HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
The College Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"Tuthill, Richard" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 24 Dec 1995 09:13:00 EST
Reply-To:
"Tuthill, Richard" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (36 lines)
     Thanks to Ryan for an accounting of the Maine infractions.   I remain
convinced that these infractions are basically small potatoes.   The
University (and perhaps the NCAA) are right to come down hard in this case
 --  small potatoes or not  --  but I'm concerned about an over-reaction.
 
     About a year or two ago the Hartford Courant ran an expose on big-time
football as experienced by an outstanding CT player who had gone out to the
midwest to a certain school ranked annually in the top ten.   This school
has a very good reputation.   What was described was an atmosphere where
football players regularly received "honoraria" of $100 bills for putting in
cameo appearances at university cocktail parties.   Where stars from very
humble financial backgrounds ran around in expensive cars.   And on and on
....   And,  to my knowledge,  the NCAA has never investigated this
particular institution!   That is the frame of reference I use when I think
about the Maine affair.
 
     So I guess I'm not too impressed by the conclusions of the Maine
investigation.   I think they did a very thorough job.   I think the
punishments are severe and appropriate.   But I don't see a pattern of
blatant abuse which should tarnish the institution.   And I'm not sure about
the national championship thing.   The Dunham situation is too trivial to
mention unless large sums were involved.   And from the posts,  it looks
like Ingram was ineligible the year previous to 92/93  --  or am I missing
something?   Perhaps the most serious charge relates to Shawn's $1,200.   I
suppose his detractors will claim that he invented the explanation ex post
facto,  but if there were no evidence to the contrary he would be gone by
now.   Maine would simply not let him stay when their consultants knew darn
well that the NCAA was going to can him.
 
     So,  good clean-up job,  Maine.   Lets get back to the game.
 
     -- Dick Tuthill
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2