Sunday, July 26, 2009

UAA Seawolves to the CCHA

Is the grass greener on the other side? Should UAA begin considering a move to the Central Collegiate Hockey Association? Let's examine it briefly.

The recent move by UNO from the CCHA has created an 11 team league. CCHA commisioner Tom Anastos hasn't committed to replacing UNO with a new member yet. Alabama-Huntsville has made official overtures to the league and CCHA officials have toured UAH's facilities. Unlike the rash decision made by the hasty WCHA, the CCHA is following it's established procedures regarding new memberships and so they won't be deciding the issue soon.

UAH needs a league home. They actually deserve one more than upstart UNO. They have more committment and history. Their best (realistically their "only") bet is to get into the CCHA. If UAA applied to the CCHA they'd almost certainly leap to the top of the list above UAH. If UAH doesn't get into a league ... they'll most likely have to fold their program. So ... UAA going to the CCHA could very well mean 57 teams in college hockey instead of 58. Not a good thing overall for the sport. But so what ...?

Air Force didn't give a shit when they dumped the CHA and created this whole sky-is-falling process of having to "save" teams. There is no reason that UAA shouldn't follow the same self involved interests. The so-called "community" of college hockey is all smoke and mirrors; it doesn't really exist. Schools and leagues don't act in the best interest of college hockey in general; they act in their own self-interests. UAA should give no consideration to how a move to the CCHA would affect the greater landscape.

UAA obviously wouldn't make any friends in Alabama by exploring membership with the CCHA. It would certainly cloud UAH's future since there is NO WAY IN HELL that the elitist WCHA would consider taking a team from "bubba-land" if UAA did gain admission to the CCHA.

The WCHA had to let us Alaska "assholes" in; and if you don't think the rest of the WCHA views UAA that way, then you don't have much experience on the College Hockey InterWebs. Never again will anything like that happen. That's why they all had such huge boners for UNO and Bemidji and why UAF lost out. It made sense provincially.

Well, it also makes sense provincially for UAA and UAF to be in a conference together. We know now such a thing isn't going to happen in the WCHA. Note here: The inclusion of UAF in the WCHA was closer to happening than you might think; I'm told it was within 24 hours of consummating. But in the end UAA voted for UNO's inclusion; they were not (as assumed by some rubes) the "abstaining" vote.

UAA still pays a portion of travel for WCHA opponents to come to Anchorage. This is how the WCHA treats UAA? The WCHA clearly has a bunch of greedy fuckers for members. For example, the "Alaska Exemption" makes Wisconsin somewhere around $200,000. And UAA has to pay for a portion of Wisconsin's travel? The largess those teams recieve from having UAA in their provincially-minded conference is almost mind-boggling (depending on school from $60K - $200K conservatively). Yet UAA still pays half their airfare? They're pretty much all double-dipping greedy assholes if you ask me.

UAA has no agreement to pay any travel subsidy for the new members according to UAA Athletic Director Dr. Steve Cobb (regardless of what you may have read elsewhere that came out of Bruce McLeod's mouth on the subject).

As part of negotiations with the CCHA, I'd imagine that UAA could gain membership without having to pay any damn travel subsidies. The same rationale I gave for UAF to move to the WCHA works in reverse for a UAA move to the CCHA. There are CCHA members that probably have a difficult time fully utilizing the exempted games they earn by coming to Alaska to play but Michigan, Michigan State, Miami, NMU, Ohio State and Notre Dame should all be able to make extra cash from the extra "Alaska Exemptions". The addition of one of the best rivalries in college hockey to the CCHA landscape is another (albeit lessor) benefit for the league.

FUCK the WCHA. I think I'll make T-shirts and sell them at home games this year. FUCK the WCHA. It has a certain odd-symmetry I think. FUCK the WCHA. It's certainly easy to type. I say the best way to FUCK the WCHA is to start winning some of it's fucking championships. How about it?

