John T. Whelan wrote:
 
>         So you'd rather play Ohio State than North Dakota or Colorado
> College?  I know that with the exception of Harvard, Cornell's biggest
> hockey rivals are with non-Ivy schools (Clarkson and RPI).  Now, those
> two schools have a lot in common off-ice with Cornell, given that a
> lot of science/techie types in New York apply to all three, and
> perhaps Cornell is unusual in that with the departure of the Hockey
> East schools and Army, there are not a lot of non-Ivy ECAC schools
> close to the other hockey-playing Ivies.  But take for example the
> Vermont-Dartmouth travel partnership.  Dartmouth is the Ivy team, but
> 90% of Cornell fans would rather watch a Cornell-UVM game, due to the
> rivalry (largely driven by the friction between the fan bases) that's
> arisen in recent years.  I'm pretty sure hockey is the only sport in
> which Cornell and UVM mean anything more to each other than any other
> two random schools in the Northeast.  And with the exception of
> agricultural education, I can't think of any academic connections.
 
I would get up more for Ohio State than North Dakota.  I am, perhaps, something
of an exception among Gopher fans, since I originally hail from other parts of
the Big 10 and might feel more connection to them than natives do.  But if Ohio
State remains a good hockey team, I suspect that it would be close in other
Gopher fans' minds and could easily take over with a little development.  This
would certainly be the case with Michigan.
 
>         Is this true?  The ECAC was unhappy when the Ivies handed out
> weekly press releases, but when they agreed to limit it to a champion
> and year-end awards, that seemed a suitable compromise.  The only
> reason I can think of why someone might object to that sort of Big Ten
> championship is that it might be seen as the first step to Big Ten
> secession.  (And that it might replace tournaments like the Mariucci
> Classic, Badger Showdown and GLI.)
 
Because of the structure, it would require a number of non-conference games to
be scheduled between Big 10 teams.  In addition to being tough if the WCHA does
not cut back on league games, when I brought this idea up about a year ago,
everyone else seemed to react as if it is the duty of the Big 10 schools to use
their non-conference games to play other teams.  I believe that the call came
from out east that the point of non-conference games was to play inter-regional
match-ups.
 
>         Unless Minnesota and Wisconsin join the CCHA, which would
> leave the question of who would host the Final Five.
 
Think we could get the nine votes it would take, folks?
 
J. Michael Neal
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.