Notes on the NCAA ruling(s):
 
1) This pertains not so much to hockey, so I list it first, so
   you may choose to ignore it.  The 'positive' ruling on limiting
   practising to 20 hours a week (this means supervised workouts)
   is widely bemoaned in sports like swimming/diving, gymnastics and
   track and field.  Most of these athletes feel the need to practise
   much more than this.  I hear alot about this out here in California.
   I am hearing bad stuff about this rule from many very rational
   students, administrators and coaches...
 
2) The half-of-minimum-aid provision is designed to remove any
   penalties that the ruling may incur on smaller and minority
   colleges.  These schools would have to sponsor at least 35
   grants in BOTH mens and womens sports.  Apparently, this was
   a sore point with said minority institutions.
 
3) As an unnamed small-school coach said in my paper,
   for the first time this places a purely financial requirement,
   instead of educational ones.  Should size or quality of competition
   be the determining factor in Div I participation??  Comments?
 
4) As has been stated over and over in the past few days, the limit
   on scholarships won't affect most ECAC schools among others.  It
   will however affect others somewhat.  Overall, I don't feel too
   bad about this ruling. The limit on games will affect WCHA and
   CCHA the most, but I don't really oppose this one either.  Most
   HE and ECAC teams play less than 34 games and get a good balance.
   Oops, above when I say among others, I mean the other strongly
   academic East schools...
 
5) This bit about non Div I schools not getting any Div I tournament $$
   is the biggest crock I have seen from the NCAA (well, maybe.  There
   is alot to consider).  Hockey is about the only sport I can think
   of where non-Div I schools can field a Div I - caliber squad, and
   win consistiently.  These schools shouldn't be penalized for beating
   the bigger schools!  What is this ruling going to do (not just this
   $$ part, all of it), cause the smaller schools to form non-Div I
   leagues?  I think everyone will be the poorer for it.
 
   All in all, this seems par for the course for the NC2A.  They get
   all fired up to 'fix' college athletics, make some big rulings
   (see UNLV), reconsider same (UNLV), and ignore the major problems
   such as steroid/drug use, and athletic favors at ALL schools
   (not just the biggies).  I think the NCAA is just slightly more
   effective than the old Leauge of Nations at doing it's job.
 
CMM