I don't really want UAA in the CCHA. I suggest it spitefully (don't underestimate spite as a reason though ... it can be a very self-satisfying emotion). I cherish the opportunity to see my team beat any number of WCHA team's that I already hate. And there's just so much to hate about our league opponents (see virtually any pre-series posts I've made here over the years). That would be very hard to replicate in the CCHA. I'd feel bad bagging on places like BGSU, Ferris Wheel, Western Michigan and LSSU. I will never feel bad disrespecting Grand Forks U. Not to mention that the CCHA has that stupid fucking shootout.

Feel free to discuss the upside and downside of such a move. I think there's an upside from just "considering" it publicly. In order to keep UAA in the conference, wouldn't WCHA members happily let UAA stop paying the travel subsidies?


green hornet said...

Interesting point of view. Next thing we find out the Big Ten has decided to start up a hockey conference. Surely, that would put college hockey on its ear.

Donald Dunlop said...

I should have said somewhere that I doubt that any UAA fans would support this idea.

The whole "cachet" of being in the WCHA is far too engraved on our psyche's. The constant drone of how "great" the WCHA is has some merit. However, UAA would have just as much a chance to build a successful program (i.e... one that wins a National Championship) from within the CCHA.

Anonymous said...

Nothing worse than seeing the likes of Ferris State, and Bowling Green up here. Puke.

Donald Dunlop said...

Because Mankato, Bemidji and Omaha are much more "the likes" of what we'd want to see up here?

Bowling Green - 9 NCAA appearances and 1983-84 National Champs
Ferris Wheel - 02/03 CCHA Champs
LSSU - 10 NCAA appearances and 3 National Championships
Western Michigan has the same number of NCAA appearances as UAA (3).

Anonymous said...

If you guys learned how to play decent hockey you'd have nothing to worry about.
Go Goofers!

Anonymous said...

With only one month and our returning players getting ready for a great season. You would think you would spend your time promoting the best team we have had in years. I just hope our players do not read this garbage. Playing in the best league in hockey is what these players have strived for, don't sell them short.
Your ranting about the wcha will note help us recruit top end talent. Drop the subject and talk positive about our team and players.

Disappointed fan

Runninwiththedogs said...

Fuck you Donald for mentioning the 1984 NC...

Also fuck you for making the post NSFW with your bold-fonted fucks.

I made it home safely Saturday, btw, fog and all.

Donald Dunlop said...

Congrats on the safe driving. Hopefully, my phone guidance and "niceness" helped contribute to your safe journey.

As to the WCHA/CCHA question (and this to the Seawolf fans that hate me today) ...

The WCHA doesn't GIVE A SHIT about UAA. They think that we are here to fill their basement. There is no doubt that the WCHA is THE TOUGHEST league in which to have success. I won't argue that for a second. The CCHA is 2nd tier (but lets not forget that the last 2 National Champs didn't come from our league).

If you read carefully, you'll see that the main point of the post is my desire to have UAA stop paying travel subsidies.

I'm sick and fucking tired of UAA carrying water for these fucking WCHA programs. Why the hell should we continue to pay for these greedy bastards? They all think they are the coolest shit to come down the pike and that "outliers" like UAA should have to pay their bills. Fuck them. Fuck Wisconsin, Fuck Minnesota, Fuck UND, Fuck DU, Fuck CC, Fuck all of them.

Let those greedy fuckers pay their own way.

Anonymous said...

Seriously, I think it'd be a great move. Put the two Alaska schools in the same league, where they belong, and make the WCHA figure out a solution to the 11-team league, rather than coming up with their own solution of "let's make someone else do it!"

Glad to see not all of the people currently in the WCHA are obnoxious, arrogant pricks...

Runninwiththedogs said...

Fuck Wisconsin is something I can always get on board with.

Did someone just say you're not obnoxious, arrogant, or a prick, Donald? Holy shit.

Talking on the phone while driving down an unlit highway in the fog with possible deer crossings is always a good idea.

dggoddard said...

Do you really think the CCHA wants UAA either? Two programs in the CCHA are on life support (BGU & WMU).

