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

(10-11-2017 06:41 PM)brovol Wrote:  It wouldn't shock me to at some point see the NCHC and at least the most committed WCHA schools merge, and then have an East and West division, to help with some travel costs. It would not hurt the nchc brand, as all its marquee schools would remain. Just pure speculation.

I see that more likely then the posters on the main boards who think WMU/BGSU/Canisius/Ferris St and few others would form their own, new conference.

(10-11-2017 05:29 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 12:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-09-2017 08:03 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-09-2017 11:25 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-08-2017 07:30 PM)brovol Wrote:  Not a victory lap. My team lost. If you pay a little attention you will see that I said nothing whatsoever and Charm sends his post, clearly in my direction, as if one game into the season he established that WCHA teams cannot compete on the same ice with NCHC teams like WMU. My post was a retort. If you care to discipline for cocky provicating post, do so with the village provocatier, not the guy who is responding to the sucker punch.

And the only way you can say I lost the "argument " is if you think it is a good thing for WMU to finish at or near the bottom of its conference three out of four years, with its best year finishing in third place out of eight. If that is a "win" for you brother, your standards are so low I wouldn't stoop so low as to engage you in an "argument ". But enjoy the glory.

My standard is better hockey. The Broncos clearly have better talent and play better hockey because they are in the best conference in college hockey. It attracts better recruits. We're still relatively early into this, but the freshmen who have entered the picture this year is just another sign of how strong this program is right now. We lost a lot of talent & experience this off-season.

Yes, it's much harder to finish high in the standings in the NCHC than the WCHA. Nobody can dispute that. I'd rather have Bronco hockey compete at a higher level, have the likes of Denver, Duluth, & North Dakota come to Lawson every year rather than drop down to a weaker conference and see inferior opponents. I'd rather be in hockey's SEC over the Sun Belt.

WMU + NCHC = win

Fair enough. I disagree that we have better talent now, and don't think that we will unless we are consistently at or near the top of our conference. That will always be tough in the NCHC. And while you would rather see ND, Denver and Duluth, most folks that come to Bronco hockey games would much rather see a lousy MSU or UM team play at Lawson, and while you and I know those nchc teams are much better hockey schools, to the average bronco fan Duluth is no more game worthy than Michigan Tech. Lastly, while I am the first to agree the NCHC is one of the best if not the best leagues in the country, there is relative parity in college hockey which doesn't exist in football. SEC schools in football generally will destroy Sun Belt schools when they play. Even the best team in the NCHC could lose to an Atlantic Conference or a WCHA team, and they do.

But regardless, we all want the same thing in a solid WMU hockey program that competes consistently for league titles and a chance to make a run in the NCAA tournament. If that happens in the NCHC I am delighted. If it doesn't, and if our hockey program becomes dormant, I will be disappointed,as I was for the first several years in this conference.

BTW...my Sun Belt comparison...this is from a USCHO article today:

"the WCHA’s record winning percentage against other conferences has continued to drop, all the way to a .279 mark a season ago, worst in the nation."

That seems pretty Sun Belt-ish to me.

Comparing hockey conferences with college football conferences simply does not hold water. But if, for argument's sake, you think that if Western Michigan got an offer to join the SEC in football that we should take that, you have a naivety with respect to college sports which clearly compromises your credibility here my friend. If Western were to be in the SEC, we would simply be guaranteeing finishing in last place just about every year. Even the worst teams in the SEC have athletic budgets which are probably triple westerns budget, have huge stadiums, enormous fan bases, and so many other advantages over what we would be able to establish, even if we wished to broaden our horizons, and had a commitment to competing.

Man, you can turn an argument into something I didn't come a 100 miles from saying or thinking. Yeah, I want Western to join the SEC...that was the point of all this. You got me. Glad you put me in my place & exposed my burning desire to get Western into the SEC.

For argument's sake, if you think your shirt is made of jalapeño poppers and you can eat it, I'm here to tell you that you're mistaken and very naive.

Let's stick to actual thoughts we're each having and not burn down straw man arguments we make up.

(10-11-2017 08:30 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 05:29 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 12:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-09-2017 08:03 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-09-2017 11:25 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  My standard is better hockey. The Broncos clearly have better talent and play better hockey because they are in the best conference in college hockey. It attracts better recruits. We're still relatively early into this, but the freshmen who have entered the picture this year is just another sign of how strong this program is right now. We lost a lot of talent & experience this off-season.

Yes, it's much harder to finish high in the standings in the NCHC than the WCHA. Nobody can dispute that. I'd rather have Bronco hockey compete at a higher level, have the likes of Denver, Duluth, & North Dakota come to Lawson every year rather than drop down to a weaker conference and see inferior opponents. I'd rather be in hockey's SEC over the Sun Belt.

