MeHateHe
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2006
- 2,545
- 2,921
Did the unknown future of the WCHA influence UAA's decision to eliminate hockey?
No, if UAA had the fiscal resources to move forward with hockey, it would compete as an independent or join another conference if the opportunity arose to do so. The funding required to operate a collegiate hockey program that provides a meaningful, positive experience for its student-athletes is no longer available. The same is true for gymnastics and skiing.
This is a wee bit hard to believe ...
And if frogs had wings ... they still couldn't play hockey worth a puck.Technically, they're not wrong. They would have moved forward with an independent team if they had the financial resources. ...
And just how would they do that under prevailing NCAA rules?At one time I could have seen the NHL trying to salvage university hockey in Alabama, Alaska, and other unique areas. This is not the season for it.
The NCAA has several donors and sponsors can do joint marketing programs.And just how would they do that under prevailing NCAA rules?
The NCAA has several donors and sponsors can do joint marketing programs.
And just how would they do that under prevailing NCAA rules?
Kind of related here is the current reaction to the announcement by the UA-Fairbanks athletic department
Commitment to Alaska Nanooks Programs - University of Alaska Fairbanks Athletics
NHL teams can't help out directly. They can sponsor certain programs like the feasibility studies, but that is the limit.
But NHL teams can help out indirectly. But they can help out indirectly. But in terms of actually donating the money to start a program, it will have to be private and not sponsored. The Pegula's donating the +$100 million to start the Penn State program is the best example. It wasn't the Buffalo Sabres themselves to give Penn State the money, but it was the ownership group private giving the money. There are several high-ranking members of the Wirtz Corporation and Blackhawks corporate-sponsorship group who are Illini alumni. Supposedly this group is who the University of Illinois AD was targeting in the fundraising effort.
Let's hope they can do it. I don't know that much about the UA System, except that there is a "Head Office" and 2 branches of the University. If someone could shed some light on how both schools function financially it would be appreciated by me....
The NHL is interested in supporting grassroots hockey, not NCAA programs.
Think about it this way: the NHL wants more people playing hockey because that increases their fan base.
The rate of return on grassroots programs is going to be much higher than NCAA programs because spending on grassroots programs goes directly to generating more players, whereas spending on NCAA programs would rely on an indirect effect (assumption is that people watch NCAA hockey and then decide they want to play hockey).
American state universities are funded very similarly to Canadian universities, with the main difference just being that they receive less public funding per capita than Canadian universities. Otherwise, the systems are surprisingly similar.
That's why I'm not remotely surprised that Alaska is cutting its hockey programs in tough financial Times.
I think their program will sadly be cut too. Alaska Fairbanks now just lost their only close opponent, and still has the same problems that both schools had before.Which would lead one to think that Fairbanks will do the same soon?
I think their program will sadly be cut too. Alaska Fairbanks now just lost their only close opponent, and still has the same problems that both schools had before.
I never said that you did.I never said anything about their interest in supporting what kinds of programs or their reasons behind it. All I commented on was what they are legally capable of doing and the history of action within the parameters.