Our list administrator writes:
 
   >So far I've hear 3 stories.  One was relayed (accurately) to us by
   >Ryan.  Another was relayed by me from remarks made by Coach Walsh a
   >a banquet last Saturday night.  Yet a third surfaced today in the
   >Bangor Daily News.  I don't have the newspaper with me, but it
   >explicitly said that the NCAA penalty was because Cal did not have
   >the required 365 days at Maine after transferring.  The BDN stated
   >that the NCAA considered "Bangor Community College of the Universit
   >f Maine" (aka BCC) as a 2 year college and so time spent there did
   >ot count.  This would imply that Cal came to Maine in the Fall of
   >990 and after one semester at BCC transferred to the Orono campus for
   >he 2nd semester.  I have not verified this, however.
 
I don't need to add my voice to the growing clamor, stated so articulately by
Dave, Mike, Wayne and others.  My only comment would be to again suggest that
college hockey should consider withdrawing from the NC$$.  It becomes
increasingly apparent that this organization is not interested in promoting
hockey, only sucking out the few $$$ that hockey provides.  College hockey
would be best served by an organization of college administrators and coaches
from each hockey school who would police themselves and establish policies to
encourage the growth and development of college hockey.
 
But on to my question.  Wayne relates the press account that Ingraham's
suspension was based on the fact that he didn't serve his one year penance as
a student at Maine before playing on the hockey team.  What I don't understand
is how is this situation different than a student being recruited by a school
but then electing to attend a community college in order to beat Prop 18 (I
think that's the right number.)  Basketball schools like Indiana and UNLV
virtually live off community college transfers.  In fact these schools arrange
a placement for the potential freshman recruit at an appropriate community
college.  San Jacinto State in Texas has become a national basketball
powerhouse since so many eventual college stars spend their first year or two
playing basketball and at the same time earning enough credits to let them into
a Division 1 basketball program.
 
Somehow I don't see a distinction.  A scholar athlete can spend a year or two
at a community college taking obviously inferior courses but gaining eligiblity
to play intercollegiate athletics.  But a student athlete at an existing
Division 1 program experiencing academic hardship (acutally I'm not sure Air
Force is Division 1) can only regain eligibility at a different Division 1
school by paying tuition to the new school for one full year.  Thus an athlete
playing varsity sports who enrolls at a community college to get his grades up
and then transfers to a different Division 1 school must sit out a year at the
new school.  But an athlete who bypasses college for a community college and
transfers those credits into a Division 1 program receives instant eligibility.
So in essence the NC$$ is saying "we don't care about an athlete's academics,
we are only concerned with harassing the existing Division programs.  It would
seem to me that the more important issue is ensuring that the potential recruit
or transferee spends a year improving himself academically, not whether that
athlete has a dorm room for two semesters.
 
Am I missing something here?
                    _
            "NYS   // Hockey"
        Go 'Gate  //   Brian Morris
          Go RPI //      Albany, NY
          ______// [log in to unmask]
         (______/