new super conference (NCHC)

[WestCoastGopherGuy]

with talk of Duluth, CC, Denver, UND, UNO, Notre Dame, Miami, and Western Michigan possibly (probably) making a super league.. wonder how this will affect gopher scheduling series with teams like UND Duluth and Denver. The talk was that the big ten would schedule heavily with the WCHA.. but now the teams we would want to play are in an 8 team league.. 8 teams could play eachother two series each.. thats 14 weekends of the year. thats only a few series a year left for the super league teams to play non conference games..

I dont have a good feeling about this. wish the gophers were in that conference.

[SkiUMahLaw]

with talk of Duluth, CC, Denver, UND, UNO, Notre Dame, Miami, and Western Michigan possibly (probably) making a super league.. wonder how this will affect gopher scheduling series with teams like UND Duluth and Denver. The talk was that the big ten would schedule heavily with the WCHA.. but now the teams we would want to play are in an 8 team league.. 8 teams could play eachother two series each.. thats 14 weekends of the year. thats only a few series a year left for the super league teams to play non conference games..

I dont have a good feeling about this. wish the gophers were in that conference.

I still don't understand the talk about this.

It seems to me the costs for each of those schools will go up while the revenues will not substantially increase. So where is the benefit? Recruiting? That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense since most of these schools will be losing a foothold in Minnesota by departing the WCHA, not gaining one. TV deal? Not likely-- there is no chance that a hockey conference with these members would get a money-making TV deal like the BTN. Counter-balance to the B1G? The WCHA in its current form should be sufficiently ok to counterbalance things. And I would think that, were tough times to happen to UND or UMD, they would want to have four games per year against BSU or SCSU-- it would at least drive attendance in a way that WMU or UNO won't.

I also don't understand why Notre Dame would even consider this. The prestige of beating up on UNO or CC means nothing to them-- whereas a win over Providence or Boston College at least parallels their Big East affiliation.

All that said, the impact on other WCHA schools would be devastating-- but hey, I guess you can't expect UND or Notre Dame to act in any way other than in their self-interest, can we?

[Hammy]

I was going to finish writing a similar response but SkiUMahLaw did it better than I did. It is a lot of hyped up nonsense that won't add to the hype when all is said and done. Thanks SkiUMahLaw for saving me the time. I'll just read your post and laugh at them

[The Rube]

Reputation, DU's (and UND's, and whoever's) tv contract (they do have them, but remember we are spoiled, and rightly so, with our TV contract)*, and size of school/financials.

If UND (or whoever) doesn't have to deal with sparse (at best) attendance when (school X) comes to town, because in this superconference they can at least improve on that attendance....that's common sense. It's horribly wrong, but the hand was forced by the B1G Mistake.

*I know that every UND home game is televised on FCS, and many of DU's games are on Rocky Mountain FoxSports.

[SkiUMahLaw]

Reputation, DU's (and UND's, and whoever's) tv contract (they do have them, but remember we are spoiled, and rightly so, with our TV contract)*, and size of school/financials.

If UND (or whoever) doesn't have to deal with sparse (at best) attendance when (school X) comes to town, because in this superconference they can at least improve on that attendance....that's common sense. It's horribly wrong, but the hand was forced by the B1G Mistake.

*I know that every UND home game is televised on FCS, and many of DU's games are on Rocky Mountain FoxSports.

See, I disagree with your premise here.

It is one thing to band together a bunch of D-1 schools (e.g. Miami, Notre Dame, WMU) with a bunch of schools who want to focus on their D-1 sports (UND, UNO, Denver). But it seems odd to then include UMD and CC, as those schools are D-2 and D-3 respectively with no real movement to change that in either case. It would seem to me that their institutional philosophies are quite different across those lines. Size of school is not helpful either: CC and Denver are quite small; SCSU and Mankato are larger than UMD, and ND is ND and bigger than even B1G schools (just ask a ND grad).

A TV deal is really a fool's errand. First off, you are talking hockey, a sport that doesn't have an ESPN contract; and you are talking the college version of it, so you are already turning it into a regional matter. Then you have schools that aren't even the dominant names in their regions to band together-- and somehow that is supposed to engage a television viewer? I'm sorry but no cable company would profitably fund such a venture. The only potentially profitable name there is Notre Dame, and given their history and reputation, is it even remotely conceivable that ND would act in a manner beneficial to another school at their own financial loss? No way. And the idea that an online version is what they're looking for is a laugher-- it isn't worth doing in that manner.

At the end of the day, I believe this is looking more and more like a struggle for authority in the WCHA. CC and DU are concerned about the balance of WCHA authority being shifted to the Minnesota four; UND wants to step into the shoes of the perceived Minnesota elite spot; UNO wants to assert some relevance; ND wants to create a bidding war between Hockey East and someone else for its position; and WMU and Miami are concerned about being left high and dry if the CCHA goes belly up-- because if I am NMU, I would seriously look to join a league with Michigan Tech. With UMD, remember where Bruce McLoed coached? Their invitation may be entirely political.

Sad because they're screwing around with the Mankatos and BSUs for their own personal agendas!

[st8ofhockey]

If this goes forward, the WCHA and CCHA would be left with 5 teams each. IMO, the likely followup by both would be to merge, to maintain the minimum number of teams to earn a conference autobid. Otherwise, I feel both would go the way of the CHA. On the surface, that doesn't seem like the end of the world - you'd finally be putting UAF and UAA in the same conference, along with Northern and Tech - who, historically, have been conference opponents in the past - along with LSSU, reducing travel expenses for the schools in the UP. I would also hope, since the B1G was the lynch pin that started this whole mess, that they would make an effort in scheduling agreements to appease everyone left in their wake - whether it be this new super conference or the left-behinds.

It's not perfect, but it's no less of a than the logistics of the B1G

[Hammy]

If there are any conference changes, my hope would be the Gophers give first priority to scheduling the teams that did not try to break up the WCHA. Specifically SCSU, Mankato, Bemidji. The ones that seem to be pushing the new conference agenda should be a low priority in Gopher scheduling. We've always tried to grow the game in this state. Let's help support the teams getting the short end of the stick in all of this.

