Like Pam, I'll only respond to on list to the points which Pam raised there.
 
On Wed, 17 Jul 1996, Pam Sweeney wrote:
 
> >>On Tue, 16 Jul 1996, Pam Sweeney wrote:
> >
> >> I think there are a couple other factors to consider:
> >>    1)  At the risk of being maligned as a Canadian-basher, let me point out
> >> that this is the "US Hockey Hall of Fame Game".  If you were to set up a
> >> college hockey game celebrating US hockey, I suspect Minnesota and BU would
> >> be the first two teams you would pick, since both teams consist primarily
> >> of US-born players.  (Yes, there are others, including St. Cloud, but these
> >> are arguably the two most prominent...)
> >>
> >Actually, it sounds like uninformed Canadian bashing to me.  Although BU
> >may have a majority of American players I don't think there is any
> >principle involved there as there is at Minnesota and has been at BC
> >until they couldn't find an American goaltender (I presume).
>
> My comments above are in light of the fact that it is a game to benefit the
> *US* Hockey Hall of Fame.  The best way to promote that Hall is by
> showcasing *US* players.  I don't mean to have any quotas "only teams with
> 50% US-born players can play in this game" or any of that crap.  I just
> mean that if you were a US Hockey Hall of Fame official and were able to
> put together your DREAM college game, it would probably be these two teams.
> Two established programs that have developed a lot of top American
> players.  (Note added in posting this to the list:  If people don't agree
> with that logic, I would be very interested to hear which two teams others
> would pick, and why.)
 
That may be Pam's dream (and that's OK) but it is not mine.  I couldn't
care less what the nationality is of the players on teams.  I think the
best showcase game is between two teams in different conferences who have
histories of excellence.  Although Minnesota and BU certainly qualify,
many other teams just as easily could--regardless of the percentage of US
players on the squad.  Pam implies she is using logic.  I just see a
preference.  The premise has no logical basis (except perhaps for people
from BC or Minnesota who seem to think where one is born is a crucial
requirement for participation on a team.
 
>
> I will grant you that there's a certain amount of chauvinism in that, but
> that's inherent in having a US Hockey Hall of Fame in the first place.
 
Having a US Hockey Hall of Fame reflects an appropriate pride in the
acheivements of US hockey players.  Using the criterion of percentage of
players on squads IMO does represent chauvinism.
 
> Let's face it, there's no "US Football Hall of Fame", just a "Football Hall
> of Fame",  and I believe there is a "Canadian Football Hall of Fame".  If
> you were to put together a game to promote Canadian football, would you
> prefer two teams where all the stars were US imports?  Or would you prefer
> two teams who had Canadian players among their stars?  (I don't know much
> about the success of Canadian players in the CFL, so maybe I'm stretching
> my analogy a bit.)  If *I'm* setting up the promotion for the Canadian
> Football Hall of Fame, all other things being equal, I'm picking the teams
> with the Canadian stars.
>
You are displaying ignorance of Canadian sports here.  Most of the stars
on CFL teams are US born and the percentage of Canadians on the teams is
maintained by a quota system or the percentage of US players would be
even higher.
 
I must add I find this thread (past and present) distasteful.  I wish
there was a way to drive a stake through its heart.
 
Arthur Berman [log in to unmask]
GO BU!!! GO ICE!!!
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.