In the recent exchange of ideas, these (well-snipped) passages stand out:
 
>>  So, Fairbanks--and perhaps other small schools--can't compete for the
recruits until they have a winning program, but they can't win until they
have more competitive players...
 
> And the fans are disgruntled.  But would the fans be happier if the team
were simply *winning*?
 
 
This is a great question.  Ivy League fans always have this in the back of
their minds -- if the situation ever gets as ugly as football and basketball
, and we simply can no longer compete against de facto professional programs
, what then?  Do we stick around in "Division I-A" and lose ersatz college
games, or do we move to Division I-AA and continue to compete for a national
championship?
 
I love the sport and would hate to see it further ghetto-ized into I-A and I
-AA divisions.  Hopefully that's not the wave of the future, since the
commercial influences which created that drift in the other sports are not
nearly as strong in hockey.  Still, it is a dilemma which is real: stay with
traditional rivalries and fight a losing battle, or find a more natural (and
competitive) arena?  I suspect the other programs which have been discussed
in the foregoing thread also face similar choices.
 
The Trick (tm), to me, is structuring the game to avoid programs being
forced into such decisions, yet also not loading Div. I down with so many
borderline programs that it becomes untenable.
 
-- Greg
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.