ACHA versus CHF

One bit of information that you need to know. The CHF wasn’t just put together after Naples. This has been in the planning stages for a long time. The people that are in charge of this new league are meticulously organizing this league. They have insurance, website, financials etc all in place.

The organizers of this group are not disgruntled former ACHA members. They have tried to work with the ACHA but the ACHA didnt want to work with them. All the CHF wanted was for the ACHA to be transparent with their financials and board minutes, all of which they have to do by law as they are a non profit. They refused to release the information and they continue to hire personnel using the ACHA dues paying members money.

It is up teams and leagues if they want to leave the ACHA. I dont think that they should be bad mouthed for doing that. The ACHA games with the CHF will count. Thank you to Jay for providing correct information.

  1. I am aware it has been in the planning stages for a long time. Heck the twitter account was registered in 2012. However, many of the people involved were running for ACHA positions in Naples this year. It seems the timing of the decision to launch was tied to the failure of several proposals in Naples, some of which I agree with, like the voting issue.

  2. Legally it appears the financials are in order. The 990s are up-to-date on Guidestar. Keep in mind the site runs a year off in posting. So the most recent is 2017, 2018 should be up before the year is out. I went through them all last week after the CHF raised the issue.

  3. The insurance is not in order or at least not to the level it is with the ACHA. Had they waited to launch and let teams and leagues know throughout this season a few things could have been done or avoided;
    a) They cannot get affiliate USA Hockey Insurance for the 2019-2020 season. That application window does not open again until October I believe. Insurance would have to be achieved through alternative routes which have not been cleanly spelled out. If they waited they could have done so prior to launch.
    b) Our team never received any kind of communication about the CHF until the week of June 17th. If you look at conference shifts in any level of college sports, they do not happen in June for games that begin in September. Again, by waiting they could have given teams a year to prepare for this. How much better would this launch have been if we knew by March what we were doing next year so we could schedule with that in mind.
    c) Schedules for most teams are pretty much set and for most teams were made not even knowing the CHF was out there. Again, this could have been avoided.

  4. We still have not been told of any kind of league fee, whereas our budget has been set since the spring, once our schedule was finished.

  5. That’s great that the CHF is going to somehow count ACHA games in their rankings formula. That formula to my knowledge has not been presented other than to say it will be via myhockeyrankings. Further, it will be a difficult mathematical formula to count ACHA opponents who might only play one or two opponents. Not to mention unequivocally the ACHA is not going to do so, which means those teams are going to drop CHF opponents in many cases. Nor would I expect the ACHA teams to do so. Consider this, the NCAA does not and cannot games against Canadian Universities in their pairwise rankings which is why other than when West Point plays the RMA they are listed at exhibition games.

Again, I think their is a place for the CHF but the launch at this time is causing more stress and anxiety than need be. I say they roll with their DIII contingent, make that great and then expand upon that for next year. They have some pioneers set to roll with them, so do it. I think their are a lot of positives but it feels like they opened an ice cream stand in the middle of winter in Upstate NY, timing is everything with a business and this timing needs to be rethought.

1 Like
  1. I am aware it has been in the planning stages for a long time. Heck the twitter account was registered in 2012. However, many of the people involved were running for ACHA positions in Naples this year. It seems the timing of the decision to launch was tied to the failure of several proposals in Naples, some of which I agree with, like the voting issue.
    1.The CHF has been part of a discussion for 14 months, but not since 2012 I assure you. It was the last option for a group trying to start a proactive dialogue with an unconcerned, unresponsive and disinterested ACHA EXEC Board. Conference leaders from Florida to Maine came together to try and address concerns and issues with the ACHA Exec board and their leadership of the ACHA. Normal election channels were the next chosen path, only to have the voting criteria “adjusted” two weeks before Naples. The final straw for me was watching the President of the ACHA vote and encourage others to vote to deny every program the opportunity to vote on ACHA issues regardless of their ability (financial, logistical) to attend the national meeting in Naples.
  2. Legally it appears the financials are in order. The 990s are up-to-date on Guidestar. Keep in mind the site runs a year off in posting. So the most recent is 2017, 2018 should be up before the year is out. I went through them all last week after the CHF raised the issue.
    2. The concern isn’t the bottom line dollar figure…its who spends the money, what money do they spend,who do they spend it with and are they authorized(by by-law) to spend it.
  3. The insurance is not in order or at least not to the level it is with the ACHA. Had they waited to launch and let teams and leagues know throughout this season a few things could have been done or avoided;
    3. Per Ashley Bevin USAH Adult Hockey chief and surprisingly a new ACHA board member. CHF has access to USAH insurance.likely a different path than ACHA but the USAH is determining the processes for both organizations currently.
    a) They cannot get affiliate USA Hockey Insurance for the 2019-2020 season. That application window does not open again until October I believe. Insurance would have to be achieved through alternative routes which have not been cleanly spelled out. If they waited they could have done so prior to launch.
    a. Maybe…CHF has already applied for Affiliate membership. If they get it depends on which USAH official you speak to.
    b) Our team never received any kind of communication about the CHF until the week of June 17th. If you look at conference shifts in any level of college sports, they do not happen in June for games that begin in September. Again, by waiting they could have given teams a year to prepare for this. How much better would this launch have been if we knew by March what we were doing next year so we could schedule with that in mind.
    b.Conference leadership has been irregular in getting the info out.We spoke to 75% of D2 and D3 conferences with information within a week of Naples.
    c) Schedules for most teams are pretty much set and for most teams were made not even knowing the CHF was out there. Again, this could have been avoided.
    c. Anytime there is change scheduling and operational issues will arise. We felt we needed to pursue every standard, ACHA policy angle for change before we stepped away from the ACHA.
  4. We still have not been told of any kind of league fee, whereas our budget has been set since the spring, once our schedule was finished.
    4.This has been out there but $1700/team…less if we can acquire the appropriate sponsorship monies.
  5. That’s great that the CHF is going to somehow count ACHA games in their rankings formula. That formula to my knowledge has not been presented other than to say it will be via myhockeyrankings. Further, it will be a difficult mathematical formula to count ACHA opponents who might only play one or two opponents. Not to mention unequivocally the ACHA is not going to do so, which means those teams are going to drop CHF opponents in many cases. Nor would I expect the ACHA teams to do so. Consider this, the NCAA does not and cannot games against Canadian Universities in their pairwise rankings which is why other than when West Point plays the RMA they are listed at exhibition games.
    5. MyHockeyRankings says they can do it…they are the best so I’ll beleive them…ultimately the “ranking” element in this is not the only issue. The CHF wants to maintain and secure everyones natural and traditional rivalry opponents. Those games and traditions make the college hockey experience.It doesn’t appear the ACHA feels the same, that’s their prerogative and an indication of what they value.

