For what its worth, heres my take on the issue.  I agree that, as a general
matter, the 21 year old freshman has an advantage over an 18 year old
freshman.  However, I also believe that a 18 year-old Brian Leetch or Paul
Kariya had an advantage over the 23 year old seniors playing against them in
those years.  If the goal of college hockey is to achieve parity, then ban (or
distrubute equally) those players who have an advantage, be it talent or age.
If, on the other hand, the goal is to allow Colleges to have their true
students, of whatever age, compete against other schools' students, then let
all eligible players play.  Leave the issue of whether the hockey player
wishes to defer his college two or three years (until age 21) to those who are
impacted by the decision -- the student.  Do colleges otherwise penalize older
students who took some time off between HS and college?  As long as the older
students continue to satisfy the academic requirements imposed on all
students, who are we to complain?   (As an aside, the Canadian Universities
allow their students to play, even after having played pro hockey -- as long
as those students are legitimate students who chose to go to school later in
life.).
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.