Eric Burton wrote:
 
> Actually if you ask the Sioux Hockey Players I think you will see that they
> respected What Niagara accomplished this season and made mention of it in
> the papers.
 
Well, I still come out on the side that Niagara's victory should result in:
 
1) Respect for Niagara (and saying that other team's could have beat UNH is an argument that appears to be disrespectful)
 
2) Belief that the current team selection system works
 
Several people have posted that the current system does not have enough strength of schedule component to it.
 
I don't care.  All of the other systems require math majors or engineers to understand them.
 
It is hard enough to get people to understand PWR.  With Niagara's victory it just goes to show there is no need to switch from PWR b/c it seemed to do an admirable job at picking the top 12 teams.
 
And based on the non-conference schedules which seem to be appearing for Alabama-Huntsville, Niagara, Quinnipiac, UConn, Holy Cross, Canisius, Mercyhurst, etc. (from preliminary reports, all these schedules seem to have quite a few big 4 teams on their schedules), it seems that RPI should start ranking all of these squads appropriately again.
 
So my vote is for keeping the current system.
 
Yes, if a squad like Niagara has a slight edge b/c their last 16 games are against a little weaker group than another squads, so be it.  You could say that an ECAC squad of the past may have had some similar advantage b/c the ECAC may have been considered weaker.
 
Let the current system do its job.  RPI will be statistically correct again from here on out and it plays a big part in the current system.  And having both a MAAC team and a CHA team in next year's tourney will only help all of college hockey.
 
 
Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.