G. M. Fineniss raises some interesting points that tends to reinforce
my position on whether or not the academies should play Div I hockey.
 
Where is it written in stone that Canadians are the best hockey players?
It is not; however, I have lived in several states where hockey
could be played at the same level as is played in Canada in the pre-
school, grade school and high school levels. But it is not. The Canadian
player skill level, built over a number of years through very good junior
player programs, is considerably higher than what is found over most of the
United States. I would promote such programs in the US. There is some
evidence that such programs do exist in the North East and the upper
Mid West. There can be much more.
 
G.M. also points out that the NHL is not a realistic goal for most
college players. I basically agree with this comment; however, a
successfull Div I. team must have two or maybe three players that have
NHL potential. Without these players, the teams flounder in the bottom
of the leagues. I think that may well be part of the problem with MTU
this year: we have several average players but we do not seem to have
2 or 3  players of NHL potential (with the exception of our goalie, Jamie
Ram.)  THe problem with the military academies is that they almost
never will get such a player.
 
G.M. asks if we should drop UIC, Ohio St. and Merrimack from the
Div I because they are not currently competitive? I can not speak for
these schools and the intents of their programs. But I will say this,
if a program has the potential of being competitive (that is, in the
top 30 of the 44 teams playing,) for more than 50% of the time, then
it should play Div I. hockey. If it doesn't have this potential, then
they should reconsider. They are probably playing in the wrong division.
Both Army and USAFA do not have this potential and should better match
their division choice to the potential of their programs.
 
The one point that I do take exception to is the statement that the
level of competitiveness should not matter. The cadets at the military
academies are taught to win. You can not do this by losing. A few losses
are necessary to both measure one's abilities and to keep one humble;
however a steady diet of losses makes one inconfident, retreating and
inward looking. In particular, the job of the academies is create leaders
who will win and are supremely confident of that. I don't know about
you but I never want to lose a war. The price of winning a war is great
but the cost of losing a war is much greater. The sports programs at
the military academies reinforce the winning spirit. Thus they must
be competitive.
 
Walt Olson
MTU