The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Torn about this. Would be good for NCHC. Would be really bad for the new WCHA, who I want to be able to maintain multi-bids ever year.

Brovol will be by any minute now to lecture us on how much better it would have been for us to join the new WCHA.

http://www.wcha.com/men/pres1516/201607/jul13wcm.php

I think MSU and ASU would make the league far more balanced.

(07-13-2016 04:53 PM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  Torn about this. Would be good for NCHC. Would be really bad for the new WCHA, who I want to be able to maintain multi-bids ever year.

Brovol will be by any minute now to lecture us on how much better it would have been for us to join the new WCHA.

http://www.wcha.com/men/pres1516/201607/jul13wcm.php

Wouldn't it be a lot better being in the WCHA? Our program sure has gone to $hit in the NCHC.

(07-13-2016 07:09 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 04:53 PM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  Torn about this. Would be good for NCHC. Would be really bad for the new WCHA, who I want to be able to maintain multi-bids ever year.

Brovol will be by any minute now to lecture us on how much better it would have been for us to join the new WCHA.

http://www.wcha.com/men/pres1516/201607/jul13wcm.php

Wouldn't it be a lot better being in the WCHA? Our program sure has gone to $hit in the NCHC.

News flash: The new WCHA is DYING a slow death. Travel is much too expensive. The best team wants to leave, marking it a one-big league. How much longer will the new WCHA exist if one of its two best teams leaves?

If we would have joined the new WCHA, it would have been a nice five year run. Those teams are screwed.

Was hoping for BG. Would have balanced things out east.

(07-13-2016 06:54 PM)JSB3 Wrote:  I think MSU and ASU would make the league far more balanced.

I suspect this is exactly what is in the works. Heard rumors MSU applied with the understanding that they would be approved if, and only if, ASU landed in the NCHC.

(07-13-2016 07:24 PM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 07:09 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 04:53 PM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  Torn about this. Would be good for NCHC. Would be really bad for the new WCHA, who I want to be able to maintain multi-bids ever year.

Brovol will be by any minute now to lecture us on how much better it would have been for us to join the new WCHA.

http://www.wcha.com/men/pres1516/201607/jul13wcm.php

Wouldn't it be a lot better being in the WCHA? Our program sure has gone to $hit in the NCHC.

News flash: The new WCHA is DYING a slow death. Travel is much too expensive. The best team wants to leave, marking it a one-big league. How much longer will the new WCHA exist if one of its two best teams leaves?

If we would have joined the new WCHA, it would have been a nice five year run. Those teams are screwed.

Not sure where you are getting this information, but I believe it is inaccurate.

As far as prognostications go; mine have been spot on since WMU joined the NCHC, and yours have been wrong. But keep guessing Charm. One day the blind squirrel is bound to find an acorn.

It sounds like judge bum is happy the team had a hard time the last year so he can be right.

(07-15-2016 12:40 PM)brovol Wrote:  Not sure where you are getting this information, but I believe it is inaccurate.

As far as prognostications go; mine have been spot on since WMU joined the NCHC, and yours have been wrong. But keep guessing Charm. One day the blind squirrel is bound to find an acorn.

What, exactly, am I wrong about? Here's a tip: First, remove your head from your rear. Second, get a clue about the modern college hockey landscape.

The new WCHA is an absurdly expensive league. Some teams are making two separate trips to Alaska. I wouldn bet that some teams are also making a trip to Huntsville on top of this. How can they afford it? Mankato is about to leave. Who is going to replace them? Air Force? Get real.

There is going to be more and more realignment in college hockey over the next 10 years. The NCHC is growing and is subject to the whims of the old Minnesota WCHA members. One of the Alaska schools could drop varsity hockey all together.

So...in short: You're clueless. The new WCHA might have been a good fit for WMU for a handful of years, but KB probably saw the writing on the wall that the league, in its current composition, wouldn't last long and that the NCHC was a much more stable and promising option.

Thank God and G0d KB was listening to smarter people than Brovol. Scoreboard: Intelligent hockey fans 1, Brovol 0.

It's all over hockey news that WCHA is having financial issues judge bum.

You two bozos can convince yourselves that you are right about anything you want, being the "web geniuses" that you think you are, but you thought the NCHC was going to bring a great boost to WMU hockey, and turn the progress we had been making over the previous few seasons into national prominence. You were so excited that we were in with the cool hockey schools, and now you could tell all your Big 10 buddies that your college was in a better conference than theirs. Your egos, riding on the coat tails of WMU hockey, had finally made it. And then you got pissed at me because of my prediction, before we had ever played a game in the NCHC, that WMU was at a very significant disadvantage as compared to the other extremely successful hockey schools in the new league, and that we would struggle in the new league, then lose the momentum that WMU hockey had gained, ultimately leaving us as a perennial doormat in this super conference, much like the football lackies in the SEC. While I appologize for urinating on your circle jerk Charm and Diaper, you are hard pressed to chalanging the accuracy of my prognostication. Thus far at least, I have been clairvoyant.

