>Bill Fenwick <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>As I recall, the games-in-Alaska exemption was put in place to help
support
>>the then-independent Alaska teams by making it attractive for opponents to
>>schedule trips up there. Since both Alaska teams are now in leagues,
perhaps
>>this exemption isn't needed as much, at least for league games
Pam Sweeney wrote:
>I believe the "Alaska Exemption" is not a hockey rule, but an NCAA-wide
rule, meant to encourage teams of all >sports to play in Alaska (and
Hawaii), so UAA and UAF joining hockey conferences is not likely to cause
its >repeal.

The rule is NC$$-wide, but I am pretty sure they are looking at changes. In
squeak-ball, they are looking at
ways to limit the number of pre-season (and other) tournaments that teams
play, and I think they are giving some
consideration to lifting the exemption on the Thanksgiving squeak-ball
tourneys in Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico. In that context, I could see
them lifting the exemption entirely.

John