re: UAH Hockey might be screwed

They shouldn’t move to D1. They don’t have the following or the resources necessary to compete at that level.

Why can’t a program just be content where they are?

When they went D2 in 86 the NCAA had already done away with any sponsorship for D2 hockey, they would however bring it back from 93-99.

D3 was never on the table for them because that has to be regionally focused.

D1 independent was the only option.

Now they're stuck in a leftovers conference at the D1 level after some much needed realignment and rebranding of conferences.

He thinks the University of Alabama in Huntsville is in Birmingham...

I’m just saying you’re trying to sound like you have in depth knowledge about UAH and their hockey program and you don’t even know what city they’re in

You don't know what you're even talking about if you're referring to a game against Vanderbilt.. which would have been at the club level, not NCAA.

Club hockey was, and always will be a complete circus-joke, regardless of the rulesets.

College hockey has never allowed fighting. It had an open-play style with no two-line pass, dating back decades before the NHL made the same rule change.

Don't try to talk to me on this subject. It won't go well for you.

...only on the internet :shakes head:

No idea what's even being 'argued' here. Seems like you're super hard-on for Hunstville and don't like being told what's up on a matter that involves something in your personal space.

Club hockey in the 70s, in Alabama of all places, must have been an absolute shite-show of epic proportions.

I have no doubt the clueless people playing in those games would do stupid shite that people like yourself found entertaining.

In any case, NCAA college hockey has always been a more skill focused and open style of play as opposed to major junior and pro hockey, which both allow fighting and both relatively recently took out the two-line pass to open the game.

And without a doubt UAH going D1 was a terrible idea, and it's likely to come to an end sooner than later.

You're way off if you think I'm saying the game used to be backwards and unrefined.

I'm saying the level of hockey that you watched was so absolutely horrible it's the type of environment that would result in a circus - (hate this word) but it was a gong-show.

This started with you saying college hockey was more entertaining when there was fighting and rougher play.

I'm saying what you were watching wasn't college hockey. It's was like a beer league with unofficial affiliation to the universities they represent.

There's so many alternatives for top players to NCAA college hockey, which is so different than football. Guys play major junior, or jr a, or already pro at 18-19 when they'd be in college.

By the time you'd fill out rosters for club hockey teams in the 1980s you're talking about kids that weren't even decent high school players in most cases. That's certainly still the case today with a some exceptions of half decent players.

I think you're probably carrying a bit of old-man syndrome on this one and it's influencing how you're processing what I'm saying, on top of the fact you don't understand hockey or the dynamics of the levels.

You, and the other people enjoying cheap beer, enjoyed those games because you didn't know any better.

It's so foreign to you you were just in awe of how different it was and like seeing those idiots run around at each other.

Actually, am a hockey expert and hold a psychology degree.

So, laughing.

But yeah, you were watching a beer league with unofficial affiliation to the schools on the jerseys.