[Cardinal]

If there are any conference changes, my hope would be the Gophers give first priority to scheduling the teams that did not try to break up the WCHA. Specifically SCSU, Mankato, Bemidji. The ones that seem to be pushing the new conference agenda should be a low priority in Gopher scheduling. We've always tried to grow the game in this state. Let's help support the teams getting the short end of the stick in all of this.

As they have discussed on the SCSU board, the key to helping those three teams will be going to their buildings to play, which I worry won't happen as often as those teams may need (i.e. yearly).

[Cardinal]

Per Schlossman, it's a done-deal.

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/a ... id/209049/

UND will soon announce it is leaving the men’s Western Collegiate Hockey Association for a new, startup conference in 2013-14, the Herald has learned from multiple sources.

An official announcement is expected next week.

At least five other teams will join UND in this league: Denver, Colorado College, Nebraska-Omaha, Minnesota-Duluth and Miami (Ohio).

[ScoobyDoo]

Wow.

[Kelor]

If there are any conference changes, my hope would be the Gophers give first priority to scheduling the teams that did not try to break up the WCHA. Specifically SCSU, Mankato, Bemidji. The ones that seem to be pushing the new conference agenda should be a low priority in Gopher scheduling. We've always tried to grow the game in this state. Let's help support the teams getting the short end of the stick in all of this.

Sadly, I'd put the Gophers on the list as the biggest culprit of breaking up the WCHA. We knew this was going to occur. It was a certainty that the BTHN was going to cause massive damage to the other WCHA teams. I just had no idea they would put something together so quickly.

[ScoobyDoo]

Well, hate to say it but I was one that knew this would happen and that's why I was anti-Big 10. I don't see any way that the NCAA tourney doesn't contract and the league itself doesn't lose at least 6 teams when everything is said and done.

[gopher6]

If there are any conference changes, my hope would be the Gophers give first priority to scheduling the teams that did not try to break up the WCHA. Specifically SCSU, Mankato, Bemidji. The ones that seem to be pushing the new conference agenda should be a low priority in Gopher scheduling. We've always tried to grow the game in this state. Let's help support the teams getting the short end of the stick in all of this.

Sadly, I'd put the Gophers on the list as the biggest culprit of breaking up the WCHA. We knew this was going to occur. It was a certainty that the BTHN was going to cause massive damage to the other WCHA teams. I just had no idea they would put something together so quickly.

I blame Becky for this pathetic move, so if we get lucky and win the WCHA this year how long do we keep the Mcnaughton Cup??

[g_manpucker]

The Maverick faithful here in Mankato are in full on mode. This is really screwing over the teams left out of this "super-conference". The Free Press reporter here in town Shane Frederick said in an response to a email I sent him that he is working overtime trying to break what is going on and how MSU is trying position itself in a conference other than the WCHA since it seems a fore gone conclusion that it's going away.

[Doc Holliday]

Sadly, I'd put the Gophers on the list as the biggest culprit of breaking up the WCHA. We knew this was going to occur. It was a certainty that the BTHN was going to cause massive damage to the other WCHA teams. I just had no idea they would put something together so quickly.

The Gophers had nothing to do with it. You have argument towards "The Big Ten," but not the Gophers. The U does what the Big Ten says. Just the way it works.

Perhaps not every year the Gophers could go to Mankato & St. Cloud, but perhaps a 2 for 1 could be worked out....would have to examine the economics if a 2 for 1 would work for all involved.

[thinkbui]

...so if we get lucky and win the WCHA this year how long do we keep the Mcnaughton Cup??

The Cup goes to whichever conference Tech ends up in regardless of who is in possession of it.

[SkiUMahLaw]

Sadly, I'd put the Gophers on the list as the biggest culprit of breaking up the WCHA. We knew this was going to occur. It was a certainty that the BTHN was going to cause massive damage to the other WCHA teams. I just had no idea they would put something together so quickly.

Bull.

We didn't choose to go to the B1G, we are members and were required to go. End of story. But even on the way out, the concern expressed by Maturi in response to many of us here was ensuring that we maintain games with our Minnesota brethren.

Nodak, on the other hand, is choosing to be a d-bag here. They would be just fine where they were at, and would probably be extremely successful as a big fish in a small pond. But whereas we may be arrogant without a choice, they are choosing to be d-bags. What's worse? Being one because of who you are, or choosing to be one?

Unfortunately, this reaction shows exactly how strong the pull is with what the Gophers were able to do to Minnesota hockey-- fund all these Minnesota schools' programs.

Herb Brooks is turning over in his grave right now-- especially after telling God that he should go to UND...this is NOT what Saint Herb would have advocated.

Edit: What I also don't understand is-- who's going to be the patsy with these schools? Every conference needs its perennial winners and its losers, and these schools are setting themselves up entirely and only to be winners. What happens when the dust settles itself out? What if UND is the perennial losers in this conference? What then? This is very short-sighted and just smells funny-- in that bad, bad sort of way.

[SouthTexGopher]

Nodak, on the other hand, is choosing to be a d-bag here. They would be just fine where they were at, and would probably be extremely successful as a big fish in a small pond. But whereas we may be arrogant without a choice, they are choosing to be d-bags. What's worse? Being one because of who you are, or choosing to be one?

I'm simply quoting your post because it's worth reading twice.

UND is choosing to blow up the conference, we didn't have a choice. Nice job, UND. Punks on the ice, punks off the ice, punks in elevators...punks all around.

[Cardinal]

Nodak, on the other hand, is choosing to be a d-bag here. They would be just fine where they were at, and would probably be extremely successful as a big fish in a small pond. But whereas we may be arrogant without a choice, they are choosing to be d-bags. What's worse? Being one because of who you are, or choosing to be one?/quote]

I'm simply quoting your post because it's worth reading twice.