I have never argued that this was either an easy choise for KB, or that the WCHA was a long term guarantee of success. However, I don't appologize for maintaining the the WCHA was, and is still, our best option. Alaska should be dumped from that league, but otherwise, it is a quality and competitive conference, with local ties and interest, and is a place where WMU fits well in terms of resources and level of play. We can consistently do well in the WCHA, whereas that is clearly not the case in the NCHC. Indeed, I believe we could conceivably lose our hockey program if we stay in the NCHC.

Next time you two halfwits want to tag team me, bring someone along who is less comically stupid.

(07-16-2016 10:34 AM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 12:40 PM)brovol Wrote:  Not sure where you are getting this information, but I believe it is inaccurate.

As far as prognostications go; mine have been spot on since WMU joined the NCHC, and yours have been wrong. But keep guessing Charm. One day the blind squirrel is bound to find an acorn.

What, exactly, am I wrong about? Here's a tip: First, remove your head from your rear. Second, get a clue about the modern college hockey landscape.

The new WCHA is an absurdly expensive league. Some teams are making two separate trips to Alaska. I wouldn bet that some teams are also making a trip to Huntsville on top of this. How can they afford it? Mankato is about to leave. Who is going to replace them? Air Force? Get real.

There is going to be more and more realignment in college hockey over the next 10 years. The NCHC is growing and is subject to the whims of the old Minnesota WCHA members. One of the Alaska schools could drop varsity hockey all together.

So...in short: You're clueless. The new WCHA might have been a good fit for WMU for a handful of years, but KB probably saw the writing on the wall that the league, in its current composition, wouldn't last long and that the NCHC was a much more stable and promising option.

Thank God and G0d KB was listening to smarter people than Brovol. Scoreboard: Intelligent hockey fans 1, Brovol 0.

You do know the the first place team in the WCHA didn't earn a tournament bid this year right? While in the NCHC the five teams made it

Brovol - this season was a fluke, I think there were a few bad personalities that didn't mix well with Murrays coaching style. Recruiting continues to improve and last last season we began to see the fruits of the Murray recruiting difference last year when our freshman led the team on offense.

(07-17-2016 03:27 AM)JSB3 Wrote:  

(07-16-2016 10:34 AM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 12:40 PM)brovol Wrote:  Not sure where you are getting this information, but I believe it is inaccurate.

As far as prognostications go; mine have been spot on since WMU joined the NCHC, and yours have been wrong. But keep guessing Charm. One day the blind squirrel is bound to find an acorn.

What, exactly, am I wrong about? Here's a tip: First, remove your head from your rear. Second, get a clue about the modern college hockey landscape.

The new WCHA is an absurdly expensive league. Some teams are making two separate trips to Alaska. I wouldn bet that some teams are also making a trip to Huntsville on top of this. How can they afford it? Mankato is about to leave. Who is going to replace them? Air Force? Get real.

There is going to be more and more realignment in college hockey over the next 10 years. The NCHC is growing and is subject to the whims of the old Minnesota WCHA members. One of the Alaska schools could drop varsity hockey all together.

So...in short: You're clueless. The new WCHA might have been a good fit for WMU for a handful of years, but KB probably saw the writing on the wall that the league, in its current composition, wouldn't last long and that the NCHC was a much more stable and promising option.

Thank God and G0d KB was listening to smarter people than Brovol. Scoreboard: Intelligent hockey fans 1, Brovol 0.

You do know the the first place team in the WCHA didn't earn a tournament bid this year right? While in the NCHC the five teams made it

What I do know is that WMU hasn't made it to the NCAA tournament in either the NCHC or the WCHA; because we have lost way too many games in the NCHC , and haven't been playing in the WCHA. The WCHA has had multiple bids in prior years, and it is guaranteed at least one.

Every year, over the past four years, our Bronco hockey brethren on this forum have shared a collective wisdom that the current recruiting class has been outstanding. Go back and read the posts. Yet every year we have been bad. You say this year has been a fluke, and it is a chemistry issue. I'll tell you what makes good team chemistry ; winning. Losing does just the opposite, and hurts recruiting, and hurts attendance, and hurts the energy of the program, and enthusiasm within the school for the program. This is exactly what has happened to WMU hockey since joining the league.

