I don't think I buy into the watered down theory.  If anything I think
parity is closer to reality.  Some one mentioned college football as an
example, I don't think that you can compare the two because football rewards
a champion based on a poll and if anyone has parity it is football.
Virginia Tech playing for a national championship?  Outside of Bruce Smith,
who ever heard of V Tech?  The same teams compete for the title every year
because they are good and they have the preconceived notion of a writer that
they are the best.  Not always the case.
 
I don't know where the issue stands but if the NCAA allows players in with
professional experience doesn't that increase the talent pool in numbers and
quality?  I think college hockey suffers too much from the haves and the
have nots.  You don't see too many surprises year in and year out for the
finals.  SLU to the Frozen Four was a surprise but not a shock.  I can't
think of real surprise in the last few years.  Maybe BC the first year of
their run but there was a lot of talent there, just young.
 
Look at the 90's and this years final four teams.  A total of 18 teams have
made the finals in the last 11 years.  Michigan, BU and Maine leading the
way with 6, 6 & 5 appearences.  Seven teams had one appearence (Colgate,
Clarkson, N. Mich, Harvard, SLU, UVM & Minn.) and six teams had two
(Wisconsin, MSU, OSU, UNH, N. Dak & CC).  LSSU had 3 and BC 4 to round out
the field.  You could probably predict the winner with relative accuracy
based on the probablitity of the teams appearing in the final four.  FYI, I
didn't take into account any NCAA violations changing the "official" records.
 
I guess that I feel adding the new teams to the field will help the
situation rather than hurt it.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.