WMU + NCHC = win

Fair enough. I disagree that we have better talent now, and don't think that we will unless we are consistently at or near the top of our conference. That will always be tough in the NCHC. And while you would rather see ND, Denver and Duluth, most folks that come to Bronco hockey games would much rather see a lousy MSU or UM team play at Lawson, and while you and I know those nchc teams are much better hockey schools, to the average bronco fan Duluth is no more game worthy than Michigan Tech. Lastly, while I am the first to agree the NCHC is one of the best if not the best leagues in the country, there is relative parity in college hockey which doesn't exist in football. SEC schools in football generally will destroy Sun Belt schools when they play. Even the best team in the NCHC could lose to an Atlantic Conference or a WCHA team, and they do.

But regardless, we all want the same thing in a solid WMU hockey program that competes consistently for league titles and a chance to make a run in the NCAA tournament. If that happens in the NCHC I am delighted. If it doesn't, and if our hockey program becomes dormant, I will be disappointed,as I was for the first several years in this conference.

BTW...my Sun Belt comparison...this is from a USCHO article today:

"the WCHA’s record winning percentage against other conferences has continued to drop, all the way to a .279 mark a season ago, worst in the nation."

That seems pretty Sun Belt-ish to me.

Comparing hockey conferences with college football conferences simply does not hold water. But if, for argument's sake, you think that if Western Michigan got an offer to join the SEC in football that we should take that, you have a naivety with respect to college sports which clearly compromises your credibility here my friend. If Western were to be in the SEC, we would simply be guaranteeing finishing in last place just about every year. Even the worst teams in the SEC have athletic budgets which are probably triple westerns budget, have huge stadiums, enormous fan bases, and so many other advantages over what we would be able to establish, even if we wished to broaden our horizons, and had a commitment to competing.

Man, you can turn an argument into something I didn't come a 100 miles from saying or thinking. Yeah, I want Western to join the SEC...that was the point of all this. You got me. Glad you put me in my place & exposed my burning desire to get Western into the SEC.

For argument's sake, if you think your shirt is made of jalapeño poppers and you can eat it, I'm here to tell you that you're mistaken and very naive.

Let's stick to actual thoughts we're each having and not burn down straw man arguments we make up.

Excuse me; I thought you said I'd rather be in hockey's SEC Than The Sun Belt. That appeared to be an analogy between the hockey conferences and the football conferences. Hang on let me look again... Yep it's still there. Maybe it's a typo. You should correct that if that's not what you meant to say.

(10-12-2017 05:04 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 08:30 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 05:29 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 12:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-09-2017 08:03 PM)brovol Wrote:  Fair enough. I disagree that we have better talent now, and don't think that we will unless we are consistently at or near the top of our conference. That will always be tough in the NCHC. And while you would rather see ND, Denver and Duluth, most folks that come to Bronco hockey games would much rather see a lousy MSU or UM team play at Lawson, and while you and I know those nchc teams are much better hockey schools, to the average bronco fan Duluth is no more game worthy than Michigan Tech. Lastly, while I am the first to agree the NCHC is one of the best if not the best leagues in the country, there is relative parity in college hockey which doesn't exist in football. SEC schools in football generally will destroy Sun Belt schools when they play. Even the best team in the NCHC could lose to an Atlantic Conference or a WCHA team, and they do.

But regardless, we all want the same thing in a solid WMU hockey program that competes consistently for league titles and a chance to make a run in the NCAA tournament. If that happens in the NCHC I am delighted. If it doesn't, and if our hockey program becomes dormant, I will be disappointed,as I was for the first several years in this conference.

BTW...my Sun Belt comparison...this is from a USCHO article today:

"the WCHA’s record winning percentage against other conferences has continued to drop, all the way to a .279 mark a season ago, worst in the nation."

That seems pretty Sun Belt-ish to me.

Comparing hockey conferences with college football conferences simply does not hold water. But if, for argument's sake, you think that if Western Michigan got an offer to join the SEC in football that we should take that, you have a naivety with respect to college sports which clearly compromises your credibility here my friend. If Western were to be in the SEC, we would simply be guaranteeing finishing in last place just about every year. Even the worst teams in the SEC have athletic budgets which are probably triple westerns budget, have huge stadiums, enormous fan bases, and so many other advantages over what we would be able to establish, even if we wished to broaden our horizons, and had a commitment to competing.

