Countdown to 2013-2014Brad Schlossman confirmed what he essentially broke: There is the new conference going to go down the first year the BTHC is in existence.
Here's the story:
The full statement:
We are pleased to announce that six top NCAA Division I ice hockey programs will become founding members of a newly formed hockey conference, which will begin competition for the 2013-14 season. The six institutions are Colorado College, University of Denver, Miami University, University of Minnesota Duluth, University of Nebraska Omaha and University of North Dakota.
We understand and appreciate the widespread interest in developments relating to the formation of the new hockey conference. More information will be provided about the initiatives that have been undertaken, as well as the next steps involved, at a news conference in Colorado Springs this Wednesday, July 13. Our programs look forward to continued associations with our current leagues, the WCHA and CCHA, for the next two seasons.
Additional information about Wednesday’s news conference will be forthcoming in the next few days. There will be no further comment from athletic directors, coaches or other officials from any of the institutions until Wednesday’s news conference.
I guess it has been pretty hashed out. But here's the major themes I've been seeing in comment sections:
1. BTHC started the dominoes falling. The Big Ten Hockey conference, in my opinion, did set all of this up by completely changing the landscape of college hockey from the traditional league and divisional mindset to more of a modern business perspective where TV deals and $$$ mean more than tradition and balance. Yes, there are aspects involved that make sense for the conference, but it seems like the pros don't outweigh the cons unless you are a supporter of a Big 10 team.
2. The WCHA disintegration is largely due to the WCHA leadership (or lack thereof). Goon and many others seem pretty dead set on this, but I'm STILL not sold (even after Goon called me to tell me that my perspective on this is wrong!). McLeod didn't come across as being very strong in the face of apparent crisis. I agree. He hasn't looked good many times in the past as well (I seem to recall the member schools basically bludgeoning him into admitting BSU and UNO). Greg Shepherd is just a stooge and meaningless in this case but I throw his name into this because he's a buffoon just like McLeod. In any case, my view is this: If the member schools really didn't like McLeod, they could have simply canned him. They didn't even after a bunch of bad things happened. My view is this: UND, CC, UMD, and DU didn't care much for McLeod and essentially wanted him gone. The other schools, especially the smaller schools like UAA and MTU, disagreed with the other schools. So... "the big four" couldn't garner the votes or whatnot to give McLeod the boot. So they walked and took UNO with them.
But I maintain that the WCHA administration is just one nail in the coffin. The major issue is, of course, money. The BTHC (I prefer the Big Ten Conference of Hockey so I can call it the BTCH.. lovin' that) teams are looking out for themselves and that forces other teams to do the same or flounder in mediocrity. These teams bolted for the same thing. Unfortunately, I'm not so sure it is going to be as lucrative as they expect. Likewise, sticking around wouldn't have been any better. So, it was a lose lose situation.
3. It's all UND's fault. I think it is going to be UND's fault because UND is the biggest name (despite DU being just as notable in the DI college hockey world) in the collegiate niche sport associated with the "Super League." No one will blame Miami or UNO or CC or UMD. They're all relatively small fish. That leaves DU and UND. I always thought DU and McLeod got along famously. After all, Gwoz or the DU AD had VERY easy access to McLeod. DU is a small school in a big city. That doesn't mean alot in this issue but it's all I can dream up. I'm not quite certain why, despite all of the schools that are splitting being pivotal in this process, DU isn't given the share of scrutiny that UND is being given.
4. This is the end to some of the programs. I can't much argue with this. I think most will survive but I still can't help but believe that financially strapped programs such as BGSU, LSSU, and perhaps Ferris State and Northern Michigan may end up in hot water over this. Hot water on ice usually produces a sinking feeling... And unless there's a lot of under the table secrecy that is unheard of in the days of information freedom, there's not a whole lot of schools looking to add DI Hockey. I feel that, if we're still at 59 DI hockey teams in 2016, it will be a miracle. If we increase, then Paul Kelly and College Hockey, Inc. should be deified.
5. There is going to be some mighty hard feelings even without the blame game. This is going to be the reality. I'd love to blame the BTCH (I'm rolling with it. Sue me) for this, but when Penn State announced they were going DI, I don't think anyone was surprised at the formation of the BTHC so it is a sad departure and one fraught with some bitterness, but not all that much animosity. Everyone knows what the Big 10 stands for so this is par for the course, even though the scale was a bit bigger. However, the CHSL's formation comes with a lot of mystery behind the closed doors of the WCHA meetings, some apparent built up angst certainly between some schools and the league office and perhaps even between the schools themselves... It's just not an amicable split. It's simply going to be a rough 2 years ahead of us with unknowns galore. With McLeod being rather untrustworthy to begin with, does he act professionally towards the 5 departing teams or does he throw bones to those who chose to stay? As terrifying as these conspiracy theories may be to those who believe in them, the best way to find out is to watch how the officials treat UND, DU, UMD, UNO, and CC this next two years. If any other WCHA teams, such as BSU, get the invite, throw their name into that hat as well.
.jpg)