My point here is this. This isn’t about making a superleague (see ACHA D1 departure for that)…it isn’t about hate for the ACHA. It isn’t about hurting the ACHA. The CHF is about making the college hockey experience better for all involved. We say “players first” and we mean it. Is this year and next year going to be difficult ,sure it is change always is. We aren’t out soliciting, selling this CHF thing. Its the byproduct of people who feel the existing model has issues, the drivers of that model are blind or unwilling to change for the better of all, every player, every program, every conference. The CHF will happen this coming season working towards a better college club hockey world for everyone.

It would be great if I could get some clarification on the scheduling nightmare that has begun. I am a student club president for my team and I am also in charge of our scheduling. We are staying in the ACHA as our league voted on it. With what it looks like we could have up to 6 games vs CHF teams. I’m sure a lot of schedulers have similar concerns and questions.

  1. Will ACHA teams officially be allowed to play CHF teams as long as the ACHA receives a sealed USAH certified roster of that specific CHF team? (I know the ACHA was discouraging it in emails it sounded like) If not, should i be canceling these games and finding new ACHA opponents?

  2. Will these games count towards ACHA rankings? Or is this information unknown.

  3. Is there a certain date or time frame to expect a list of final ACHA or CHF teams? I’d expect it to be after July 12th. This info is crucial so ice time can be reserved and budgets can be set.

WE JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO PLAY TEAMS IN BOTH LEAGUES. UGH (as long as they are USAH registered of course)

1 Like

They CANNOT prohibit you from playing anyone (assuming the insurance is aligned). Now will those games count towards rankings? I can almost guarantee a no (at least from the ACHA).

Look at the DVCHC from last year. Salisbury operated two teams- one was ACHA D3, the other was non-ACHA yet the played in the same “league” (divisions different) as the non-ACHA team played a regular schedule vs ACHA teams with ZERO issues. The games did not count for rankings of course, but a regular schedule was played.

I think it comes down to do those six games impact your ACHA games requirement. If you can afford to add a few CHF games then who really cares as long as everything lines up.

1 Like

Preface: My program and conference unanimously voted to remain in the ACHA for 2019/20. Our conference also unanimously voted to revisit the discussion again for 2020/21.

I think The CHF is on to something. They have tabled a viable option that is very intriguing to programs like ours. (Our regional location, budget, school support, etc.) It may not be the best option for everyone, but options themselves are good to have. I hope the CHF thrives in 2019-20.

There is a lot the ACHA could improve upon by simply empowering well informed, proactive representatives from EACH faction of their membership and allowing them to decide what is most beneficial for their faction. I think that is the axiom of the CHF. I think the CHF is working towards that, and by creating a direct competitor, forcing the ACHA to do so as well.

Just my thoughts tho, full disclosure I am a few bourbons deep at this point in the day. Happy 4th!

1 Like

I have read everything available regarding this mess and yea it is a mess. The ACHA has issues and much of the issues in my experience are directly related to some of the people leading the CHF. As I read more and more all of this it seems as if people on both sides should have been at the table fixing whatever need fixing (easy for me to say). The ACHA has made huge strides in establishing legitimacy and now (my opinion) this is a huge setback for non-NCAA programs whether they be “club” or “varsity” programs.

