The following comes from an extremely reliable source. I think it needs
to be heard.
Most of you may not know this, but games played outside the continental US
do count towards the 30-game ECAC and 26-game Ivy limits, although they don't
count towards the 34-game NC$$ limit. Thus, if ECAC schools want to play
games in Alaska, say, that will push them over the limit, they need to have
it voted on by the league. I do not know if the non-Ivies vote too, all
I have are the results of the Ivy votes.
RPI wanted to go to Alaska next year and play three games. That would have
put them one over the ECAC limit at 31. But this was shot down, with all six
Ivies apparently voting no.
Since RPI couldn't make the trip, Yale then decided it wanted in and applied
for dispensation. Yale would have gone one over the limit at 27 with these
games.
The Ivies voted YES.
In addition, this season Brown played a total of 29 games, including three
in Alaska, and just a couple of years ago, Yale did the same. Dartmouth went
there in 1989 for the Nissan Classic which pushed them over the limit, and
made an earlier trip to Alaska as well. Princeton played four games there
in 1985-86 for a total of 30 on the season.
I believe it has been at least 9 years since an ECAC non-Ivy went to Alaska.
I know other non-Ivies were interested in going. I do not know if they also
applied to have the games allowed and were rejected.
Apparently Ivies can go to Alaska, but non-Ivies cannot.
I'm not sure how much more proof needs to be given that there are positive
things that can be done to improve the ECAC, yet they refuse to do it.
Folks, please, realize what is going on rather than getting upset just
because the ECAC/Ivies are being criticized.
By the way, as I've always said, my argument isn't with the ECAC/Ivy hockey
programs. It's with the administrations at these schools. The Ivies seem to
have an unfair grip on the league, and the non-Ivies are too frightened of not
being associated with the Ivies to leave and develop identities of their own.
- mike
|
