VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Friday, April 25, 09:40:18amLogin ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1234[5]678910 ]


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 14:07:39 07/23/04 Fri
Author: colgate13
Subject: My inference was...
In reply to: colgate13 's message, "Yes, it is simple" on 11:15:25 07/23/04 Fri

First off, my response was very tounge in cheek. My tone was missed, I apologize. The Ivy's all have great athletic programs.

That said, Princeton hockey has not been a great program as of late. Basketball is much more of a priority. I don't think they put as much of an athletic priority on their hockey as they do their basketball, lacrosse or football.

Therein lies my logic - they voted for you for the ECAC because they care more about the academic profile of the ECAC than the athletic competitiveness. Just my tainted opinion formed from these unwarranted HC backlashings.

As for the other "yes" votes, Harvard seems obvious as the in state rival (Yale did the same in voting for Q), Dartmouth... who knows? I wasn't there. RPI? Maybe they would prefer a nonscholarship school in the ECAC and Q is more of a threat to them? Speculation all indeed.

But again, the point I'm making is don't fault Colgate for trying to maintain or increase the athletic competitiveness of the ECAC when that's all HC would do if the shoe was on the other foot for basketball. If HC chose to be competitive, I have no doubt they'd be in the ECAC.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.