UND is choosing to blow up the conference, we didn't have a choice. Nice job, UND. Punks on the ice, punks off the ice, punks in elevators...punks all around.

So it's okay for the Gophers and Badgers to chase the money because they "had no choice," but for UND and others to do it is wrong and that makes them punks? Please. They are doing the same thing the Big 10 teams did, and that is following the lead of their school's administration. Guarantee you Lucia and Eaves would have rather stayed in the WCHA, and same goes for Hakstol, Gwoz, etc. They just don't have the convenient cover of the Big 10.

All of these programs are positioning themselves better financially, no more, no less.

[sunbone]

Boy, it was really tough to see this one coming. Still waiting for someone to explain to me how the hell this is good for college hockey.

[Kelor]

The Gophers had nothing to do with it. You have argument towards "The Big Ten," but not the Gophers. The U does what the Big Ten says. Just the way it works.

Fair enough, but I'm pretty sure the UofM voted in the affirmative to build the BTHN. They may have only been 1/6th of the cause, but that's still 1/6th.

I'm not a fan of backing the Sue, but frankly they would be fools to stay in the WCHA. I see Wisconsin and Minnesota (more broadly the Big10) as the d-bags here. The Sue - not so much.

On edit: Denver, Colorado College, Nebraska-Omaha, Minnesota-Duluth and Miami (Ohio) are also bailing. How is it UND's fault and not theirs? It seems their hands were tied even more. Eliminate those 5 teams and tell me one reason why UND should stick with a Mankato/St Cloud/Bemidji conference?

[Doc Holliday]

All of these programs are positioning themselves better financially, no more, no less.

Are they? (Serious question)

What happens with their conference tournament? Are the other 7 going to say "yes, please" and accept Grand Forks because it's the only potential money maker?

More travel costs heading to Miami, Western & Notre Dame...

TV deal? I don't see anything significant coming...

I understand why UMD is wanting in, because you don't want to be without a chair when the music being played by North Dakota stops....but unless the postseason tourney is put permanently in Grand Forks, I guess I'm failing to see why this will be that much financially better than what the WCHA would provide.

[SouthTexGopher]

So it's okay for the Gophers and Badgers to chase the money because they "had no choice," but for UND and others to do it is wrong and that makes them punks? Please. They are doing the same thing the Big 10 teams did, and that is following the lead of their school's administration. Guarantee you Lucia and Eaves would have rather stayed in the WCHA, and same goes for Hakstol, Gwoz, etc. They just don't have the convenient cover of the Big 10.

All of these programs are positioning themselves better financially, no more, no less.

There's a difference between Minnesota and Wisconsin on this. Maturi wasn't pushing for a BTHC. Alvarez was.

[Gopherguy05]

The Gophers had nothing to do with it. You have argument towards "The Big Ten," but not the Gophers. The U does what the Big Ten says. Just the way it works.

Fair enough, but I'm pretty sure the UofM voted in the affirmative to build the BTHN. They may have only been 1/6th of the cause, but that's still 1/6th.

I'm not a fan of backing the Sue, but frankly they would be fools to stay in the WCHA. I see Wisconsin and Minnesota (more broadly the Big10) as the d-bags here. The Sue - not so much.

On edit: Denver, Colorado College, Nebraska-Omaha, Minnesota-Duluth and Miami (Ohio) are also bailing. How is it UND's fault and not theirs?

Maturi was quoted as not wanting to join the Big ten hockey conference. He finally relented when he saw it was going to be a foregone conclusion. The biggest booster of a Big Ten Hockey conference was that slimy a-hole Barry Alvarez to the east...who knows as much about hockey as the curly hair on my left testicle.

[Kelor]

[Maturi was quoted as not wanting to join the Big ten hockey conference. He finally relented when he saw it was going to be a foregone conclusion. The biggest booster of a Big Ten Hockey conference was that slimy a-hole Barry Alvarez to the east...who knows as much about hockey as the curly hair on my left testicle.

I'm still looking for any quote that suggests he relented. I remember seeing that suggestion here a few months ago, but never found anything to back it up. I agree Alvarez is a slime. In line of d-bags on this subject, he's #1. The Sue are way down the list.

Minnesota athletic director Joel Maturi: “It’s worth celebrating that a BCS conference institution in Penn State has joined the great landscape of college hockey. We are also pleased that the Big Ten has embraced this move by recommending that men’s hockey be added as an official conference sport.

[Cardinal]

So it's okay for the Gophers and Badgers to chase the money because they "had no choice," but for UND and others to do it is wrong and that makes them punks? Please. They are doing the same thing the Big 10 teams did, and that is following the lead of their school's administration. Guarantee you Lucia and Eaves would have rather stayed in the WCHA, and same goes for Hakstol, Gwoz, etc. They just don't have the convenient cover of the Big 10.

All of these programs are positioning themselves better financially, no more, no less.

There's a difference between Minnesota and Wisconsin on this. Maturi wasn't pushing for a BTHC. Alvarez was.

So the guy who is pushing the "PSLs" for hockey, raising ticket prices, etc. was against the BTHC? I highly doubt that. Maybe he didn't openly push for it like Alvarez did, but he knew it was coming regardless of his public stand, so why speak out for it and take the PR hit?

[Cardinal]

All of these programs are positioning themselves better financially, no more, no less.

Are they? (Serious question)

In their eyes, yes, which is all that matters right now, right?

[Doc Holliday]

In their eyes, yes, which is all that matters right now, right?

That's true.....and I'm sure there are many bean counters at all schools involved that know much more about the dollars & revenue than what I'm examining. I'm sure UND did their homework when it comes down to this. I just wonder if their answers written down are right.

[thinkbui]

The Gophers had nothing to do with it. You have argument towards "The Big Ten," but not the Gophers. The U does what the Big Ten says. Just the way it works.

Fair enough, but I'm pretty sure the UofM voted in the affirmative to build the BTHN. They may have only been 1/6th of the cause, but that's still 1/6th.

