Jim Teresco poses and interesting question regarding Union hockey. While
Union is a wonderful school, has very high admissions standards, and has a
very attractive campus, I think they are at a juncture where they are going
to have to make some decisions soon. The players they recruited a few years
ago and who got them to that number five position in the ECAC regular
season, are now all going to the MAAC on rides. Believe me, when the
difference in yearly price between Union and the MAAC schools is $10K to
$30K, prospective SA's and their parents are strongly influenced no matter
how attractive Union is.
 
        It seems to me that if Union is going to stay D-1 in hockey, the balance
between football and hockey has to change. Yes,  I know, Union is unique in
that it does not preferentially package its financial aid -- and so
football and hockey are already hypothetically on an even footing. However,
I don't happen to believe for a minute that is the case in actual practice.
I think that Union would probably be better off back in NESCAC D-3 if they
are not willing to de-emphasize football. Barring NESCAC, the MAAC, with
its 11 ride limit, would be a better place for them. The top teams in the
MAAC are already better than Union from what I can see, based simply on
personal observation of how the Dutchmen skate.
 
        -- Dick Tuthill
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.