Well,
        I'll probably get attacked, but I don't mind if I do, given the
caliber of the 'arguments' and yes, the ad hominem stuff against Larry. I
understand his viewpoint, though I don't take it to the degree that, I
think, he does. Do I feel bad that young US born hockey players end up
'beaten out'' for spots on US college hockey rosters? Yes I do. And though
they may be legitimately beaten out, I don't believe that the caliber of
play would slip  much if they were playing. Am I for legislation or school
policies to keep out the Canadians or Europeans? No I'm not.But I repeat, I
can understand where Larry is coming from.
        And c'mon people, "They should also be offensive to every American."

I'll let that one stand on it's own.

and "West Point enrolls and trains foreign officers, they just don't end up
in the US Army."
I talked with a West Point grad who now has a son there- no hockey. Very
very few foreign officer trainees are there for a full Academy education.
Most for a year or less, many in 'separate'
programs.Many older than college students, even hockey players. Seems like
apples and oranges to me.And since the discussion here is about athletics,
unless one of these foreign officers shows up on a West Point roster, of
questionable relevance, IMO.

"Hometowns of three BC Eagles 2000-01 roster, courtesy of their
website:  Calgary, AB
Kanata, ON and Osoyoos, BC."

 a total of 3 current roster players somehow makes BC NOT committed to US
players? Might be hard to find another non-Minnesota D1 school with less
than 3.Completely aside from BC's long standing( and acknowledged)practice
of fielding teams of almost exclusively US players.



Tom Curtis