Man, you can turn an argument into something I didn't come a 100 miles from saying or thinking. Yeah, I want Western to join the SEC...that was the point of all this. You got me. Glad you put me in my place & exposed my burning desire to get Western into the SEC.

For argument's sake, if you think your shirt is made of jalapeño poppers and you can eat it, I'm here to tell you that you're mistaken and very naive.

Let's stick to actual thoughts we're each having and not burn down straw man arguments we make up.

Excuse me; I thought you said I'd rather be in hockey's SEC Than The Sun Belt. That appeared to be an analogy between the hockey conferences and the football conferences. Hang on let me look again... Yep it's still there. Maybe it's a typo. You should correct that if that's not what you meant to say.

That's exactly what I said and meant, which has absolutely nothing to do w/ me wanting Western football to join the actual SEC. So, I guess my natural follow-up question if this is how your brain works is why you want Western football to join the Sun Belt? That seems like a dumb idea. Please explain yourself.

(10-12-2017 07:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 05:04 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 08:30 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 05:29 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 12:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  BTW...my Sun Belt comparison...this is from a USCHO article today:

"the WCHA’s record winning percentage against other conferences has continued to drop, all the way to a .279 mark a season ago, worst in the nation."

That seems pretty Sun Belt-ish to me.

Comparing hockey conferences with college football conferences simply does not hold water. But if, for argument's sake, you think that if Western Michigan got an offer to join the SEC in football that we should take that, you have a naivety with respect to college sports which clearly compromises your credibility here my friend. If Western were to be in the SEC, we would simply be guaranteeing finishing in last place just about every year. Even the worst teams in the SEC have athletic budgets which are probably triple westerns budget, have huge stadiums, enormous fan bases, and so many other advantages over what we would be able to establish, even if we wished to broaden our horizons, and had a commitment to competing.

Man, you can turn an argument into something I didn't come a 100 miles from saying or thinking. Yeah, I want Western to join the SEC...that was the point of all this. You got me. Glad you put me in my place & exposed my burning desire to get Western into the SEC.

For argument's sake, if you think your shirt is made of jalapeño poppers and you can eat it, I'm here to tell you that you're mistaken and very naive.

Let's stick to actual thoughts we're each having and not burn down straw man arguments we make up.

Excuse me; I thought you said I'd rather be in hockey's SEC Than The Sun Belt. That appeared to be an analogy between the hockey conferences and the football conferences. Hang on let me look again... Yep it's still there. Maybe it's a typo. You should correct that if that's not what you meant to say.

That's exactly what I said and meant, which has absolutely nothing to do w/ me wanting Western football to join the actual SEC. So, I guess my natural follow-up question if this is how your brain works is why you want Western football to join the Sun Belt? That seems like a dumb idea. Please explain yourself.

Little hint for you Minor.

(10-12-2017 07:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 05:04 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 08:30 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 05:29 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 12:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  BTW...my Sun Belt comparison...this is from a USCHO article today:

"the WCHA’s record winning percentage against other conferences has continued to drop, all the way to a .279 mark a season ago, worst in the nation."

That seems pretty Sun Belt-ish to me.

Comparing hockey conferences with college football conferences simply does not hold water. But if, for argument's sake, you think that if Western Michigan got an offer to join the SEC in football that we should take that, you have a naivety with respect to college sports which clearly compromises your credibility here my friend. If Western were to be in the SEC, we would simply be guaranteeing finishing in last place just about every year. Even the worst teams in the SEC have athletic budgets which are probably triple westerns budget, have huge stadiums, enormous fan bases, and so many other advantages over what we would be able to establish, even if we wished to broaden our horizons, and had a commitment to competing.

Man, you can turn an argument into something I didn't come a 100 miles from saying or thinking. Yeah, I want Western to join the SEC...that was the point of all this. You got me. Glad you put me in my place & exposed my burning desire to get Western into the SEC.

For argument's sake, if you think your shirt is made of jalapeño poppers and you can eat it, I'm here to tell you that you're mistaken and very naive.

Let's stick to actual thoughts we're each having and not burn down straw man arguments we make up.

Excuse me; I thought you said I'd rather be in hockey's SEC Than The Sun Belt. That appeared to be an analogy between the hockey conferences and the football conferences. Hang on let me look again... Yep it's still there. Maybe it's a typo. You should correct that if that's not what you meant to say.

That's exactly what I said and meant, which has absolutely nothing to do w/ me wanting Western football to join the actual SEC. So, I guess my natural follow-up question if this is how your brain works is why you want Western football to join the Sun Belt? That seems like a dumb idea. Please explain yourself.

You are the one who use the SEC and Sunbelt comparison to the hockey conferences. I told you it was a poor comparison. Why do I need to explain myself, when you were the one who made the ridiculous contention?