I also think you vastly overstate the financial benefit of the extra home series.

Anonymous said...

Let's not get to wound up the team is going to have a good year, fill the sully, go for 5th place and home playoff advantage. This is our year lots of returning players with skill. A good year will put us in good standing in the league.
The toronto maple leafs have not won the stanley cup since 1967.
The aces are a good draw. Make college hockey entertaining and win games. Winning teams will draw top end talent. Promote your returning seniors and program.


Anonymous said...

Maybe if you put UAA stop paying the travel subsidies in bold font then we would have realized how much you really love the WCHA, but hate travel subsidies.

Fuck them all is something i can always get on board with.

Donald Dunlop said...

How is taking the attendance of one home game times 15 dollars a "vast overstatement"?

Colorado College -7343 seats times 15 dollars = $110,145
Denver University - 6026 seats times 15 dollars = $90,390
Michigan Tech -4200 seats times 15 dollars = $63,000
Minnesota - 9700 seats times 15 dollars = $145,500
Minnesota St. -4832 seats times 15 dollars = $72,480
Minnesota-Duluth -5233 seats times 15 dollars = $78,495
North Dakota -11500 seats times 15 dollars = $172,500
St. Cloud -5763 seats times 15 dollars = $86,445
Wisconsin - 15237 seats times 15 dollars = $228,555

Those are CONSERVATIVE estimates. Anytime I've talked about it, I've stipulated that not all teams necessarily get the full benefit of the exemptions they receive. But that's their own fault.

The potential is there. The truth is that MUCH more than what I've estimated is certainly possible.

And NO ... I don't think the CCHA "wants" UAA. I don't think the WCHA "wants" UAA.

It was with that realization that the NCAA created the "Alaska/Hawaii Exemption". They recognized the provincially insular attitudes of schools/leagues in the contiguous 48 states.

There isn't a school in the WCHA that would choose on their own accord to travel to Alaska and compete without those incentives. As I've shown, those exemptions (and their FAT potential revenue) STILL wasn't enough for them ... That's why UAA had to supply 25 airplane tickets for a decade and why they're still supplying half a dozen.

puck swami said...

One thing about Donald is that he calls them the way he sees them, and his writing is always entertaining and provocative, even when you may not agree with him. And there is some serious truth in much of what he writes.

But I do think there is a MODICUM of college hockey community interest in the WCHA, as expansion doesn't help the WCHA as much as it keeps the Bemidji program from going under. The CCHA will save UAH, and Atlantic Hockey has already saved Niagara and Mercyhurst. Each league does a little expansion and the programs remain viable. IF the leagues don't cooperate, the CHA programs fold, and the NCAA risks trimming the NCAA tourney back to 12 teams from 16 due to proportional representation rules.

UAA's ultimate salvation won't come from another league. This is a Seawolf program that is just a few gamebreakers away from being an elite WCHA program. Other teams hate playing UAA because UAA has the ability to beat anyone in the league on any given night, and were they to start keeping the best Alaska prospects at home, it would go a long way toward becoming the serious power in the league that it has potential to be.

Donald Dunlop said...

In order to move up the league ladder a school also has to spend money. It's difficult to keep some of that money in the bank when your opponents have access to the account.

Any school traveling to Alaska to compete gets an exemption. That is money in their pocket. They also get fully half of their airline expenses paid by the host school.

Conservatively, that's $4800 an opponent ($400 airline ticket time 12) that UAA is forced to spend on teams that already have a clear way to recover those costs themselves (if they'd paid their own way).

$4800 x 7 = $33,600 a year.

That is a LOWBALL number but still a significant amount that UAA's hockey program could use for equipment and/or salaries and/or any number of valuable things that could help UAA become more competitive in this league.

I would think that if there is modicum of community in the WCHA, that some school in the league would step up, do the right thing and pay their own way.

Rhetorical question now ... Would you write a letter to your Peg Bradley-Doppes asking her to have DU pay it's own way?

Anonymous said...

