Adam Wodon writes:
>I don't know why Hockey East graduates and fans get offended by the suggestion
>the ECAC has better academic schools. There's no shame in being behind a
>conference that includes Harvard, Princeton and Yale ... geez! It's like being
>insulted because they say you're not as good as Wayne Gretzky.
If I may offer my point of view...my concern is with the suggestion that
some people make that HE schools (or those in the CCHA or WCHA) do not
place an emphasis on academics before hockey but that ECAC schools do.
Experience has shown me time and time again that this is not true.
I do not have a problem with the idea that ECAC schools on a whole are
deemed to be better academically. Whenever such a list is prepared,
someone's got to be at the top of that list. As Adam says, that does not
mean HE schools are lousy. For some of us - me, anyway - financial
considerations also come into play, since ECAC schools also happen to be
among the more expensive schools in the country. That played a direct role
in my personal decision to transfer from an ECAC school to one that
happened to be in HE. Sometimes you have to give up a little in one area
(academic reputation) to gain a more advantageous arrangement in another
(financial considerations).
>Cal Ingraham is another - Maine had to forfeit 14 games he played in. There
>may have been another. I'm not sure who gets the most blame, but there's
>plenty to go around. But this has nothing to do with the other discussion.
>You are correct, what Maine does doesn't NECESSARILY reflect on the league.
I'm also not sure how much it should be considered to reflect upon Maine,
or at least the Maine hockey program. Four incidents occurred recently
dealing with four Maine hockey players: Ingraham, Tory, Tardif, and
Latendresse. Tory's was the only one in which direct blame can be laid at
the feet of the Maine hockey program. And Latendresse's did not result in
any forfeits because he never played while ineligible (having used up his
eligibility in what was originally thought to be his junior year).
The big plus is that Maine is taking steps to correct the administrative
oversights that caused these situations. The unfortunate aspect is that
people who are unfamiliar with what actually happened in each of these
situations - especially certain media people - only look at the fact that
four players were ruled ineligible in some way and ascribe this to an
attempt to cheat on the part of the Maine hockey program. I believe this
is unfair.
>> As for Hockey East, you can not use one school to make a blanket
>> statement. No matter what occured at Maine, it can not be used as an
>> example to all Hockey East teams do the same. I know that Merrimack
>> and BU have both suspended players from the hockey team in regards to
>> academic problems.
>
>You seem to be contradicting yourself. You say Maine cannot be used to make a
>blanket statement, then list two other HEAC schools. BC, by the way, also had
>big problems this year.
I don't recall any problems at BC that dealt with academics. Ten players
*were* suspended for problems relating to conduct. And of course, there
were the scholarship issues left over from the previous coaching regime.
I believe that Sean's examples of players being suspended due to academic
problems at BU and Merrimack - and this has happened at other schools, too
- demonstrate that HE schools DO place a greater emphasis upon academics
than hockey.
A perfect example is that at least twice at Merrimack, players have met the
NCAA standards for eligiblity but not those of the school's, which are
stricter. Both times, those players were declared ineligible by the
school. And each player was the best on the team at that time, one an
All-America candidate and prior All-America.
--- ---
Mike Machnik [log in to unmask] *HMM* 11/13/93
***** Unofficial Merrimack Hockey home page under construction at: *****
***** http://www.tiac.net/users/machnik/MChockey/MChockey.html *****
** Send comments/suggestions to: [log in to unmask] or [log in to unmask] **
|
