> 1. No scholarships.  Johnnie can go to Yale for $100k or Michigan for free.
>

This may be picking nits (then again, maybe not), but whether to award
athletic scholarships in the ECAC is left up to the individual schools, and
is not a league rule.  Clarkson has awarded them for quite some time, and
Saint Lawrence has recently begun awarding them as well.  While I can't say
for sure, I do believe that some of the other non-Ivies also do.

The Ivies, of course, do not.  That's part of their tradition/charter.  But,
as has been stated here before by others, there *are* ways around that, such
as awarding other types of scholarships, grants, etc.  In this case, though,
there is a distinction between an ECAC rule an the restrictions put in place
by the Ivy League and individual schools.

That said, its clear that significant changes are needed in the ECAC, if it
is to regain competitiveness.  Keeping the schedule artificially short
(c'mon, 2 GAMES!?!) is just silly.  Its the only conference where not
everybody plays by the same rules (the Ivies only schedule 29 games, and
start their practices even later) and half the conference plays for an
additional title (the Ivy League title, of course).

I've advocated splitting the ECAC between the Ivy League and the non-Ivies
(call them the Empire conference if you like, since all of them are in NY
state except for UVM, who is not far outside the state line).  Part of me
would like to see an outright split, but that would kill some important
rivalries.  Two divisions could be made, to keep the existing rivalries
intact, but keep the conference schedule more biased toward playing
in-division teams (perhaps 2 games against in-division teams and 1
other-division teams).

Hmmm. That would make seeding the conference tournament pretty tricky.  Maybe
an outright split is the better idea.  At least then all the teams within
both sides of the split would be playing on level ice.

Todd
http://members.aol.com/todnielson/creasemonkey.html