I say it's a damn good idea. Even with a stellar team this upcoming season, UAA might only achieve 5th place in the WCHA. Why not switch to the CCHA, and in the process regularly fill the Sully to see UAA kick total ass!! UAA has the ability to win multiple CCHA titles. WCHA, CCHA, who cares? Just win.


Anonymous said...

Ok besides the big 4 who is going to score up front. We need secondary scoring.That is what the season hangs on. the bottom 9 forwards need more than a couple of Goals. If we get a second and third line that can consistantly score then your talking being in the top 6 in the league. Some one call who is going to have the Breakthrough year. i call Lienwebber up front. We need goals.!!!

Anonymous said...

some of the appeal for our players is the wcha, but we need new fucilities bad. tell cobb to stop sucking the money to the basketball team not a d1 sport and sink some money to the d1 peograms

SeawolvesFan said...

If we did move to the WCHA, we would lose some of our best recruits, who only came her because of the WCHA, though most of them haven't turned out very good

Anonymous said...

TO: Seawolves fan, some of our top
end talent were offered many full ride scholarship offers. Unfortunately we loose players like lawson, beagle and crowder.
Clark, grant and lunden had many offers to other schools. They were sold on the uaa program. It is up to the coaches to win this year. Let's not have any excuses from the players a 100 % effort every game. Let's fill the sully and build a strong program for future recruits.

A real seawolve fan

SeawolvesFan said...

You call yourself a real Seawolves Fanatic? When you can't even spell Seawolf, or Seawolves. Your no fan of the Seawolves, and they don't deserve some little punk who can't even spell there name right

A Seawolves Fanatic said...

Former Seawolf in USA Today(scroll down the left side of the screen):

Anonymous said...

seawolves fan,

You are in no way to judge someone if they can spell, look at what you wrote about uaa joining the wcha (we are already in dipshit).

A Seawolves Fanatic said...

Got, me there. BUT, if he is a Seawolves fan, you would think he/she could spell it

Dirty said...

I am all for a complete piece of crap team like UAA leaving the WCHA. They have done absolutely nothing since joining the WCHA and bring absolutely nothing to the league. Fellow WCHA teams don't care about UAA because they've proven that they don't deserve it.

At least fellow horrible teams like Michigan Tech actually have a history. Don't fool yourself, despite what you say, UAA has no history. They are a terrible team and will forever remain a terrible team. Schools like SCSU and Mankato may also have no history, but at least they have good teams every few years. UAA hasn't had a good team since any of their current players were in diapers and won't have another good team until those players are in diapers again. That's if the Sourdough's are lucky.

I say good riddance to UAA. You won't be missed.

ScoobyDoo said...

UAA leave the WCHA?

Never. Minnesota wouldn't allow it. Plane fare and exemptions are too important.

Donald Dunlop said...

So before any other UAA fans jump on Dirty for what he's said ...

He is providing exactly the sort of example of fan attitudes throughout the WCHA that I'd expected to see in response to my post. Don't anyone think for a second that I didn't anticipate it.

I noted here a couple of weeks ago that I'd be deleting asshole comments from here on out. I'm not deleting this. I'd even expect some more from some other WCHA jack-off fans who are so steeped in their own history that they belittle everyone else's.

They don't understand sports. They don't understand that sports are about the "competition". Especially AMATEUR sports.

In North Dakota they think they have a sort of mini-NHL franchise. Don't forget in this case that Grand Forks is a tiny little berg and it's ENTIRE population has the "Sioux-Milieux" burned in their petty little souls.

When and if their team has a bad streak there will be thousands in the streets running around screaming with their arms flailing in every direction. At that point whatever it takes to correct the situation will occur. They'll boot kids off their team. They'll fire their coach and offer some ungodly amount of money to some to come right the ship. Only a short bad streak would ever occur there. The community wouldn't let it happen. It's their fucking life. It is their identity. It is ALL they have.

I'd rather compete against teams and fans that have a more centered view of their team. The CCHA would provide more of that. Do we really want to continue to compete against mini-NHL teams with rabies-infested nutbag supporters?