(10-12-2017 01:16 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 07:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 05:04 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 08:30 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 05:29 AM)brovol Wrote:  Comparing hockey conferences with college football conferences simply does not hold water. But if, for argument's sake, you think that if Western Michigan got an offer to join the SEC in football that we should take that, you have a naivety with respect to college sports which clearly compromises your credibility here my friend. If Western were to be in the SEC, we would simply be guaranteeing finishing in last place just about every year. Even the worst teams in the SEC have athletic budgets which are probably triple westerns budget, have huge stadiums, enormous fan bases, and so many other advantages over what we would be able to establish, even if we wished to broaden our horizons, and had a commitment to competing.

Man, you can turn an argument into something I didn't come a 100 miles from saying or thinking. Yeah, I want Western to join the SEC...that was the point of all this. You got me. Glad you put me in my place & exposed my burning desire to get Western into the SEC.

For argument's sake, if you think your shirt is made of jalapeño poppers and you can eat it, I'm here to tell you that you're mistaken and very naive.

Let's stick to actual thoughts we're each having and not burn down straw man arguments we make up.

Excuse me; I thought you said I'd rather be in hockey's SEC Than The Sun Belt. That appeared to be an analogy between the hockey conferences and the football conferences. Hang on let me look again... Yep it's still there. Maybe it's a typo. You should correct that if that's not what you meant to say.

That's exactly what I said and meant, which has absolutely nothing to do w/ me wanting Western football to join the actual SEC. So, I guess my natural follow-up question if this is how your brain works is why you want Western football to join the Sun Belt? That seems like a dumb idea. Please explain yourself.

You are the one who use the SEC and Sunbelt comparison to the hockey conferences. I told you it was a poor comparison. Why do I need to explain myself, when you were the one who made the ridiculous contention?

You know better and purposely misconstrued his statement to match your argument broncos83 Brovol.

(10-12-2017 01:21 PM)ChicagoMan Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 01:16 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 07:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 05:04 AM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-11-2017 08:30 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  Man, you can turn an argument into something I didn't come a 100 miles from saying or thinking. Yeah, I want Western to join the SEC...that was the point of all this. You got me. Glad you put me in my place & exposed my burning desire to get Western into the SEC.

For argument's sake, if you think your shirt is made of jalapeño poppers and you can eat it, I'm here to tell you that you're mistaken and very naive.

Let's stick to actual thoughts we're each having and not burn down straw man arguments we make up.

Excuse me; I thought you said I'd rather be in hockey's SEC Than The Sun Belt. That appeared to be an analogy between the hockey conferences and the football conferences. Hang on let me look again... Yep it's still there. Maybe it's a typo. You should correct that if that's not what you meant to say.

That's exactly what I said and meant, which has absolutely nothing to do w/ me wanting Western football to join the actual SEC. So, I guess my natural follow-up question if this is how your brain works is why you want Western football to join the Sun Belt? That seems like a dumb idea. Please explain yourself.

You are the one who use the SEC and Sunbelt comparison to the hockey conferences. I told you it was a poor comparison. Why do I need to explain myself, when you were the one who made the ridiculous contention?

You know better and purposely misconstrued his statement to match your argument broncos83 Brovol.

Um. No, I didn't. And if you can read that is obvious.

Now go write a letter to your son who "goes to Army". Hahahahaha

(10-12-2017 09:51 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 01:21 PM)ChicagoMan Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 01:16 PM)brovol Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 07:10 AM)BroncoMinor Wrote:  

(10-12-2017 05:04 AM)brovol Wrote:  Excuse me; I thought you said I'd rather be in hockey's SEC Than The Sun Belt. That appeared to be an analogy between the hockey conferences and the football conferences. Hang on let me look again... Yep it's still there. Maybe it's a typo. You should correct that if that's not what you meant to say.

That's exactly what I said and meant, which has absolutely nothing to do w/ me wanting Western football to join the actual SEC. So, I guess my natural follow-up question if this is how your brain works is why you want Western football to join the Sun Belt? That seems like a dumb idea. Please explain yourself.

You are the one who use the SEC and Sunbelt comparison to the hockey conferences. I told you it was a poor comparison. Why do I need to explain myself, when you were the one who made the ridiculous contention?

You know better and purposely misconstrued his statement to match your argument broncos83 Brovol.

Um. No, I didn't. And if you can read that is obvious.

Now go write a letter to your son who "goes to Army". Hahahahaha

There is no point in continuing this discussion. You'll just frame the conversation however you want to make it seem like wanting to be in the WCHA still makes any sense. It doesn't.