Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

It looks like Simon Fraser, in British Columbia, will be going to Division I. The WCHA would be an obvious place for them to play hockey.

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2016/04/16 ... y-program/" target="_blank

Happy for them, but WCHA membership for Simon Fraser would mean more travel for us, assuming BGSU remains in the WCHA.

Simon Fraser will be good for the Alaska schools.

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't hoping for a realignment (shifting eastward) before they joined the WCHA.

Perhaps the WCHA could break into divisions. We have a pretty good nucleus of an East Division with the Michigan schools and (I suppose) Alabama-Huntsville. But would the Minnesota schools tolerate being in a division with the Alaskas?

Another question: If the NCHC adds Arizona State, would Bowling Green be the obvious choice to balance out the conference? Or is it not that obvious?

They've hired a consultant group to let them know what they'd need to go division one. Still some big questions like money and an arena, but for a school that's been rumored to be going D1 for awhile it looks like they're actually making progress. It'd be an almost guarantee they'd join the WCHA. They're already conference mates with the Alaskas in other sports.

We should see some more movement once ASU announces (most likely the BTHC) but don't expect wholesale changes like last time.

Schadenfreude wrote:Perhaps the WCHA could break into divisions. We have a pretty good nucleus of an East Division with the Michigan schools and (I suppose) Alabama-Huntsville. But would the Minnesota schools tolerate being in a division with the Alaskas?

Another question: If the NCHC adds Arizona State, would Bowling Green be the obvious choice to balance out the conference? Or is it not that obvious?

I've always said splitting the league into divisions is a horrible plan. Two separate 6 team conferences (maybe have a scheduling agreement) is a much better plan. One league is guaranteed one auto-bid. Two leagues is guaranteed two auto-bids. With the way college hockey is right now, even with 12 teams, a poor showing non-conference could easily result in only one team in the NCAAs. The two 6 team leagues would have a better chance of getting 4 teams in (one at large and one auto each).

I wonder how quickly SFU could become pretty good. There would probably be some NCAA recruits from B.C. who would rather stay near home.

pdt1081 wrote:

Schadenfreude wrote:Perhaps the WCHA could break into divisions. We have a pretty good nucleus of an East Division with the Michigan schools and (I suppose) Alabama-Huntsville. But would the Minnesota schools tolerate being in a division with the Alaskas?

Another question: If the NCHC adds Arizona State, would Bowling Green be the obvious choice to balance out the conference? Or is it not that obvious?

I've always said splitting the league into divisions is a horrible plan. Two separate 6 team conferences (maybe have a scheduling agreement) is a much better plan. One league is guaranteed one auto-bid. Two leagues is guaranteed two auto-bids. With the way college hockey is right now, even with 12 teams, a poor showing non-conference could easily result in only one team in the NCAAs. The two 6 team leagues would have a better chance of getting 4 teams in (one at large and one auto each).

Six team conferences are a really bad idea. There's a reason the conferences with six teams either add more teams or are no more. You end up playing the same teams over and over and you have to hope no one drops their program or goes to another conference. Go under six teams? No more auto-bid. The division system works because there's the security of a strong conference, a plethora of opponents/competition, and the rough travel is more spread out over time.

10 years ago you might have been able to work out scheduling agreements. College hockey in 2016 is every team/conference for themselves.

BG84 wrote:I wonder how quickly SFU could become pretty good. There would probably be some NCAA recruits from B.C. who would rather stay near home.

they'd have a terrific recruiting base, and could ramp it up pretty quickly.
on the other hand, when they were here...we outshot them 61-13.

plus if they join the conference, we should get a name change to International Collegiate Hockey Conference, just to trump the Nachos.

poltergeist wrote: plus if they join the conference, we should get a name change to International Collegiate Hockey Conference, just to trump the Nachos.

I like it!

Or, the WCHA could become the World Collegiate Hockey Association.

The new logo:

BG84 wrote:I wonder how quickly SFU could become pretty good. There would probably be some NCAA recruits from B.C. who would rather stay near home.

Quinnipiac has recruited BC heavily and it's worked in their favor.

Thought of this thread the other day when I read this article. Doesn't include Simon Fraser, but liked the set up and idea

http://www.sbncollegehockey.com/2016/4/ ... rth-dakota

I like that set up, too. Bring back the CCHA!

A cheeky lad Dilks is.

Schadenfreude wrote:I like that set up, too. Bring back the CCHA!

WHAT HE SAID!!!