Well, my copy of this issue of The Hockey News finally arrived in DC
on Wednesday, almost a week after I first saw it mentioned on USCHO
last Friday.  I was mainly eager to see why THN thought that RPI
deserved to be #7 in the NCAA.  Now I know -- it is because our top
two lines are returning intact.  One can't believe everything one
sees in print.  :-)
 
As to the 6-page ad not including the ECAC, somewhere (probably in
USCHO), I read that the ECAC did not choose to participate.  It was
speculated that this might have something to do with the fact that
Fanter resigned.  I doubt it.
 
George and Terri Downing quoted from the ad: "Several Eastern
College Athletic Conference teams, led by the Ivy League
institutions, decided to branch off and form their own league and
that left several schools in a predicament. Those schools banded
together, forming Hockey East..."
 
and then commented:
 
>Although it's simplified, that seems correct, at least to my
>memory.
 
I guess that everyone's memory is different, but I see it somewhat
differently.  The teams that started HEA were the ones that broke
off as they did not want to be saddled with the limitations that
the Ivies wanted to impose on the league.  Basically there was
and still is a difference in philosophy between the original HEA
schools and the Ivy league schools.  Who jumped off the train first
is probably not important.
 
By the way, there also were, of course, five other ECAC schools,
Clarkson, Colgate, RPI (now called Rensselaer), SLU, and UVM in
the last years of the old ECAC.  My recollection is that HEA
wanted Clarkson and SLU to join and originally it was reported
that they did switch affiliation, but they had a change of heart.
At that time, I did not hear any rumor that RPI was going to join
HEA, however, it does seem to come up periodically.
 
 
Ralph Baer
RPI '68, '70, '74.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.