I'm not a fan of backing the Sue, but frankly they would be fools to stay in the WCHA. I see Wisconsin and Minnesota (more broadly the Big10) as the d-bags here. The Sue - not so much.

On edit: Denver, Colorado College, Nebraska-Omaha, Minnesota-Duluth and Miami (Ohio) are also bailing. How is it UND's fault and not theirs?

Maturi was quoted as not wanting to join the Big ten hockey conference. He finally relented when he saw it was going to be a foregone conclusion. The biggest booster of a Big Ten Hockey conference was that slimy a-hole Barry Alvarez to the east...who knows as much about hockey as the curly hair on my left testicle.

That and the all-in/all-out ultimatum from the conference forcing him to choose between playing in the new BTHC or giving up all the prestige Minnesota enjoys as a member of the Big Ten, which would have affected not only the entire Athletic department, but the entire University.

[Kelor]

That and the all-in/all-out ultimatum from the conference forcing him to choose between playing in the new BTHC or giving up all the prestige Minnesota enjoys as a member of the Big Ten, which would have affected not only the entire Athletic department, but the entire University.

This is another thing I'd like to see confirmed. As often as it has been said in here, I have found nothing concrete to suggest this is the case.

[ScoobyDoo]

Good article Cardinal. I agree, the glory days are now over. I personally don't think college hockey will recover or ever be the same again.

[FargoSiouxHater]

It seems their hands were tied even more. Eliminate those 5 teams and tell me one reason why UND should stick with a Mankato/St Cloud/Bemidji conference?

This is the part of it that I agree with. As much as it pains me to side with Sue here, I can't blame them for bolting as opposed to being in a conference the "leftovers" of the WCHA.

[Hobey Baker]

Per Schlossman, it's a done-deal.

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/a ... id/209049/

UND will soon announce it is leaving the men’s Western Collegiate Hockey Association for a new, startup conference in 2013-14, the Herald has learned from multiple sources.

An official announcement is expected next week.

At least five other teams will join UND in this league: Denver, Colorado College, Nebraska-Omaha, Minnesota-Duluth and Miami (Ohio).

I find it incredibly sad that a dominant college hockey league like the WCHA is ripped apart for the Big 10. This is not good for college hockey, IMO.

[SiouxFanatic]

I'm probably in the minority here but I'd rather have UND remain in the WCHA and simply have Bruce McLeod removed as commissioner. I think his departure alone would be a step up and in the right direction. It is fairly obvious that the schools are not happy with how Bruce McLeod has been running things(or lack thereof) in regards to what to do when Wisconsin and Minnesota leaves.

While we may all think this is a quick knee-jerk reaction, I've got to assume that UND, DU, CC, and the other schools spent a good amount of time researching/studying the idea of creating a new league. I have to guess that this new league is viable and worth it otherwise why cause further chaos than what there already is due to the pending formation of the BTHC?

Also, I'm glad to see there are more levelheaded Gopher fans here in comparison to USCHO, which is just a UND blamefest(aka kill the messenger scenario). Not saying UND doesn't deserve some blame but there is definitely plenty to go around.

[sunbone]

I think I hate Penn State even more than Wisconsin right now.

[SkiUMahLaw]

In response to Cardinal, to a degree timing is everything. Clearly, this would not have occurred but for the B1G. But after the B1G was announced, nobody believed the WCHA to be in peril. However, with the actions of the Stupor-6 right now, it throws all of D-1 college hockey into a major mess. But it was their choice to do so-- and looking out for perceived best interests that is doing it, not anything more.

With that in mind, the B1G was protecting one of its own in Penn State. Do you really expect hockey to take off in State College if they had to host Ferris State or UAH regularly? No chance. Even though MN is not as well-off by the decision, it did not have any ability to stop it from occurring-- and threatening to withdraw from a century-old Academic affiliation that funds billions of dollars per year in research over a few hundred thousand for a hockey program only is NOT a true "choice".

On the flip side, with UND and the rest, what is the problem with the WCHA? They made an affirmative choice to act in their immediate best interest and only their immediate interest. I don't see this as a stable conference at all-- some real disparity between D-1 and non-D-1 philosophies; school sizes and institutional hockey commitments here. In the WCHA, the bond was tight because of history-- and it kept these philosophy differences from dominating the story. But without that bond, it's all up in the air, unfortunately.

My criticism of UND is not their hypocrisy-- it's the short-term thinking that is doing it. Their hypocrisy is really an expectation...

[Cardinal]

In response to Cardinal, to a degree timing is everything. Clearly, this would not have occurred but for the B1G. But after the B1G was announced, nobody believed the WCHA to be in peril. However, with the actions of the Stupor-6 right now, it throws all of D-1 college hockey into a major mess. But it was their choice to do so-- and looking out for perceived best interests that is doing it, not anything more.

With that in mind, the B1G was protecting one of its own in Penn State. Do you really expect hockey to take off in State College if they had to host Ferris State or UAH regularly? No chance. Even though MN is not as well-off by the decision, it did not have any ability to stop it from occurring-- and threatening to withdraw from a century-old Academic affiliation that funds billions of dollars per year in research over a few hundred thousand for a hockey program only is NOT a true "choice".

On the flip side, with UND and the rest, what is the problem with the WCHA? They made an affirmative choice to act in their immediate best interest and only their immediate interest. I don't see this as a stable conference at all-- some real disparity between D-1 and non-D-1 philosophies; school sizes and institutional hockey commitments here. In the WCHA, the bond was tight because of history-- and it kept these philosophy differences from dominating the story. But without that bond, it's all up in the air, unfortunately.

My criticism of UND is not their hypocrisy-- it's the short-term thinking that is doing it. Their hypocrisy is really an expectation...

I'm sure the WCHA wasn't in peril once the Gophers and Bucky left, but I'm sure in the eyes of UND, DU, etc., they league was not going to be as well off financially, which is tough to argue with. Add in that they are fed up with the leadership and there's a chance to start a new league that -- again, in their eyes -- will be better and more profitable, I don't see how people can be pissed at them and the other WCHA teams for "trimming the fat" and moving on. Yeah, it sucks for the teams being left behind, but these schools need to lookout for themselves first and foremost.

