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:
Tue, 26 Dec 1995 09:18:00 EST
Reply-To:
"Tuthill, Richard" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (50 lines)
     I guess it is obvious that the reaction to the Maine situation spans a
rather wide spectrum.   My views are quite well known,  so I don't want to
expand on them here.   But a number of questions have arisen in my mind that
perhaps I could share with the list.
 
     If Ingraham was ineligible in any way in 92/93,  why didn't the NCAA
step in and forfeit all of Maine's victories in that year (including the
championship) when it was discovered in the fall of 93 that he had had a
problem in 91/92 (and they forfeited 14 games for THAT year).   Why is the
Ingraham discussion even part of this,  except to perhaps show a pattern?
  There is nothing new here is there?
 
     Was Dunham the only college player to accept spending money from USA
Hockey?   If not,  then every school that had a player on that Olympic team
is at risk for ALL the games subsequently played by that player.   There
could be a MASSIVE number of forfeitures coming up,  folks.   Maybe even
multiple games where both teams used ineligible players and the games in
question have to be completely nullified!
 
     Are USA Hockey and USOC cooperating with these investigations?   It is
at least possible,  in my mind,  that they might not be.   I'm curious to
know if they are.
 
     What do people close to the situation think of the $1200 that Shawn
received,  supposedly for prior services rendered,  during his period of
suspension?   Is that explanation valid?   If there is adequate back-up
documentation for that explanation,  then I don't see a problem.
 
     How many of us feel that if you took a microscope to any D-1 hockey
program in the country that you could probably find as many violations as
they found at Maine?   (I can almost hear the self-righteous harrumphing
from here:-)   No system is perfect,  and I'm curious about what a "normal"
number of infractions would be.   Wouldn't picking a couple of schools at
random for a complete and thorough audit be a good thing for the NCAA to do
on an annual basis?   (Please no shudders,  it would really help:-)   Sort
of like having Lloyds of London coming in periodically to do your ISO 9000
audit!
 
     I wonder how much schools like UNC,  Duke,  Michigan,  and Penn State
spend on compliance efforts compared to Maine?   This speaks to my
contention that Maine was trying to manage a big-time program with a Yankee
Conference mentality.   (I grew up in the Yankee Conference.   It is truly
small-time:-)   It would certainly be interesting to know the relative sizes
of the budgets.
 
     -- 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