Walt Olson's recent post concerning the DivI status of the military academies
sort of got me thinking.  While I agree with some of his points, in my mind
none of them exclude the USMA and the USAFA from DivI status.
 
It is true that there is a five-year commitment required upon graduation
(unless you are David Robinson, of course).  While it is true that the
academies cannot recruit Canadians, does that preclude them from fielding
(or icing) a decent hockey team?  (And by decent, I don't mean winning their
conference or making the Final Four every year.)  Since when it is written
in stone that only Canadians make the best hockey players?  If that is true,
then Canada should win every gold metal in the Olympic Games.  (Do not read
into this that I have something against Canadian players, especially since
most of the current Spartans are Canadians.  I just am stating that not only
Canadians can play hockey.  I realize Walt didn't explicitly or implicitly
state this, but it could be interpreted in that fashion.)
 
While it is also true that in many sports at many schools, some athletes
look at college competition as a stepping stone to the professional level.
But, there are a much larger number of athletes who are realistic and
realize that competition at the college level is the highest point they
will achieve.  Those are the students (hopefully) who look upon college as
a place to further themselves and prepare themselves for a career, whether
they graduate from Michigan State or Hamline or the USAFA.  (This does not,
of course, include those people who write for student newspapers, since
these people are completely ill-prepared to face the outside world.)  If
all athletes wanted to go to the pros, nobody would ever go to Northwestern
to play football.  But, why do they go?  Becuase they know they'll probably
start, and they will have four years of playing in the highest level they
know they can get to instead of riding the pine for two or three years
waiting until the latest pro prospect graduates, or more likely, declares
himself as a hardship case for early entry into the draft.
 
So, for those players who realize that college is the highest level that they
can achieve, it is fit that the NC$$ and fans across the country give these
student-athletes as many oppurtunities to showcase their talents as we can.
This, to me means, as many DivI teams in all sports that we can possibly stand.
And as much TV coverage as possible, so that those of us who want to see these
people play can and appreciate the sport and its participants more than
think about how much money they can make going pro.
 
For instance, should we drop teams like UIC and Ohio St. and Merrimack (no
offense, Mike) and Union from DivI status because they aren't competitive
at the moment?  Do the athletes that go there think that they have a realistic
shot at making the pros?  Then, why go?  Two reasons: They want the education
and they want to play.
 
That's why I think it would be unfair to deny the young men (and women) who
choose to attend one of the military academies the opportunity to play sports
at the highest level.  Their level of competitiveness year in and year out
should not matter.  The fact that they are furthering themselves and choose
to play a sport they love at a place which will probably not give them the
chance to be a professional displays more character to me than someone who
goes to a university just so they can get a big contract someday in the NFL
or the NBA.
 
G. M. Finniss
Michigan State University
WVU '87, UTenn '92, MSU who the hell knows when?
 
P. S.  Could somebody please explain to me the purpose of sending a blimp to
        a domed stadium?  And, did I miss it, or when Francis Scott Key wrote
        the Star-Spangled Banner in Baltimore Harbor in 1814, did he actually
        include the line "yea, yea, yea, yea" right before "And the home of
        the brave"?