Those in the WCHA have done just fine. In fact, the change resurrected some teams who had been struggling as a program before the change. Mich tech, bowling Green , and noone can argue the success of Ferris. Minnesota state has obviously done well too. If WMU had gone to the WCHA when the CCHA fell, I am confident, given the momentum of our program, and our resources compared to the other schools in the WCHA , we would have likely made to NCAA a couple times, and had seasons which would keep the momentum of the program high.

The thing is, lookin back we have hindsight, but even with that hindsight so many of you refuse to acknowledge what you are looking at, and still want to try jamming a square peg in a round hole.

(07-17-2016 06:10 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 03:27 AM)JSB3 Wrote:  

(07-16-2016 10:34 AM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 12:40 PM)brovol Wrote:  Not sure where you are getting this information, but I believe it is inaccurate.

As far as prognostications go; mine have been spot on since WMU joined the NCHC, and yours have been wrong. But keep guessing Charm. One day the blind squirrel is bound to find an acorn.

What, exactly, am I wrong about? Here's a tip: First, remove your head from your rear. Second, get a clue about the modern college hockey landscape.

The new WCHA is an absurdly expensive league. Some teams are making two separate trips to Alaska. I wouldn bet that some teams are also making a trip to Huntsville on top of this. How can they afford it? Mankato is about to leave. Who is going to replace them? Air Force? Get real.

There is going to be more and more realignment in college hockey over the next 10 years. The NCHC is growing and is subject to the whims of the old Minnesota WCHA members. One of the Alaska schools could drop varsity hockey all together.

So...in short: You're clueless. The new WCHA might have been a good fit for WMU for a handful of years, but KB probably saw the writing on the wall that the league, in its current composition, wouldn't last long and that the NCHC was a much more stable and promising option.

Thank God and G0d KB was listening to smarter people than Brovol. Scoreboard: Intelligent hockey fans 1, Brovol 0.

You do know the the first place team in the WCHA didn't earn a tournament bid this year right? While in the NCHC the five teams made it

What I do know is that WMU hasn't made it to the NCAA tournament in either the NCHC or the WCHA; because we have lost way too many games in the NCHC , and haven't been playing in the WCHA. The WCHA has had multiple bids in prior years, and it is guaranteed at least one.

Every year, over the past four years, our Bronco hockey brethren on this forum have shared a collective wisdom that the current recruiting class has been outstanding. Go back and read the posts. Yet every year we have been bad. You say this year has been a fluke, and it is a chemistry issue. I'll tell you what makes good team chemistry ; winning. Losing does just the opposite, and hurts recruiting, and hurts attendance, and hurts the energy of the program, and enthusiasm within the school for the program. This is exactly what has happened to WMU hockey since joining the league.

Those in the WCHA have done just fine. In fact, the change resurrected some teams who had been struggling as a program before the change. Mich tech, bowling Green , and noone can argue the success of Ferris. Minnesota state has obviously done well too. If WMU had gone to the WCHA when the CCHA fell, I am confident, given the momentum of our program, and our resources compared to the other schools in the WCHA , we would have likely made to NCAA a couple times, and had seasons which would keep the momentum of the program high.

The thing is, lookin back we have hindsight, but even with that hindsight so many of you refuse to acknowledge what you are looking at, and still want to try jamming a square peg in a round hole.

You have no idea, every team in the WCHa with the exception of BGSU, MSU Mankato, Michigan tech and FSU are traditional tier two schools in the modern college hockey. It's the harsh truth to college hockey that some teams are big fish and some small. In the former CCHA and WCHA the teams in the current WCHA were small fish and thus were passed over for other conference opportunities. This means the WCHA is not a top notch conference. The competition is not as good with lesser talent and that will only grow over time as these teams continue to miss the NCAA tournament while having good records because they only beat low level teams who don't have success in inter league play to improve there pairwise. These lesser conferences such as the WCHA and Atlanic are irrelevant in the national college hockey landscape. If WMU joins the WCHA it will be good at first but then will become just another lower tier WCHA school. In the NCHC WMU has the ability to be a championship contender with the correct recruiting, but they couldn't do that with NCHC. To be a top team you need to play other top teams. I hope I've began to explain how extemely wrong you are. In all honesty, every time I see one of your long nonsensical comments I feel like punching you for wanting to doom this program in the doomed WCHA. No offense just being honest. Any other WCHA school would kill to be in our position. We were great in a strong CCHA and we will return to that in the NCHC with the right players. We came in last place before the Blashill season and trip to the tourney. It will take the right player it I believe we are still in rebuild mode after losing 4 NHL caliber dman and 5 NHL caliber forwards in the past three years. We will be extremely good it's just a matter of when. But with this years recruiting class we are well on our way. This year will at the least be better. Wisconsin has struggled mighty hard for the last 5 years so does that mean they need to leave the big ten and go to the WCHA and dominate against lesser teams in a lesser conference? Is it no because they are Wisconsin? Don't you want us to have the same reputation as Wisconsin? Don't you want us to be a top tier program? Please stop this madness about the WCHA you are absolutely nuts.

