In a message dated 97-06-10 08:44:40 EDT, you write:
Arthur Berman writes:
 
 This assumption is precisely why colleges should not field "professional"
 revenue producing teams under the guise of educational development.  There
 is more than one way interest in a sport can be measured.  Participation
 is an equally valid frame of reference and more appropriate for what are
 supposed to be educational institutions.
 
 We could model US Colleges on the Canadian system or am I wrong in pointing
out that the author of this reply is one who always chants the mantra BU or
is BU hockey not the evil big time US College sport the author decries?
 
I know it is not politically correct to state the obvious. The impact of
Title IX (besides killing non-revenue sports) is to stunt the growth of D1
college hockey. If women wanted equality they could compete on an equal
basis. Any numbers type "affirmative action" is affirmatively unfair.
 
The fact is that schools like Williams, Middlebury, and Amherst offer a full
gamut of all sports for both genders. It can be done- and they do it because
their market i.e the students want and expect it just like they had at
Choate, Andover, & Exeter.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.