And moreso than anything else ... THESE fuckers still have UAA pay half of their way up here? Are you fucking kidding me? If you ask me ... they have no balls. If they did then they'd live up to their arrogance and PAY THEIR OWN FUCKING WAY.

Donald Dunlop said...

Thanks for stopping by. I too believe that UAA's continuing inclusion in the WCHA is a strong positive for the bottom line of every other member. The exemptions are sweet.

But paying for half of your Gopher team to come up here is FUCKING RIDICULOUS. It is ridiculous enough that I think UAA (not just it's loudmouth blogger) should make an overture to the CCHA. I wouldn't support moving to the CCHA if there were ANY travel subsidies included.

Basic fairness would suggest that WCHA members SHOULD be paying for UAA's travel. 11 out of 12 WCHA members will continue to benefit financially from UAA being in the league. The one team that doesn't benefit financially from it? UAA.

Dirty said...

Just so I have this right, UND and Minnesota fans should not expect a high quality team? Instead they should emulate UAA fans by not caring if the team is good or not. Should Sioux and Gopher fans also emulate the Seawolf fans by filling half the arena?

It is cute how since UAA can't compete in the WCHA, you want to take your toys and go to the CCHA. The only problem with this analogy is that UAA doesn't really have any toys to take with them.

Donald Dunlop said...

UND has about $200,000 a year they make from UAA being in the league. Regardless of your shit attitude and stupidity, the AD at your school does pay attention to his bottom line.

And even though none of the AD's in the WCHA are apparently interested in competing on level terms they are much more likely to be interested in keeping UAA in the WCHA fold than allowing them to bolt for perhaps greener pastures.

If you've got something to contribute to the conversation then I'll allow you to comment. If, however it's just going to be the same chest-thumping horseshit as you've post twice now I'll be deleting it (unless of course I decide that it affords me some sort of quality opportunity to continue to expose your stupidity).

If your school is such hot shit then why don't they fucking man-up and pay their own way? And don't think I haven't considered the myriad of possible answers that you might give to that question.

You're probably just fine making smarmy comments on USCHO; but here ... you're in a sword fight and you brought a straw from Burger King.

Dirty said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Donald Dunlop said...

If you were interested in discussing the subject you would. Add something relevant to the discussion or piss off ..

444 said...

Damn this shit reminds me of the days when Donald and Dirty fought at

If by chance UAA decides to leave the WCHA maybe old Bruce should head up to Marquette and see if they want to REALLY switch.

Nah, lets just hope for a Big Ten Hockey Conference to form.


In all seriousness money talks and people walk.

Donald Dunlop said...

In this case it would be the money that walks.

Anonymous said...

Clark, Grant and Lunden were not the only players with several other Div. 1 offers.

Anonymous said...

This discussion is serving no good purpose. Dirty should worry about his own back yard, and how to keep the Sioux players out of JAIL. Yup, real classy them there flickertails are.

Donald Dunlop said...

I disagree ...

I think it serves a very important purpose.

It points out to those who care about the UAA program that it isn't competing on level terms due to the financial implications for everyone.

At minimum (bare minimum) this is about UAA not having to spend AT LEAST $35,000 dollars a year.

Suze said...

It would be different if UAA didn't agree to those terms, but they did.

What I want to know is this, how much did it cost Bimidji and UNO to join the WCHA? Not much I am betting.

Mala In Se said...

CCHA could take UAA, UAH.

Perhaps NMU could then be lured back the the WCHA.

Donald Dunlop said...

I imagine UAA did what they had to do to maintain their membership in the glorious WCHA. However, with the CCHA "apparent" opening for another team there are two positive opportunities for UAA.

1:) Go to the CCHA and work closely with UAF to become regionally significant together.

2:) Leverage the opportunity to go to the CCHA and eliminate the ridiculous WCHA travel subsidies.