(07-17-2016 09:46 AM)JSB3 Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 06:10 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 03:27 AM)JSB3 Wrote:  

(07-16-2016 10:34 AM)Charm City Bronco Wrote:  

(07-15-2016 12:40 PM)brovol Wrote:  Not sure where you are getting this information, but I believe it is inaccurate.

As far as prognostications go; mine have been spot on since WMU joined the NCHC, and yours have been wrong. But keep guessing Charm. One day the blind squirrel is bound to find an acorn.

What, exactly, am I wrong about? Here's a tip: First, remove your head from your rear. Second, get a clue about the modern college hockey landscape.

The new WCHA is an absurdly expensive league. Some teams are making two separate trips to Alaska. I wouldn bet that some teams are also making a trip to Huntsville on top of this. How can they afford it? Mankato is about to leave. Who is going to replace them? Air Force? Get real.

There is going to be more and more realignment in college hockey over the next 10 years. The NCHC is growing and is subject to the whims of the old Minnesota WCHA members. One of the Alaska schools could drop varsity hockey all together.

So...in short: You're clueless. The new WCHA might have been a good fit for WMU for a handful of years, but KB probably saw the writing on the wall that the league, in its current composition, wouldn't last long and that the NCHC was a much more stable and promising option.

Thank God and G0d KB was listening to smarter people than Brovol. Scoreboard: Intelligent hockey fans 1, Brovol 0.

You do know the the first place team in the WCHA didn't earn a tournament bid this year right? While in the NCHC the five teams made it

What I do know is that WMU hasn't made it to the NCAA tournament in either the NCHC or the WCHA; because we have lost way too many games in the NCHC , and haven't been playing in the WCHA. The WCHA has had multiple bids in prior years, and it is guaranteed at least one.

Every year, over the past four years, our Bronco hockey brethren on this forum have shared a collective wisdom that the current recruiting class has been outstanding. Go back and read the posts. Yet every year we have been bad. You say this year has been a fluke, and it is a chemistry issue. I'll tell you what makes good team chemistry ; winning. Losing does just the opposite, and hurts recruiting, and hurts attendance, and hurts the energy of the program, and enthusiasm within the school for the program. This is exactly what has happened to WMU hockey since joining the league.

Those in the WCHA have done just fine. In fact, the change resurrected some teams who had been struggling as a program before the change. Mich tech, bowling Green , and noone can argue the success of Ferris. Minnesota state has obviously done well too. If WMU had gone to the WCHA when the CCHA fell, I am confident, given the momentum of our program, and our resources compared to the other schools in the WCHA , we would have likely made to NCAA a couple times, and had seasons which would keep the momentum of the program high.

The thing is, lookin back we have hindsight, but even with that hindsight so many of you refuse to acknowledge what you are looking at, and still want to try jamming a square peg in a round hole.

You have no idea, every team in the WCHa with the exception of BGSU, MSU Mankato, Michigan tech and FSU are traditional tier two schools in the modern college hockey. It's the harsh truth to college hockey that some teams are big fish and some small. In the former CCHA and WCHA the teams in the current WCHA were small fish and thus were passed over for other conference opportunities. This means the WCHA is not a top notch conference. The competition is not as good with lesser talent and that will only grow over time as these teams continue to miss the NCAA tournament while having good records because they only beat low level teams who don't have success in inter league play to improve there pairwise. These lesser conferences such as the WCHA and Atlanic are irrelevant in the national college hockey landscape. If WMU joins the WCHA it will be good at first but then will become just another lower tier WCHA school. In the NCHC WMU has the ability to be a championship contender with the correct recruiting, but they couldn't do that with NCHC. To be a top team you need to play other top teams. I hope I've began to explain how extemely wrong you are. In all honesty, every time I see one of your long nonsensical comments I feel like punching you for wanting to doom this program in the doomed WCHA. No offense just being honest. Any other WCHA school would kill to be in our position. We were great in a strong CCHA and we will return to that in the NCHC with the right players. We came in last place before the Blashill season and trip to the tourney. It will take the right player it I believe we are still in rebuild mode after losing 4 NHL caliber dman and 5 NHL caliber forwards in the past three years. We will be extremely good it's just a matter of when. But with this years recruiting class we are well on our way. This year will at the least be better. Wisconsin has struggled mighty hard for the last 5 years so does that mean they need to leave the big ten and go to the WCHA and dominate against lesser teams in a lesser conference? Is it no because they are Wisconsin? Don't you want us to have the same reputation as Wisconsin? Don't you want us to be a top tier program? Please stop this madness about the WCHA you are absolutely nuts.