I agree it would have been best to add Miami and maybe Notre Dame or someone else to the WCHA and keep it rolling, but obviously these departing schools had pretty strong reasons to bolt. I'm sure what those reasons are will come out over time.

[SkiUMahLaw]

I'm sure the WCHA wasn't in peril once the Gophers and Bucky left, but I'm sure in the eyes of UND, DU, etc., they league was not going to be as well off financially, which is tough to argue with. Add in that they are fed up with the leadership and there's a chance to start a new league that -- again, in their eyes -- will be better and more profitable, I don't see how people can be pissed at them and the other WCHA teams for "trimming the fat" and moving on. Yeah, it sucks for the teams being left behind, but these schools need to lookout for themselves first and foremost.

I agree it would have been best to add Miami and maybe Notre Dame or someone else to the WCHA and keep it rolling, but obviously these departing schools had pretty strong reasons to bolt. I'm sure what those reasons are will come out over time.

I agree with the "in their eyes" concept. And I also agree that such is all that matters, unfortunately.

It shows how important it was to keep Minnesota in the WCHA. It truly was the glue that bound the conference together. I think that allows us to be arrogant!

It also makes me question whether UMD is considering a D-1 move for all sports a la NDSU. Fortunately for them, tUMD is not in the MnSCU system, so it wasn't a one-for-all situation in their case. But I believe CC and UMD are the only schools in the Stupor-6 that are not D-1in all sports though...

[SiouxFanatic]

I'm sure the WCHA wasn't in peril once the Gophers and Bucky left, but I'm sure in the eyes of UND, DU, etc., they league was not going to be as well off financially, which is tough to argue with. Add in that they are fed up with the leadership and there's a chance to start a new league that -- again, in their eyes -- will be better and more profitable, I don't see how people can be pissed at them and the other WCHA teams for "trimming the fat" and moving on. Yeah, it sucks for the teams being left behind, but these schools need to lookout for themselves first and foremost.

I agree it would have been best to add Miami and maybe Notre Dame or someone else to the WCHA and keep it rolling, but obviously these departing schools had pretty strong reasons to bolt. I'm sure what those reasons are will come out over time.

What I put in bold is the cold hard truth of it all. Sucks, but it is the truth. Applies to every school.

I agree as well that it would've been best to just add Miami and Notre Dame to the WCHA but yeah...it is quite obvious that the schools have some sort of issue(must be big) with the WCHA HQ aka Bruce McLeod that made them choose to leave.

@SkiUMahLaw: You are correct about UMD and CC though Nebraska-Omaha has just begun the transition to Division I in all sports. They killed their football and D2 National Championship winning Wrestling team(s) to do it.

[SkiUMahLaw]

I agree as well that it would've been best to just add Miami and Notre Dame to the WCHA but yeah...it is quite obvious that the schools have some sort of issue(must be big) with the WCHA HQ aka Bruce McLeod that made them choose to leave.

I have to think the issue is bigger than just McLeod. Were it just one person, it would be over already and he would be gone.

I have zero actual evidence of this, but on a belief: it may be a philosophical issue of revenue sharing. Without having MN and WI, the X revenue is going to drop big time. How that pot was going to be split may be at issue. My guess is that McLeod was mandating the continuation of the old system of equal splits between all WCHA teams. I could see that some of the departing parties felt otherwise-- specifically, UND and DU. And if DU was going to go, so was CC. And if those three were going to go, UNO and UMD were not going to be left behind.

This may be a big issue of the FF were to leave the X in the future. Were it hosted in Grand Forks, does an equal split make sense?

Again, no grounds for promoting this as being true at this time, but I can see that philosophical issue playing a major role in this determination.

[team22tank]

What a joke all across the board. Maybe some schools out West (like Washington State) will add hockey and then those teams will create a super conference with Hockey East just to elaborate what a joke this is turning into.

There are 5 D1 teams in Minnesota they will now be scattered across 3 Conferences, that is an F'n' joke.

[sec 16 row16 seat 16 17]

sounds like minnesota goverment.

[team22tank]

sounds like minnesota goverment.

I don't know if I should laugh or cry?

[Hammy]

So it's okay for the Gophers and Badgers to chase the money because they "had no choice," but for UND and others to do it is wrong and that makes them punks? Please. They are doing the same thing the Big 10 teams did, and that is following the lead of their school's administration. Guarantee you Lucia and Eaves would have rather stayed in the WCHA, and same goes for Hakstol, Gwoz, etc. They just don't have the convenient cover of the Big 10.

All of these programs are positioning themselves better financially, no more, no less.

It is an apples and oranges situation. Do we have a choice? I guess in theory we all do. But realistically, we don't when you consider the big picture of our athletics. Our athletic department depends on the Big Ten. It is where our bread is buttered for the vast majority of our sports. It goes well beyond hockey. When the Big Ten admin want something, they get it. I think it was clear we really didn't want to go (the unanimous vote was more PR than anything) but the hockey team can't tell a conference "no" when we depend on that conference for our overall livelihood.

In contrast, a school like UND (and the like) had a choice. Their choice was to throw other programs under the bus because of "what ifs".

Even with this new conference, I fail to see how they think this is really going to match the BTHC. On paper for the time being, it does on the ice. But this situation isn't a snapshot of one year. It is a long term thing. They aren't going to come close to the media power and overall revenue that the BTHC. This new conference isn't going to do much of anything. Look at it as it stands right now... it is basically WCHA Lite. Especially if Notre Dame doesn't go along... and if that happens, it makes this decision look even more foolish.

[Hammy]

I guess I'm failing to see why this will be that much financially better than what the WCHA would provide.

