Edward N. Moller wrote:
 
> History shows us that accepting the hockey schools' consensus is
hardly a
> given.  It is the UNC's of the world that have placed a limit on 18
scholarships
> for hockey while allowing basketball to have a limit of 15
scholarships.  It
> just shows how little they understand our game, and they have
absolutely no
> desire to develop any understanding.  The 18 scholarship limit is
surpassed if,
> as most teams do, you skate four lines of forwards, three lines of
defense, and
> carry two goalies.  Meanwhile, how many NC$$ basketball teams go more
than five
> deep on their bench?
 
I suspect that even in this case, the UNC rep is still just nodding
his/her head
when the scholarship issue comes up.  I suspect that this is still an
issue where
the consensus opinion of the hockey schools is listened to; it's no skin
off of
UNC's nose if they make the scholarship limit 50, since they don't have
a team.
 
I'd think that the more severe limit comes from the majority of hockey
schools that
couldn't compete if you raised the limit and the wealthier institutions
poured more
dollars into the sport.  It's a cost containment measure.  Moreover,
there are
schools that don't offer scholarships at all (to varying degrees, see
earlier
definition of "need-based scholarships") and have an interest in keeping
the ceiling
down.  I'm sympathetic, really, though I think that it's a step that
will be only
partially successful, as those with deep pockets will find other ways to
spend their
money.
 
J. Michael Neal
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.