As per 1:) .... Neither school is going to be given the opportunities from their respective conferences on their own. Together the schools would have a little bit more clout and could look after their best interests. The ability to look after our own best interests is not available under the current conference alignment. The opportunity for UAF to join UAA in WCHA was there briefly but it wasn't chased early or vigorously enough. Steve Cobb should call Tom Anastos sooner rather than later.

As Per 2:) ... Fairly self-explanatory. Threaten to go to the CCHA and WCHA members will take notice and adjust those "terms" to which you referred. Viola ... no more travel subsidies.

We all dream of the day that there is a true conference that makes sense for UAA and UAF but nobody out here in the REAL west is jumping into D1 hockey. Both schools float in a sea of provincially ruled and biased conferences alone. There is NO VALID REASON for us to not be in the same conference.

I'm fairly certain that it cost Bemidji $120,000. As for UNO, I haven't seen a figure floated but many assume it was less.

cetihcra said...

Donald -- The extra $35k (estimated by you) that UAA spends yearly on visiting teams' airfare is made up for by the WCHA's guaranteed playoff revenue distribution. The CCHA's playoff revenue is far less than that of the W, so the Wolves would probably be out more than $35k/yr.

just a thought.


Anonymous said...

Donald let Dirty back on!!!!
Oh wait his mom is calling him...his dinner is ready.

Donald Dunlop said...

Yes it is a sort of offset ... it is an offset that everyone gets ... equally amongst the members ... everyone gets it. An equal share for each.

Nice and fair.

The unfair stuff is below:
Rest of WCHA
Exemptions $$$$ --- 60K - 200K (revenue to cover travel to Alaska/Hawaii granted by the NCAA)
Airfare savings $$$$ ---- 5K per school (remember .. that's at $400 per ticket)

Exemptions --- 0 for SEVEN trips made
Airfare lost to carry other programs ---- 35K

If someone can justify why UAA pays ANY travel for the other WCHA teams then I'll shut up. But there is no justification for it. It is quite simply ... wrong.

The NCAA created the exemption to offset those schools travel expenses. Getting more money directly from UAA is nothing but salacious greed.

Donald Dunlop said...

As for Dirty ...

He's free to add anything substantive. But he won't.

Anonymous said...

Dirty wont because his mom wants the lawn mowed.

Donald Dunlop said...

And I forgot ...

Yes ... UAA share from the CCHA's championships would be much less than it's share from the WCHA. That is the downside of going to the CCHA. However, UAA's would get at least one cheap road trip.

I don't know if the drop in revenue versus the FIT of having UAA and UAF in the same conference is worth it. The intangibles of being aligned with UAF are difficult to gauge.

444 said...

Donald how much money would UAA save by leaving the WCHA?

Never Summer said...

Would you please explain this one for me?

If the teams of the WCHA make some much money from having UAA in their conference, then why wouldn't they add UAF (I understand the offer was on the table) with BSU instead of UNO. UNO cannot possibly put enough people in the seats to overcome a approx. $100,000 increase in revenue that these teams would see by adding two more games to there schedule. It just doesn't make sense, if it's all about money then this seems to be the obvious way to go.

Is it possible that the NCAA doesn't want any one confrence to have both Alaska teams? That would widen the gap in the total number of games played between teams in different conferences and possibly create an unfair advantage in the PWR. I don't know, I'm just asking to see if you have any thoughts?

444 said...

I might be mistaken so please correct me but I thought UNO was averaging over 6,000 fans per game in Omaha. IMO, that is very good. So they are putting enough people into their seats.

Never Summer said...

Yes, but is the revenue generated by those 6,000 fans divided up between the teams in the WCHA, because as I understand it the money collected for playing two extra games a year would go to the team playing at home.

Just to clearify, does UNO increase the revenue of every team in the conference enough to suprass what they could make by playing two extra home games? Thus making UNO a more attractive candidate monetarily than UAF.

A Seawolves Fanatic said...

Your supposed to write it like this:

Dirty won't because his mom wants "her" lawn mowed.

Donald Dunlop said...