Bingo. For the most part, the entities in this new conference aren't big money teams with large fan bases to fuel more and more revenue. Most of these six teams also don't have the kind of local market to provide big money to the conference via TV revenue. Denver would be the best chance but they only had 12 games broadcast on their local FSN (which would make one think they don't exactly get great ratings there if they won't do more). Not to mention, no conference brand cache, etc.

[Cardinal]

So it's okay for the Gophers and Badgers to chase the money because they "had no choice," but for UND and others to do it is wrong and that makes them punks? Please. They are doing the same thing the Big 10 teams did, and that is following the lead of their school's administration. Guarantee you Lucia and Eaves would have rather stayed in the WCHA, and same goes for Hakstol, Gwoz, etc. They just don't have the convenient cover of the Big 10.

All of these programs are positioning themselves better financially, no more, no less.

It is an apples and oranges situation. Do we have a choice? I guess in theory we all do. But realistically, we don't when you consider the big picture of our athletics. Our athletic department depends on the Big Ten. It is where our bread is buttered for the vast majority of our sports. It goes well beyond hockey. When the Big Ten admin want something, they get it. I think it was clear we really didn't want to go (the unanimous vote was more PR than anything) but the hockey team can't tell a conference "no" when we depend on that conference for our overall livelihood.

In contrast, a school like UND (and the like) had a choice. Their choice was to throw other programs under the bus because of "what ifs".

Even with this new conference, I fail to see how they think this is really going to match the BTHC. On paper for the time being, it does on the ice. But this situation isn't a snapshot of one year. It is a long term thing. They aren't going to come close to the media power and overall revenue that the BTHC. This new conference isn't going to do much of anything. Look at it as it stands right now... it is basically WCHA Lite. Especially if Notre Dame doesn't go along... and if that happens, it makes this decision look even more foolish.

I don't think there's any way they match it; but I do think it's fair to say they'll equal or surpass a Gopher and Badger-less WCHA. There's a lot of smart people at all of these schools that have spent a lot of time and money researching this. Could it fail? Sure. But I'm betting they have very good reasons to think they'll be no worse off -- and probably better -- when the dust settles. But again, they won't touch the Big Ten in terms of $.

[jallengarry]

[Maturi was quoted as not wanting to join the Big ten hockey conference. He finally relented when he saw it was going to be a foregone conclusion. The biggest booster of a Big Ten Hockey conference was that slimy a-hole Barry Alvarez to the east...who knows as much about hockey as the curly hair on my left testicle.

I'm still looking for any quote that suggests he relented. I remember seeing that suggestion here a few months ago, but never found anything to back it up. I agree Alvarez is a slime. In line of d-bags on this subject, he's #1. The Sue are way down the list.

Minnesota athletic director Joel Maturi: “It’s worth celebrating that a BCS conference institution in Penn State has joined the great landscape of college hockey. We are also pleased that the Big Ten has embraced this move by recommending that men’s hockey be added as an official conference sport.

Maturi said he didn't like it many times in public:

"The Big Ten Conference understandably feels that having hockey on the Big Ten Network will enhance the viewership. Nobody argues that,'' Maturi said, acknowledging his school receives millions of dollars from BTN and has a sense of obligation to its broadcast lineup.

"There is some disagreement as to whether we should have a Big Ten hockey conference. I, for one, have felt that wouldn't be good for college hockey. Some may not agree with me and I'm respectful of that because we all have differences of opinion."

[Hammy]

I don't think there's any way they match it; but I do think it's fair to say they'll equal or surpass a Gopher and Badger-less WCHA.

Possibly. But I don't think there is any doubt that the expenses are going to go up for most of these programs. I doubt attendance is going to go up at most of these schools. So I'd have to guess they are ultimately pinning their hopes on increased media revenue and conference tourney revenue.

Other than DU (which is an afterthought in their market), they don't reside in big markets so I don't see them getting a lot of pay off from the media avenue... it may be better than what the Big Ten-less WCHA would have received (maybe not) but enough to offset the increase in expenses they'll have? Questionable.

The conference tourney may not be as successful as the WCHA (even w/o MN and UW) given the teams are spread out and (once again) really don't have large fan bases. At least the Final Five was a central locale where fans of many local teams (even ones w/o a team involved) could still go. That's not going to happen in this new league where teams are healthy distances apart.

Unlike the BT teams, these six teams mention for the new conference don't have the athletic department revenue to handle losses very well. It is much more of a gamble than I think some people are acknowledging.

Having "smart" people doesn't make business entities immune from bad decisions that hurt the company badly. Plenty of businesses can attest to that

[RWD]

I know people have asked "Why CC and UMD?"

As for CC, Denver and UND are pretty much running the show here, I think. Maybe Miami too. CC is DU's biggest rival and probably the only game that DU sells out. Well, CC and UND. I don't know why anyone would think it was a puzzle that CC was invited.

So, as for UMD, there's probably a lot of reasons. Of course we are the national champions. Of the remaining options available, UMD has had the most postseason success. They have a brand new arena (so does Bemidji, but UMD's is better and bigger). They're not in the MnSCU system. They're in the best position to jump to D-1 if an opportunity comes up. Had they not won it all this year, maybe they wouldn't have been invited. But UMD is now a known commodity, at least for awhile. I'm sure they'll go back to sucking again some time, but UMD is... the best of the rest, I guess. They don't fit the mold, but who else is left that's a true D-1 school and not a play-up, and would be a better fit.

Bleah. I don't like this new league that much. I don't like that UMD may end up under UND's thumb. I think if the CCHA had been more stable, the WCHA would have remained intact. The WCHA would have been decent but the CCHA would have been a wasteland. The B10 doomed the CCHA far far more than it doomed the WCHA.

[Orion]

I'm seeing some similarity to the Big 12 in that this will be a conference that is controlled by a sub set of powerful institutions calling the shots while others are basically along for the ride. I can see this going down with the more influential schools in like UND, DU, ND, and Miami setting the rules and then asking the like of UMD and UNO if they want to come along for the ride. I think alot of people saw a 4 conference world coming in the future. The teams not in the Big 10, ECAC, HE, or 'Super Best Friends' are going to be hurting.

