The local paper published the complete list of players who have been
invited to the US Olympic team tryouts - Olympic trials players plus others.
Conspicuous by his absence was Tony Amonte.  I wonder if Peterson and his
staff decided not to invite Amonte, or if Amonte already told them he did
not want to try out.  Of course, Amonte is under contract to the Rangers,
but his contract specifically states that if Amonte wishes to play for the
US Olympic team, he will be allowed to do so.  I had looked forward to the
reuniting of the Commonwealth Line - Amonte-McEachern-Joe Sacco - but
this may not happen.  Joe Sacco, under contract to Toronto, was invited,
and he spent the past season with the AHL's Newmarket Saints.  McEachern
also received an invite, as did BC's entire HEM line of Heinze, Emma and
Marty McInnis.
 
On an unrelated note, I was disturbed to read Bobby Hull's article on his
son Brett in the Hockey News' Award Issue.  Now, I have always been a fan
of The Golden Jet along with the rest of hockey's great "old-timers".  But
in this article, Bobby gives the impression that he was a great mentor to
Brett, and I thought I had heard that for a long time, Brett wanted nothing
to do with his father.  In a Sports Illustrated article on Brett when he
played for Minnesota-Duluth, Brett tried to disassociate himself from his
dad who apparently was not around much for him when he was young, through
his parents' divorce and all.  I specifically remember that Brett had one
of his dad's old hockey cards taped to his UMD locker, but he didn't want to
talk about his dad to the interviewer.  But I got the impression from the
THN article that Bobby was just trying to capitalize in some way on the
tremendous success of his son.  Did anyone get this impression?  And has
there been a reconciliation between the two that I haven't heard about, and
which would better explain the appearance of this article?  Otherwise, it
just bothers me that Bobby would suddenly appear to take some credit for
Brett's success when it seemed to have been in spite of his dad rather
than due to him.  Sorry if I'm interpreting the events incorrectly, but
I would appreciate if someone could set me straight.
 
 
- mike