It's a distance thing. It doesn't matter that a flight from St. Paul to Fairbanks is about the same amount of time as a bus trip from St. Paul to Omaha. Insipid minds look at a map and think "whoa". They're also afraid of making 2 trips to AK (even though the Alaska teams make 7 or 8 such trips a year).

Revenue from the extra exempt games is not shared. It is kept by the school.

Playoff revenue is shared between all the teams ... both the Final Five and the playoff series that lead to it.

So, no UNO doesn't make the league more money than UAF could have.

Donald Dunlop said...

UAA probably wouldn't make or save a substantial amount of money moving to the CCHA. I'm advocating UAA move to the CCHA purely to strip the revenue from the other WCHA programs that they make from playing the extra regular season home games.

My suggestion to leave the league isn't about making money somewhere else. It's about denying money to the greedy fucking WCHA members.

444 said...

I can a respect your position.

A Seawolves Fanatic said...

Fuck the other ingnorant members of our league, if they didn't learn anything last season, they'll learn this season.

My "coming out/or better point getter" players:





Selby(if he gets good/quality ice time)

A Seawolves Fanatic said...

I like Lee Baldwin's style:


The last two D's to wear the #7 are Mark Smith and Matt Shasby, let's hope for a hat trick

Anonymous said...

So you are saying just another average #7 player? I'll pass, give me 6 Matt Robinsons or even a Chad Anderson, someone who isn't afraid to hit the opposing team.

Donald Dunlop said...

Who's going to breakout?
Will the primary scorers do their job?
What about secondary scoring; will there be enough of it?
Can team goaltending stay over .900?

Just some of the questions that must be answered positively if we are to see an improved team on the ice.

Anonymous said...

3 weeks till the players arrive.
What can we expect from our returning players.


Anonymous said...

Nothing to report on our players arriving next month.
Exciting team.


A Seawolves Fanatic said...

"So you are saying just another average #7 player? I'll pass, give me 6 Matt Robinsons or even a Chad Anderson, someone who isn't afraid to hit the opposing team."

Mat Robinson. Shasby was a great skating D, Mark overall was decent. The #7 has been kind to us with a leader in the locker room and Chad Anderson's D lineman. Our forwards will do most of the hitting........

Anonymous said...

Anything new on our incoming recruits.


Anonymous said...

You post about getting revenge by kicking ass may work everywhere else except in St. Cloud where you do play this year, and your record is 0 for the National Hockey Center (something like 0-30-2). OK, the easy comback is the 0 for the NCAA's my squad save it...:>)

Anonymous said...

The team coming in to St. Cloud this year is one of the best we have ever had, clark, lunden and grant will tear your team apart whether in St. Cloud or up in Anchorage. We have the most returning seniors and juniors for the first time ever.
HOld on to your this is our Season to remember.

Anonymous said...

Go Fan! I'm with you buddy.

Less than two months before the
exhibition game in Wasilla.

Donald Dunlop said...

Just an FYI ...

I've edited the "Future Seawolves" list to reflect the off-season additions that have now been confirmed. Click on them for additional info.

Good to see Gellert coming with linemate Spencer. Bruijsten has lots of positive comments from scouts about pro potential. Matthew Friese (along with the already confirmed Sam Mellor) are exciting prospects who we could reasonably call elite junior players.

And both Baldwin and Darwitz led their respective leagues in scoring by defenseman.

It's now what I'd call a strong 2009 incoming class. There are at least 3 players very capable of becoming "impactful" players as freshman.

A Seawolves Fanatic said...

Great job Shyaik/Blair/Simon!

The '09/10 Freshman Class just got better, Warner's got some intresting #'s. 6 goals in the BCHL in 104 games and then 6 goals for Army in only 24 games. DD does he still have to serve?

Man I can't wait for the season to start, I NEED MY HOCKEY FIX!

Donald Dunlop said...

I believe if you drop out/leave any Service Academy during the first year you have no commitment to further service.

Suze said...

I have a friend who played for Air Force, and left after 2 years.

You can play for two years and not have to serve.

A Seawolves Fanatic said...