Your comments are barely worthy of response. You must not watch college hockey, and instead think it works the same as football. It doesn't. The WCHA is more than relevant, and competes favorably at the highest level. Ask the folks at Ferris, who have enjoyed great runs, worthy of any conference. Likewise, other schools in the WCHA, who you feel are insignificant, have been in the big show. College hockey has great parity. And the distinctions between the "big fish" and the "small fish" as you describe them, changes by the year, and is much smaller that you apparently can comprehend. The NCHC has not put four or five teams in each year, as you would like to believe, but even if they had, it goes to further my point. The bottom line is that WMU isn't making the tournament , which is apparently just fine with you. It isn't for me.

Quit ignoring the evidence in front of you. WMU has been hurt by the NCHC. And on the other hand, several schools in the WCHA have very much benefitted from that league. The more you say the more obvious your ignorance becomes. If you think it would be pathetic to be in the WCHA, I can't imagine what you think of the Mid American Conference.

(07-17-2016 12:04 PM)brovol Wrote:  The NCHC has not put four or five teams in each year, as you would like to believe.

NCAA bids by conference since the 2013-14 season:

2013-14
NCHC: 3 (SCSU, North Dakota, Denver)
WCHA: 2 (Ferris, MSU-Mankato)

2014-15
NCHC: 6 (Omaha, Miami, Denver, UMD, North Dakota, SCSU)
WCHA: 2 (MSU-Mankato, Michigan Tech)

2015-16
NCHC: 4 (UMD, North Dakota, SCSU, Denver)
WCHA: 1 (Ferris)

Over three seasons, the NCHC has produced a total of 13 bids (average: 4.33 per season out of an eight-team conference).

Over three seasons, the WCHA has produced 5 bids (average: 1.67 per season out of a 10-team conference).

There's no question we need to raise our level of play, but I'll take my chances in the league where if you finish in the top four - maybe even top five - of the conference, you're probably headed to the NCAA tournament.

Judge bum only respects his own bullchit

(07-17-2016 02:17 PM)The Colonel Wrote:  

(07-17-2016 12:04 PM)brovol Wrote:  The NCHC has not put four or five teams in each year, as you would like to believe.

NCAA bids by conference since the 2013-14 season:

2013-14
NCHC: 3 (SCSU, North Dakota, Denver)
WCHA: 2 (Ferris, MSU-Mankato)

2014-15
NCHC: 6 (Omaha, Miami, Denver, UMD, North Dakota, SCSU)
WCHA: 2 (MSU-Mankato, Michigan Tech)

2015-16
NCHC: 4 (UMD, North Dakota, SCSU, Denver)
WCHA: 1 (Ferris)

Over three seasons, the NCHC has produced a total of 13 bids (average: 4.33 per season out of an eight-team conference).

Over three seasons, the WCHA has produced 5 bids (average: 1.67 per season out of a 10-team conference).

There's no question we need to raise our level of play, but I'll take my chances in the league where if you finish in the top four - maybe even top five - of the conference, you're probably headed to the NCAA tournament.

Good info. First, it confirms that more often than not the WCHA is a multiple bid conference. But the real question is the one you mentioned, and that is, which conference will lead to more success for WMU. If NCAA bids are the measure of success ( and I would agree that NCAA bids are a good measure), then the question should be whether it is easier to be one of the top two teams in the WCHA, or one of the top four teams in the NCHC. Chew on that for a bit fellas, but before you do, consider that in both conferences it isn't just the regular season that matters, but also the conference tournament. Where would WMU do best; the NCHC tournament, played in Minnesota, or the WCHA tournament played in Grand Rapids?

While we are at it, consider the past three seasons, and the momentum tha WMU had leading into the first year of the NCHC. If you all are being totally honest, how many of you honestly think that if we had been in the WCHA these past three years that we wouldn't have done well, made the NCAA tournament one or two years, and maintained the momentum that we had?

This is a legitimate debate, and I haven't gotten disrespectful until the two douchebags started there moronic blabber. Colonel, I have no issue with you. I can respectfully disagree if you believe that the NCHC is the better fit for WMU, and I have always known that I have been in the minority on this. The other two simply don't have a clue, or an ability to assess facts.

Strawman judge bum