can stand on equal and proud footing with "Detroit's Joe Louis Arena", "St. Paul's Xcel Energy Center" and "Boston Garden."

Adam, what have you been smoking, my friend?   No F'ing way!!

Yes it's hard to get to, yes hotels can be tough to secure. So what. Work it out.

I'll deal with it just like I did when it was in LP the last time.... Stay home or go elsewhere...   Watching the HE playoffs on TV make them appear to be a much better option.   Better hockey, better venue, and a great city.   It's hard to not make that choice.   I've been leaning in that direction anyway.   An ECACHL move to LP will seal the deal for me.

[Jim Hyla]

No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple. By the way what's the reformed WCHA going to do? They are probably facing the same problems we've gone through. Let's see how they work it out. There will be 3 major conferences, 2, and maybe 3, that are a step down. Accept it for what it is, enjoy it for what it is, and make it so that those of us who want to enjoy it, can enjoy it.

[css228]

No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple. By the way what's the reformed WCHA going to do? They are probably facing the same problems we've gone through. Let's see how they work it out. There will be 3 major conferences, 2, and maybe 3, that are a step down. Accept it for what it is, enjoy it for what it is, and make it so that those of us who want to enjoy it, can enjoy it.

Steve Hagwell's backyard?

[Trotsky]

No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families.

I loved Lake Placid, but I have to agree with Jim.  Just move it back to Albany -- it's obvious, simple, and fair.  If Union continues to be good or RPI ever returns from the dark side of the moon they'll get a good walk-up.  Even in years neither makes it they'll still do better there than any of the other choices.

[adamw]

I've been smoking the same thing for 10 years. My opinion has never changed

[adamw]

No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple.

You say we'll never have the prestige - yet in the other paragraph, you say the only way to get it is to win. So - then - it's still possible, by that logic. At least to boost it somewhat.

If you say "just win" - it suggests that ECAC coaches are inferior. But that isn't true. It's the obstacles. Some of which will never change, of course, i.e. the academic differences, smaller schools, etc...  But coaches will tell you that they need the "brand" of the ECAC to be out there in order to compete for recruits. That directly ties into winning.  The "brand" suffered, obviously, by not being on TV. Another way the brand would improve is by having its name associated with Lake Placid. That's my premise. And I do think it would be very useful in that regard.

I understand and acknowledge all of the other points. No one has it worse than me Atlantic City is 75 minutes from my door. Lake Placid is 6 hours. It's worth it.

[Aaron M. Griffin]

No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple.

You say we'll never have the prestige - yet in the other paragraph, you say the only way to get it is to win. So - then - it's still possible, by that logic. At least to boost it somewhat.

If you say "just win" - it suggests that ECAC coaches are inferior. But that isn't true. It's the obstacles. Some of which will never change, of course, i.e. the academic differences, smaller schools, etc...  But coaches will tell you that they need the "brand" of the ECAC to be out there in order to compete for recruits. That directly ties into winning.  The "brand" suffered, obviously, by not being on TV. Another way the brand would improve is by having its name associated with Lake Placid. That's my premise. And I do think it would be very useful in that regard.

I understand and acknowledge all of the other points. No one has it worse than me Atlantic City is 75 minutes from my door. Lake Placid is 6 hours. It's worth it.

Why need we become complacent with the level of success that the ECAC has? ECAC results during the 2012 NCAAs were fairly impressive. Union got into the Frozen Four and Cornell knocked off a team that many viewed as a favorite for a national title going into the tournament. Cornell was arguably an ill-timed, broken stick away from making the Frozen Four. I know that it requires more than one season to establish a trend, but I feel somewhat assured the Cornell, Sucks, and Union have a chance at being competitive next season. If RPI can right their course, then that would be one-third of the ECAC. The Ivies have become more competitive with the scholarship programs with their competitive financial aid offers. Why pretend it is like what it once was when it clearly is not? The ECAC has a chance to reassert itself as relevant during the coming transitional period. The ECAC should be able to pass WCHA Lite and Atlantic Hockey. Perhaps, I am an optimist about this. Winning is the only way to increase the appeal of our conference, that's a given. However, we cannot tie that sentiment with, "well, this is the best it will ever be." Also, I think Adam commented once that winning the ECAC was not "the thing" it once was. There's one certain way to make it "a thing" again and that is national success. I would counter that I was there in 2010, my senior year, when Cornell claimed its twelfth ECAC title and, certainly, it felt like a great accomplishment.

I am somewhat agnostic about Lake Placid. I would love to see Cornell play in Herb Brooks Arena, but all the problems that members on here have mentioned make me somewhat indifferent. I will go wherever the ECAC Championships are held on only the condition that Cornell is playing in them. However, Adam, you point out that the ECAC brand suffered by not being on television. I agree. Sadly, there are few outlets available that will air the ECAC Championships left (B1G on BTN, Hockey East on NBC Sports, and NCHC on CBS Sports) with the geographic breadth that the conference would need to rebrand itself. Also, would Lake Placid be the best locale for television exposure? Which networks would be  willing to travel to what most describe as a helplessly remote location to broadcast the ECAC Championships? I think that Lake Placid might present unforeseen issues with television exposure.

I am not sure if the location of our tournament has much to do with our brand or how others view the ECAC. I might be wrong. I have friends who are CCHA and Hockey East fans and they seemed to think AC seemed like an interesting place to host the tournament. They also did not react with condescension about when it was held in Albany because it makes sense for the geographic footprint of the conference. These comments were made with no air of superiority. I know that this might not be the sentiments of recruits or administrators from other conferences. I am just curious if the location of the ECAC Championships is as much of an issue for others without the Conference as we think within the Conference. It seems like it is mostly ECAC fans who are upset and self-deprecatingly judgmental about the location of the championships.

[marty]

I've been smoking the same thing for 10 years. My opinion has never changed

Grows wild in the Adirondacks?

On a more serious note, why does Bridgeport draw so well? Didn't the Union final draw better than BC in Worcester?

Mass-Lowell?

[marty]

Don't be too agnostic about Lake Placid if the weather is bad. You'll need to say your prayers that you don't slide off the road.