Date Posted:16:00:54 07/15/04 Thu Author: colgate13 Subject: but what if In reply to:
purple1
's message, "Re: HELLO FR. BROOKS" on 15:47:04 07/15/04 Thu
(and I'm playing devil's advocate here since I wanted HC in)
Colgate was for some reason not in the PL and there was a chance to get in as a basketball member. Would you want us if we said we only were going to support the men's team? Would you want us if, SUNY Albany, for example had said they'd support both? It's easy to say the you'd go for Colgate, but would that be in the best interest of the league? I don't know the "right" answer, but it's an analogy.
I'm completely guessing here, but I bet the recent actions of Union didn't help your cause. The last thing that ECAC members want is another Union in the league. Maybe the "half committment" scared schools off?
[> [> [> [>
Re: but what if -- purple1, 18:50:19 07/15/04 Thu
I do not believe a half committment was given. A time frame of 3-5 years was given by a school located in a good area to recruit female hockey players from.
I would still have picked Colgate for basketball if we played in all other sports because of traditional rivalries over the decades. Colgate female basketball would be able to recruit a higher caliber athlete by being the new league. Kudos!
