> From [log in to unmask] Fri Mar 29 16:31:4> As long as the NC$$ pituitary-ball tournament generates *huge* amounts of
> money, and that money goes to participating schools and conferences, AND as
> long as those end-of-year tournaments allow the 11-18 teams into "the dance",
>  the temptation will be there to view pituitary-ball as a potential revenue
> generator.  Ugly as s***, but a fact (I think) of life.
 
This is not to criticize Title IX, because I support it, but it is also
easier to field men and women's pituitary-ball teams that it is to
field a mens and womens hockey team. Yes, there are several schools with
varsity womens teams, but the feeder system (e.g., high schools) just
can not support equality in mens and womens hockey. Yet. (I'm not sure,
though. Would it be accurate to call womens basket-ball pituitary ball?)
 
I suspect some successful club teams, such as Penn State, prefer to go
varsity and would, save for Title IX. If only they would grant hockey
the "exemption" that steroid ball seems to have.
 
Ken Kretsch             | "Coach, my Mom wants me to live for my Bar Mitzvah"
BU '79                  | "Goldberg, this is your Bar Mitzvah. Today you
[log in to unmask]        |  become a man!"
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.