The biggest issue that the ACHA and (remains to be seen) CHF have not addressed is the message to the .500 and below teams.

As a Commissioner explain to me how I can go to a school with limited to no funding and will likely only win 2-3 games and mandate them to pony up $1700-$2000?

I know both have explored “non-tournament” bound options, but you still need rationale for dues.

Ringer47: The leaders of the CHF have made multiple requests to meet with the leaders of the ACHA and the ACHA has made no movement to solve some of their requests. Much of this would have gone away if the ACHA leaders did 3 things: 1. published a budget, not a list of expenses after they spent the money 2. published an agenda for all upcoming board meetings on their website and 3. published board minutes on their website following board meetings. At this point the ACHA has not even published a budget for the 2019-20 season but have added people for various jobs throughout the ACHA . The CHF has tried to work with the ACHA but the ACHA doesn’t want to work with the CHF.

All of 3 of those issues are easily fixed. I have first hand experiences with some of the CHF leadership and I can assure you those men are less than adequate in their duties, decisions, communication, etc. I find it perplexing that these men are so fed up with the ACHA this is the route they have chosen given their lack of communication, adherence to bylaws, decisions made without consultation from member schools, etc. The ACHA obviously will need to reorganize, be more transparent, be more inclusive in regard to voting procedures, etc. Hopefully that will take place but specifically to those that had leadership roles in the ACHA and are now part of the CHF good luck because they are part of the daily problems of the ACHA.

Ringer 47- if the three issues are easily fixed, and the ACHA knows that those issues are concerns, why haven’t they been fixed? They are a non profit and and have a 501C and it is against the law not to make the information public. Thanks

Here’s the IRS number if anyone wants to loop them in: 877-829-5500.

Hello All……Good to see everyone is discussing the Hockey world. I just felt it was time to offer a dissenting opinion.To Ringers commentary. He makes a number of statements that are backed up by his reading, that are either false or misinformed.First substantiate for me how the leaders of the CHF (myself included) contributed to the issues caused by the ACHA EXEC Board. What experience can you show or detail that remotely justifies that statement. Secondly I do agree with you if both parties had sat agreed to sit down sometime in the last 14 months to discuss/address/resolve the problems presented to the ACHA board things might be different. Problem there is the ACHA EXEC Board refused to address the issues presented by member conferences, despite repeated requests to do just that. Their ignoring/turning their nose up to the present issues got us to here today. Hobeysmom references three of the issues that are in play, its impossible to discuss, have a dialogue or search for a resolution when you’re the only one interested in fixing/discussing those issues, the ACHA Board refused to engage in any effort to work things out. You’re perplexed we’d be so upset that the ACHA Board, for 14 months, refused to address their issues you listed. ( lack of communication-adherence to by-laws-decisions made arbitrarily without input or consultation from paying member schools). We’re just crazy that way, expecting the organization to do right by its members.
To NY Hockey Boss point. “National” (CHF term for tournament bound teams) will pay a higher fee than “League” (CHF term for non-tournament bound teams) . Dollar figures TBD. The exploration of “non-tournament” bound teams is this…ACHA has voted it down once and pushed off any resolution to the 2020-2021 season. IT starts in the CHF DAY ONE.

Getting closer to the 12th. Any update on who is staying and going in D2 or still pretty much just D3 teams joining. Seems like it could be a cake walk for Fairfield and Farmingdale in Nashville for the D3 land.

Few questions;

When ACHA teams play NCAA teams, does the USA hockey insurance become invalid since NCAA teams have their own insurance? I asked a commissioner of a SE conference and he didn’t answer me. Shocking.

Why couldn’t the college teams that join the CHF register as Adult teams through their USAHockey district? Which I did about 10 years ago. I’m under the impression, ACHA teams were Adult Senior teams. But nonetheless, there is no usahockey rule preventing any adult team from playing out of district, at least not yet.

Wouldn’t the exclusion of competition be against the Sherman Act? How can the ACHA be the only association?

1 Like

D-Day.

Hey Guys…
Calihockey…I think their would be some type of waiver needed for the ACHA vs NCAA. Not sure just a thought
-This is ultimately how the CHF will be insured thru USAH…some details still being ironed out

  • You’re right …USAH won’t stand for exclusion with another USAH program…we’ll see if ACHA gets that

Chiz…fake D-Day…ACHA trying to get a head count to see how short their budget $$$ will be. If a team doesn’t declare today…what happens?? ACHA gonna turn them out…push them over to the CHF?? I doubt it…but we’ll see

Just curious as why so many people are worried about USAH insurance? It’s a supplemental secondary insurance that barely pays out? Many of cases where claims were denied.

Issue I have is our student athletes have primary insurance from there parents or wherever, then secondary insurance through our school (proof for other schools could be given). So why do i need to double up with USAH insurance?

Why does a waiver exist for ncaa teams but not the non-Hockey Canada or aau juniors? Something doesn’t seem right.

I’m surprised a lawyer hasn’t gone after USA hockey using the Sherman act.

I’m almost positive the officials and coaches won’t be covered by schools insurance