Ah, thanks

Anonymous said...

anyone know when the offical roster is realeased on the goseawolves website?

Anonymous said...

UAA has the worst college website I have ever seen. I haven't been on there in years. There is very little useful information on there that hasn't already been delivered somewhere else. Only the ADN is worse. If it wasn't for Donald giving Woody some serious competition in regards to contents, the Daily Pravda wouldn't cover the Wolves at all.

Suze said...

Inside College Hockey wrote a piece on Bryce today:

Donald Dunlop said...

Bruijsten, Naslund and Currier are listed on Heisenberg today as well.

The more I look into Bruijsten the more optimistic I am. He's got a load of potential according to plenty of scouts. If he "takes off" he could be only a 2 or 3 year player. Naslund is a wait and see, hopefully he can skate. He was more of a goal scorer than a setup man as best I can tell.

Anonymous said...

We must all remember first year players in college never tear up the league in the wcha.
Let's hope the recruits can add some additional scoring to the team.
Let's just wait and see.
2 weeks and the players will arrive

Anonymous said...

Thats been the case...very little production for freshman.Its a big step.

Donald Dunlop said...

In general or on a whole rookies in the WCHA don't (as you say) "tear it up". There is no doubt about that. However, just about every year there are 2 or 3 freshman that do contribute in a significant way to their team's success.

I don't know if Bruijsten is such a kid ... He's got a nice scouting write-up at Hockey's Future and a guy who tracks/follows/watches recruits for SCSU at one point said he thought Mitch would be "the next" big Euro D1 player.

None of that means the kid will be a stud for us. But it is reason to anticipate it positively and optimistically.

It's a nice class now. Baldwin is a blueliner that uses his size and body effectively and intimidatingly. Darwitz by all acounts is a tireless worker who never forgets his responsibilities in his own end and knows how to bring the O from the backend. Crowell is tough, mature and a leader. Gellert and Spencer are top end BCHL forwards and Naslund must have done something right along the way to get the offer ... it's just he is a bit of an unknown. Who knows? Maybe he'll be the star of the bunch?

Anonymous said...

Why did it take so long for Bruijsten to sign with anyone, let alone us? Who else recruited him? All this talk about his upside gets me a bit curious as too why no one else nabbed him.

Donald Dunlop said...

It's got to be tedious and time consuming to ensure his education transfers and meets NCAA requirements. The Hockey's Future report was lated updated on June 11th, 2008 and mentions only that a "are a couple of college programs interested in him". So maybe nobody else was willing to do the necessary footwork? UAA has lots of experience bringing in foreign athletes. Perhaps it's some small advantage for UAA.

Anonymous said...

Who's the captain and assistants on the team this year?


akhockeyfanatic said...

I think Jared Tuton is a captain but don't quote me. Not sure if I've heard about anyone else.

A Seawolves Fanatic said...

Full info on Captains:

Anonymous said...

As far as Captains and Assistants go, Jarod Tuton is a good choice as the Captain.

Anonymous said...

Last year's captain was a good choice, this year hopefully no curfew issues.


Donald Dunlop said...

Jared made the curfew in Denver when so many others didn't.

Anonymous said...

Why are we still talking about the curfew?

Anonymous said...

What else is there to talk about?

Donald Dunlop said...


Y'all restless much?

Suze said...

We're waiting for our Sunday potpourri! :)

Anonymous said...

Does Donald correspond with the players in the off season.

Annabelle said...

Safe travel wishes to all players heading back up to Anchorage this week.

Donald Dunlop said...

No Sunday Potpourri this week I'm sorry to say. Next week.

I don't correspond with players at any time unless they initiate it. In four years that's happened about half a dozen times and all were out of season.

akhockeyfanatic said...

We ARE restless! We need our fix and our drug of choice is SEAWOLVES HOCKEY

GO SEAWOLVES!! See you in Wasilla on October 2nd. The fans are ready to rock 'n roll and hope you are too!

Anonymous said...

Anything new from our new marketing department.


Post a Comment