I've stated my opinion on this subject before and will do so again here. I think one big difference is that at the D-I level, there are numerous opportunities for the top players from the Midwest to stay close to home, play top level competition, and get top level educational opportunities as well. Compare Wisco and Minny with any or all of the Eastern schools that can offer scholarships, and there is no reason academically for those girls to head east. At D-III, however, once you remove the scholarship aspect from the equation, there has been an exodus of Midwestern players flocking to schools like Amherst Middlebury, and Trinity. Western schools with similar academic reputations (such as Carleton College as an example) do not have a women's hockey program. The ability to go East and play competitive hockey while getting a "little Ivy" education results in a significant talent drain running from West to East. Imagine what might have been in recent years if girls like Komerek, Swiantkowski, McNally, Styrbicki, Bloom, Hanlon, etc. had chosen to stay west of the Mississippi. The other factor at D-III is the impact of the Canadian players. At D-III, in the absence of scholarships, many Canadian players are able to avail themselves of grant money allegedly earmarked by schools to promote diversity within the student body. Given the heavy concentration of Canadian girls' hockey in Ontario and Quebec, and given that so many Eastern schools have such international grants available, it is natural for most of this talent to head East as well.
