In a message dated 97-06-10 08:44:40 EDT, you write: Arthur Berman writes: This assumption is precisely why colleges should not field "professional" revenue producing teams under the guise of educational development. There is more than one way interest in a sport can be measured. Participation is an equally valid frame of reference and more appropriate for what are supposed to be educational institutions. We could model US Colleges on the Canadian system or am I wrong in pointing out that the author of this reply is one who always chants the mantra BU or is BU hockey not the evil big time US College sport the author decries? I know it is not politically correct to state the obvious. The impact of Title IX (besides killing non-revenue sports) is to stunt the growth of D1 college hockey. If women wanted equality they could compete on an equal basis. Any numbers type "affirmative action" is affirmatively unfair. The fact is that schools like Williams, Middlebury, and Amherst offer a full gamut of all sports for both genders. It can be done- and they do it because their market i.e the students want and expect it just like they had at Choate, Andover, & Exeter. HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.