In a further attempt to stir up controversy, I will throw the following
logs of dissent on the fire:
I cannot feel sorry for Minnesota, Coach Woog, and any fans who believe
their team got a bad break because they lost the WCHA Championship to
a team (Northern Michigan) that has slightly older Canadian players.
After all, for years the University of Minnesota has had a virtual
monopoly on most of the best players from the state of Minnesota. They
are proud to say that they recruit only from Minnesota - not that there
is anything wrong with that. In fact, I hold a special place in my heart
for the Gophers (although HE takes precedence this weekend, when I will
root for Maine) since I used to live in North St Paul when I was little.
Still, I'm very amused, particularly at the segments of the newspaper
article Carol posted last week that suggest Northern had an unfair
advantage over Minnesota. Minnesota had every right to go after the same
players that now play for Northern. But Northern had little or no chance
to get the current Gophers because all Woog had to do was beckon and
the kids come running. Now that Minnesota has been outsmarted by a
team that learned how to go north of the border to find top players, they
want to clamp down on the other team's advantages -
> When you watch a game like this, with a team dominated by older, former junior
> hockey players, you can understand why John Mariucci and Marsh Ryman, former
> Gophers coaches fought so hard to have age limits that wouldn't allow older
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Canadians to dominate the college hockey scene. It might be wise for faculty
> representatives and athletic directors to take another look at eligibility
> requirements in the WCHA. (end of excerpt)
Of course they did! Then the Gophers could continue their domination of
the WCHA! Just how stupid does this guy (Sid Hartman, Star Tribune) think
we are? So one team dominated by Canadians beat out the Gophers this year.
Another one, Denver, finished in last place. It is not just that NMU
recruits Canadians. They recruit *good* ones. So they recruit well. What
is wrong with that?
We have the same situation here in the East. BC has first dibs on any kid
they want from Massachusetts, even New England. BU and Maine, as a result,
have built their programs with some great Canadians and some great area
players they stole from under BC's nose. I do not remember hearing BC
cry about BU & Maine having an unfair advantage.
Someone tell Mr Hartman that there *are* eligibility requirements in US
college hockey. For every year a player plays for an organized team
over the age of 20, before entering college, he loses a year of NCAA
eligibility. That is why Merrimack goalie Yannick Gosselin will be a
senior next year although it will be only his third year of US college
hockey. He was 21 before his first year at Merrimack began last year,
and he had played a year of junior in Canada after he turned 20.
As we had talked about last year, Merrimack also had a player who
finished his senior year in 89-90 at the ripe old age of 26, Frank
Schofield. Schofield spent several years in the Navy and out of college
before returning to finish his education, and he tried out for the team
and made it. But he hadn't played any organized hockey since turning 20.
Yup, the Gordie Howe of college hockey. We used to kid him about being
the first college player to play with his sons.
Finally, when Mr Hartman mentions in his Star Tribune article that
> Northern Michigan has seven players 23 or older, most of them from Canada...
don't forget that most of them are seniors, and were 19-year-old freshmen.
Many American kids go to prep school for at least a year now before
heading to play in college, so they are at least 19 too.
Where was this watchdog to rant and rave against Northern Michigan's
"unfair" tactics three years ago, when the Wildcats finished 7th in the
WCHA?
- mike, on the Eastern soapbox
|
