On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, Cutler, Ken wrote:
 
> hasn't won for a variety of reasons.  Clay Satow pointed out the original
> reason for the adoption of the all--Minnesota policy. It encouraged
> development of Minnesota HS players.  The policy is no longer necessary and
> will probably not be followed.
 
I would not be so quick to state that point. My impression has always been
that a significant part of Minnesota's support (both financially and in
terms of fan base) has been because they are truly Minnesota's team. I
suspect that a move away from the all-Minnesota policy may cause some
discomfort among boosters. This discomfort may hurt fundraising for the
hockey team in particular, or the U in general. For so long, the Gophers
have been "Minnesota's Pride on Ice". Will Minnesota's supporters be able
to adjust to being "Minnesota and Manitoba's Pride on Ice?"
 
I think people are being too quick to attribute Minnesota's recent failures
to the all-Minnesota policy. It may simply be that Minnesota's recent
failures are because of Doug Woog, not the origin of their players. If
that's the case, then the coaching change may be all that's needed.
 
See you later,
John
 
--
 John Edwards - Carleton (Ont) '96, Manitoba '00 - [log in to unmask]
                  "You're telling me the fun's over?
      Man! I'm still waiting for the fun to start." - Brad Hamilton
The opinions expressed are mine alone, because everybody else says I'm weird.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.