I disagree with everyone's statements that it shouldn't make a difference whether a player is African-American, Asian, Hispanic, Jewish -- or female. It should make a difference. A BIG difference. One of the primary reasons for minority involvement in so many facets in society is lack of two factors: exposure and role models. Despite the growing presence of all levels of hockey the US (thank you, ESPN and Rollerblade), the accessibility of ice hockey to the minorities on the basis of participation will always be extremely limited due to its high cost. Role models however, can reach anybody in any area of society, and have an effect. The existence of minorities in hockey -- or any sport, for that matter -- should definitely be recognized publicly. I think that at times many people are afraid that if they might be branded a racist or a bigot if they mention the nationality of a hockey player. For example, much of Boston has been very hush-hush regarding the prominence of BU's Mike Grier. It wasn't until Grier began to lead the country in scoring that the press "felt OK" to run stories on him. Even then, the press (with the exception of Sports Illustrated) very carefully skirted the race issue Grier has two future possibilities that make him extremely important: 1. Should Grier prove to be a success in the NHL, he may very well be one of the first of a "new breed" of NHL players -- strong, physical players who score rather than fight. It's been said enough about how difficult it is to move Grier out of the crease; heck, I think Michael Jordan is the only guy who gets "double-teamed" more than Grier. Imagine what Grier could do if he played on the same line as say, Paul Kariya... 2. Grier will most likely become the first American-born black player to play in the NHL. IMHO, this will be a monumental achievement, and I hope that a LOT of people make a BIG fuss about it when it happens. If anyone has any doubts about the positive results of calling attention to an athlete's racial or religious background, take a look at Arthur Ashe's career. Not only did Ashe rise to the top of his sport, but he rose to the top amidst severe racial tension. For years, nearly every article or television feature on Ashe spoke of his being "a black tennis player." This was not racism in the press; rather, this was solid reporting of the facts. Ashe himself had admitted on a number of occasions that he was very glad that so much attention was called to his skin color; he felt very strongly that it would help ease racial tension. Did Ashe's success help to lower the level of bigotry around the country? Did his two-year reign as the "best player in the world" (according to SI) nurture understanding between blacks and whites? Who knows. What we *do* know however, is that Ashe not only made blacks accepted in the world of tennis, but helped pave the acceptance of blacks in many other predominantly "white upper-class" sports. And perhaps best of all, Ashe was able to inspire thousands of blacks living in the ghettos to not just pick up a tennis racquet, but strive for the ultimate success in whatever they do, no matter how "white" it may be. After his tennis career ended, Ashe spent thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars on minority sports programs for inner-city children of all races. There is no question that he has significantly improved the lives of many children, as well as the world of sports. So folks, don't be afraid to call attention to Grier's being an African-Amercan; by all means, applaud it, and wish him the best. After all, just imagine what'll happen when Nike gets a hold of him after college. greenie S P O O N ! ! (go BU) ps: I know it's not related to college hockey, but... do you think Manon Rheaume would have been given the same opportunities if she was judged solely on goaltending skill? HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.