[WestCoastGopherGuy]

this super conference is bad a$$ now. but like any conference- it will develop bottom feeders over time. the super conference looks great now because all the teams happened to make the ncaas last year.. i think the Big Ten teams have 23 national titles in ncaa division 1 hockey. the teams in this super conference have 16 national titles in d1 hockey (if i counted right). omaha really isnt going to keep up in ncaas after making this move. dean blais wont be there forever and theres little talent to draw from in nebraska. i also think duluth might regret this move and end up a bottom feeder..the big question though for me is miami. with ohio state in the big ten i wouldnt be surprised to see ohio state manage a legit coach that can draw some legit prospects from that area. itll be interesting

hopefully notre dame stays out of the midwest conferences and heads east. if they do- we will be left with 2 conferences of 6 in the big ten and super six (assuming the wcha/ccha "left-overs" make their own conference). then the big ten can play 2 series a year against each big ten team, one series a year against each of the super six, and 3 or so additional non conference series (including a Minnesota Classic tournament over christmas with st cloud, bemidji and mankato). thats my best case scenario and IF that were to all pan out i would be happy. I know.. less speculation in the oil market

[Greyeagle]

This fat a$$' picture is on my dartboard.

[Armadillo]

This fat a$$' picture is on my dartboard.

Note to self: order customized toilet paper.

[WPoS]

this is all just the NC$$'s way of ensuring a non-all WCHA FF again....

Seriously this is quite the screw up....the WCHA, one of the best and strongest leagues is going to just go *POOF*

Are they really going to call it the "Super 6"? As in "Super-men" how very RALPH!

W

[team22tank]

this is all just the NC$$'s way of ensuring a non-all WCHA FF again....

Seriously this is quite the screw up....the WCHA, one of the best and strongest leagues is going to just go *POOF*

Are they really going to call it the "Super 6"? As in "Super-men" how very RALPH!

W

I hope they do call it "Super 6" or even "Better than the big ten" just to make a point of how much better their teams are than the B10s. Sure the big ten will have more $, more TV, more flash. But no doubt "Super 6" will have much better teams.

[Chris Eckes]

this is all just the NC$$'s way of ensuring a non-all WCHA FF again....

Seriously this is quite the screw up....the WCHA, one of the best and strongest leagues is going to just go *POOF*

Are they really going to call it the "Super 6"? As in "Super-men" how very RALPH!
W

well done sir!

[Doc Holliday]

So, as for UMD, there's probably a lot of reasons. Of course we are the national champions. Of the remaining options available, UMD has had the most postseason success. They have a brand new arena (so does Bemidji, but UMD's is better and bigger). They're not in the MnSCU system. They're in the best position to jump to D-1 if an opportunity comes up. Had they not won it all this year, maybe they wouldn't have been invited. But UMD is now a known commodity, at least for awhile. I'm sure they'll go back to sucking again some time, but UMD is... the best of the rest, I guess. They don't fit the mold, but who else is left that's a true D-1 school and not a play-up, and would be a better fit.

I think the market & arena has more to do with it than anything; them winning the national championship is secondary. Success can go in cycles. What if this decision was made around 2000-2003? St. Cloud was in a better spot competitive-wise than UMD.

Will be interesting to see though; Hammy nailed it in that revenue taken in may be similar to what the WCHA would have been, but expenses may negate that. What's UMD's 2nd closest conference foe? UNO? Western if you go by bus around the UP and down MI? And this doesn't even consider what the conference tournament will produce...

[bearpaw28]

Once the WCHA expanded to a point where everybody wasn't playing home and home series...it became vulnerable to change. Once the BIG TEN conf. became a reality, the WCHA lost a lot of panache absent MN and WI, so I do not fault North Dakota looking for better conf. options...because the league is not the same absent their rivalry with the Gophers and Badgers.

An 8 team Super Conf. would be better including Notre Dame (even with having to add Western Mich.) , but even a 6 team league with ND, Denver, CC, UMD, UNO and Miami of Ohio will restore the home and home series structure that most schools (and fans) prefer. It also avoids the most expensive roadtrip for all schools (to AA). Travel costs will go up for ND, UMD and Miami, but should be fairly neutral for Denver, CC and UNO.

If its a 6 team league, same number of non-conf. games as BIG 10...and while I don't like the 5 MN schools in 3 different conferences either...that ship sailed when the Gophers got strong-armed into joining the BIG TEN.

Barry Alvarez...he is the one who started this crap...then change in college hcokey was inevitable....for better or worse.

[ScoobyDoo]

It will never cease to amaze me that a TV station was at the crux of it all. No one watches hockey on TV.

[Chris Eckes]

It will never cease to amaze me that a TV station was at the crux of it all. No one watches hockey on TV.

Good point, Scoob. Amazing to think about.

[minnhkyruls]

This fat a$$' picture is on my dartboard.

Everytime I do PT with my Cadets I walk past the statue of this ........ guy.

[SouthTexGopher]

It will never cease to amaze me that a TV station was at the crux of it all. No one watches hockey on TV.

Good point, Scoob. Amazing to think about.

Ahem. Many of us do.

The Big Ten mainly consists of very large schools. The alumni base is massive and widespread. In the San Antonio/Austin area alone, there are over a thousand Minnesota grads. The tOSU, Michigan and Penn State alumni populations are even bigger...with Wisconsin, Iowa, Purdue, Indiana and Michigan State having populations as big as Minnesota's. I'd venture a guess that the situation is the same in most metro areas around the country. There's a reason why cable systems across the country carry the BTN.

TV is a big deal.

[Hobey Baker]

It is all about money .. selling advertising on the Big 10 Network!

[WPoS]

It will never cease to amaze me that a TV station was at the crux of it all. No one watches hockey on TV.

Good point, Scoob. Amazing to think about.

Ahem. Many of us do.

