Mike wrote about a kinder and gentler NCAA, including ... > But even though USA Hockey did provide incorrect information, and even > though the Dunhams perhaps should have known to seek out answers from a > "professional", there isn't any evidence to suggest that they deliberately > avoided getting those answers or acted with knowledge of the rules. I'm not sure that "knowledge of the rules" would have helped the Dunham's. I do suspect that a thorough reading of the NCAA Manual would provide no conclusive evidence as to whether the payment was OK or disallowed. A thorough knowledge of the origin and purpose of the payment and the NCAA rules might be another matter, but that's why, IMHO, that Mike's suggestion of going to the appropriate professional is so important. Recognizing when to go is then the challenge! :-) Mike's suggestion of parents/players going directly to the school Compliance Office cannot be overemphasized. Even they will make mistakes occasionally, but that is the first and maybe only reliable method. This is a complex area (eligibility and activities affecting eligibility) and one that cannot be well understood by most of us college hockey fans, IMHO. Certainly we've seen many, many such instances in the (U Maine) trial by fire. :-( Back on the subject of this article ... I am as a sports fan and Maine hockey fan, of course, extremely pleased with this decision, as I think it completely appropriate for all the reasons given. But at the same time I am stunned and amazed. There is no precedence for this decision. Common sense, knowledge (ignorance), (un)importance, etc. have played no part in previous decisions. Maine's high-paid ($500,000+, by some accounts) law firm could find no precedent. It would be very interesting to hear the NCAA (Council?) committee members talk about this and how they see the long-term effect. This morning on local sports-radio (WZON - Bangor) Dan Hannigan said that this decision wasn't very important, as the players and fans knew what happened on the ice ... that the reduction of athletic scholarships and 1996-97 ban from the NCAA post-season is more important. I disagree! People will not remember the missed opportunities of fewer scholarships and one more NCAA (and perhaps HOCKEY EAST) tournament, but the 1993 NCAA Championship is something that will remain with the program forever. Anyone that was at all associated with that team is certainly proud of them and their accomplishments. Yours in college hockey, wayne Wayne T. Smith [log in to unmask] Systems Group -- CAPS University of Maine System Co-owner of the College Hockey mailing lists HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.