Gopher Blog wrote:
I will say that when it comes to discussions around this topic, you remind me a bit like a gambler who keeps chasing the money he already lost... and just inevitably digs himself an even deeper hole in the process.
I asked you who you define as the "smaller programs" that you feel are at risk. Who are you considering in this boat? You use the term "many of them"... well who qualifies as "them" that are so at risk?
Wha....??? Gambler? Has someone put something besides fruit juice in your fruit juice?
Look, we are ALL wrong, on this board at some point or another. Yep, I was wrong about the BTHC. That doesn't make it any more of a good idea. And that does not invalidate my thoughts, observances, opinions on everything else. That kind of logic is very irresponsible and ignorant of you.
And some of us were WRONG about OSU being a significant power in D1 hockey. They finished with the most embarrassing streak in all of D1 hockey.
Does that mean JSR is incapable of valid thought? Following your line of logic, you would have to say so.
And you, of course, are never incorrect, right?
Dude.............get over yourself.
And you really don't need me (or anyone else) to spell out which teams may be at risk. You fashion yourself a hockey wonk, right? Start with what will remain in the CCHA and the WCHA. I am sure you will find some programs of interest there.
And we can argue all day about what will happen. It is speculation on both ends. There are no guarantees. JSR seems to believe there are, merely because large school teams like Penn State would be forming new programs to replace smaller school programs. Sorry, but that does not guarantee additional interest and growth in the sport.
I'm not pessimistic. I am realistic, while you and JSR are a bit romantic on this topic. Again, there is no effective proof that the BTHC will be a big win for D1 hockey. Am I wrong, or did you have something of substance, here?
There IS proof, however, that OSU kinda sucked this year, despite the trumpeting of some.