The Big Ten mainly consists of very large schools. The alumni base is massive and widespread. In the San Antonio/Austin area alone, there are over a thousand Minnesota grads. The tOSU, Michigan and Penn State alumni populations are even bigger...with Wisconsin, Iowa, Purdue, Indiana and Michigan State having populations as big as Minnesota's. I'd venture a guess that the situation is the same in most metro areas around the country. There's a reason why cable systems across the country carry the BTN.

TV is a big deal.

And after next year many more will be watching on TV with the seating changes at Mecca.

W

[sunbone]

It will never cease to amaze me that a TV station was at the crux of it all. No one watches hockey on TV.

Good point, Scoob. Amazing to think about.

Ahem. Many of us do.

The Big Ten mainly consists of very large schools. The alumni base is massive and widespread. In the San Antonio/Austin area alone, there are over a thousand Minnesota grads. The tOSU, Michigan and Penn State alumni populations are even bigger...with Wisconsin, Iowa, Purdue, Indiana and Michigan State having populations as big as Minnesota's. I'd venture a guess that the situation is the same in most metro areas around the country. There's a reason why cable systems across the country carry the BTN.

TV is a big deal.

Yeah, many of us do. But there aren't that many of "us." There is a reason the Gophers are one of only a couple of teams who get significant TV coverage. Yes, there are reasons the BTN is carried around the country. But none of those reasons are hockey. Which makes this whole deal even more stupid IMO.

[Bertogliat]

So right now (w/o ND and WMU) we're just talking about the better of half of the WCHA (at leat last year) plus Miami? Is Miami really worth all of the trouble?

So they are really just saying they don't want the "bottom feeders" from the WCHA and will start a new conference. Realizing (or not) that this new conference will eventually form it's own bottom feeders anyway and they be right where they where to began (only fewer Minnesota teams and a worse tourney).

Good luck with ALL that!

[Jupiter]

It sounds like WMU is staying put. So what's next?

Here is what I think should happen... Move Northern Michigan to the WCHA and have the CCHA add Huntsville. Then keep the leagues at 6 a piece.

New WCHA: SCSU, BSU, MSUM, AA, MTU and NMU.
New CCHA: AH, WMU, BG, FSU, AF, LSSU

How funny will it be when a team like Fairbanks or Bemidji knocks a team like Minnesota or North Dakota from the NCAA Tournament due to the increased auto-bids?

[monty]

The right thing for the UofM to do would be to agree to a "Minnesota College Hockey Showcase" instead of the holiday tourney. The 5 Minnesota college hockey teams would play some type of tourney at the X over the holidays. I am pretty sure FSN would want to broadcast it and it might be as successful as the WCHA final five. The 5 teams could agree to revenue sharing agreement. They could play for a trophy named after Herb Brooks. It would be the right thing to do.

[SkiUMahLaw]

I just hope that, with all of this going on, this serves as the incentive to do a "Beanpot" at the X and make it a reality. If done correctly and covered well, this could be a way of adding some extra cash to the have-nots and left-behind Minnesota schools. But a two game tournament that sells out the X could spread some wealth sufficient to give a lifeline to SCSU/BSU/Mankato.

Would the U be willing to forgo two potential home games? Perhaps. But it may be more profitable than a road trip, and four sold out games at the X would equal a sold out weekend for each of the parties involved at their home rinks, I would guess.

I guess that means tUMD, given your choice of association, I would consider that you've been uninvited to that party. Besides, we'd rather go to the DECC/Amsoil anyway so we can take over Canal Park.

Edit: Monty, we're thinking alike, and you beat me to the punch!

[sunbone]

The right thing for the UofM to do would be to agree to a "Minnesota College Hockey Showcase" instead of the holiday tourney. The 5 Minnesota college hockey teams would play some type of tourney at the X over the holidays. I am pretty sure FSN would want to broadcast it and it might be as successful as the WCHA final five. The 5 teams could agree to revenue sharing agreement. They could play for a trophy named after Herb Brooks. It would be the right thing to do.

Sorry, but a mid-season non-conference tourney playing for a DQ Cup like "Brooks Trophy" is never going to be as popular as the Final Five. It would be better than the Dodge Classic tourney I guess, but not even in the same ballpark as the Final Five.

[Hobey Baker]

I love the "Bean Pot" idea or a Holiday tournament at the X.

[thinkbui]

Since there would be 5 teams, how would seeding be done? 2 teams with weakest records face each other in play-in game like the 'old' Final Five?

[SkiUMahLaw]

Since there would be 5 teams, how would seeding be done? 2 teams with weakest records face each other in play-in game like the 'old' Final Five?

With NCAA game limitations and the need for certainty in scheduling, were it to work, you'd have only four that would participate every year (as a school that loses its play-in game could not then schedule another two games that it had slated to do). Since UMD already has made its bed and should be ok in the revenue department, my guess is that they would not be invited. So it would be BSU, SCSU, MSU-M and MN rotating each other on an annual basis.

Unless the NCAA grants an exception for one regular-season tournament as well. That could happen if the B1G has any sway, as Michigan could do the same with its brethren in the CCHA (think Mich, MSU, WMU, Ferris, Lake St, NMU and MTU).

[MAP]

I have read all the above posts with interest. I am struck by knowledgeable observers' (Hammy and Ski) skepticism about increased revenue flows from this new league for the member schools. Unlikely that they will get a lucrative TV deal (unless they add Notre Dame?) and attendance would not increase because of the formation of this new league. I wonder if this isn't a move by the "middle tier" teams in the WCHA and CCHA to drop the lower tier teams that don't produce sell out crowds etc. In other words, cut the expense of being involved with teams producing minimal revenue for the middle tier teams. This then leads to sharply defined tiers in college hockey: Big Ten Network and perhaps a revamped super league out East at the top of the revenue pyramid, the new conference and maybe a revised new conference in the East in the middle and finally the left overs.

BTW: when talking about tiers and top and middle, etc., I'm talking about revenue, not on ice performance.

[Melvin]

On the flip side, with UND and the rest, what is the problem with the WCHA? ...

Bruce MCLeod!!!