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.