Ralph Baer says that he doesn't have a problem with the Big 10 teams
playing each other more, but doesn't want it taken too far.  I'm not sure
what he means by 'too far', but I suspect that I'll disagree with him.  I'd
argue for playing each other at least twice a year and getting an
established Big 10 championship going.
 
In so many ways, these really are the natural rivals for teams like
Minnesota and Wisconsin.  It's not even so much a size thing.  Even someone
like myself, for whom hockey is the number one sport, would really get
juiced at an extension of these rivalries into hockey.  The competition
built up in other sports and over so many years make these match-ups
something that games with most of the other WCHA teams can't equal.
Besides, I want a chance to pay Ohio State back for all the football
humiliation I've suffered.
 
It's another thing that I don't think that most of the eastern fans really
appreciate.  What I would compare it to is if the Ivy League schools were
split between HE and ECAC.  You have schools of similar background and
philosophy (yeah, I know, we've got Northwestern, too.  I'd just say that
they're fun to kick around if they didn't keep beating us in our own
homecoming game) that play each other in every other sport.  Everyone
should consider their reaction to the Ivies being told not to play each
other each season before getting up in arms if the Big 10 decides to give
themselves a full complement of games.
 
J. Michael Jackson
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.