Ron Correia (pronounced like Kariya? :-)) writes:
>I believe when the player signs a letter of intent and the college agrees to
>provide a scholarship, that agreement should be legally binding on both (the
>player and the school) for 4 years.  The school should be required to provide
>that scholarship for 4 years and the player should be required to play for that
>school for 4 years.  I don't believe a player should be LEGALLY allowed to
>jump to the NHL until the terms of that contract have expired.
 
I can't agree.  When the player leaves, the school gets its
scholarship back to offer to someone else.  And the player gives up
his free or semi-free education.  If that's his choice, then he should
have the right to do that.  A scholarship isn't indentured servitude.
 
In my view, the agreement is that since the player will play for and attend
that school, and the school will provide some percentage of the cost
of an education, then the player will not attend *another* school or
go pro.  If he decides to do either (or if he breaches the agreement
by flunking out of school, getting in trouble, etc.), then the
agreement is ended.  Kind of like when I came to work for Cabletron...
they agreed to pay me so much and I agreed to work for them.  If I decide
to stop working for them, which I can do at any time with notice, then
they simply stop paying me.  I'm not required to work for 4 years or
any length of time.
 
(of course, looking at it this way makes it very hard to consider
student-athletes to be such, and I'm somewhat sympathetic to those
arguments...)
 
>This also applies to the olympics, BTW.  I would not allow a scholarship
>player to compete in any other tournament (including the olympics) during
>the college season.  I know that's harsh, but the schools need some protection
>for their investment.  And yes, I do believe these 18-22 year old ADULTS (not
>kids) are an investment.  The school is paying good money for their services
>and they should honor their agreement to play.
 
College hockey would never do this...they'd be cutting their own
throats in terms of PR and their association with USA Hockey.  It is
actually to the benefit of colleges to have their players leave for
the Olympics.  Two years ago, I had Walsh on and he was talking about
Dunham leaving for the Games - he pointed out what prestige it brings
to the school and how attractive it is to kids to want to play for a
school that produces Olympians.  The same is true to a lesser degree
for the World Juniors and other tourneys.
 
It's true that it places a burden on coaches, who sometimes find out
at the last minute that a certain kid will make the team and then have
to play without him, or else they lose him the summer before when it's
still too late to recruit someone new.  But either way, most coaches
seem to think the positives outweigh the negatives.  That's as far as
international tourneys go...it can be a different story when it comes
to NHL teams pressuring kids to turn pro early, and some coaches have
spoken out about this.  So it is good to hear that at least in Kariya's
case, the Ducks have apparently left him alone (so far, anyway).
 
Ron, any inside scoop on the Friars before Wed's PC-MC game? :-)
---                                                                 ---
Mike Machnik                                          [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc.                                  *HMM* 11/13/93
<<<<<< Color Voice of the (6-7-1) Merrimack Warriors WCCM 800 AM >>>>>>