In a message dated 3/14/99 8:32:03 PM, [log in to unmask] writes:
 
<< Anecdotal evidence would seem to be even more susceptible to this
problem; here's a semi-anecdotal argument:  no MAAC team has taken a
point (close losses are still losses) from Niagara or Mankato, who are
off the bubble in anyone's book and have a total of 27 points in 39
games against major conference competition, while no team from an
established conference has dropped a point to Army or Air Force, who
have 8 points in 9 games against the MAAC. >>
 
This should have been in huge bold letters. This is HUGE!!!!
 
Just restating what has been said above....
 
How can anyone argue that the MAAC teams should be in the big dance when in
comparing their play against other teams that do venture out to play the 'big
boy D-1' teams they're winless.  That's really what the pairwise is all about
which the system is based on, how do teams stack up against other teams,
especially common opponents.
 
No MAAC team has beaten Niagara or Mankato which have wins over big teams
(Niagara over Michigan and now Mankato over N.Dakota).
 
And MAAC teams only earn 1 point out of 8 when playing the D-1 teams of Army
and Air Force, while Army and Airforce have not taken a single point from the
major conference teams they've played.
 
In my opinion, this isn't even a close decision.  Until the MAAC teams open up
and play a full 'non-league' schedule against major conference foes, this
whole discussion is moot.
 
 
Jerry
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.