Rowe, Thomas wrote:
 
>I'm sorry, TN, but I just have to respond to this statement:
>
>        <snip>
>> For those who are developing ranking systems that did not rank Niagara in
>> the top eight prior to the tournament, note that you now have empirical
>> data that indicates that your system still needs adjustment.
>>
>        <snip>
>
>        That's just plain silly.  By that logic, any rating system that did
>not have the UW-Squeakball team ranked in the top 4 in the country is
>flawed.  Would you take the empirical end result of the tournament and force
>system parameters to place the teams in order of finish?   Suppose Niagara
>ran the table and won the whole thing.  Then any reliable system must rank
>them as number 1 before the tourney?
>
 
If Niagara ran the table and won the whole thing, then that would be the
time to use Niagara as an example to challenge the PWR rankings.  When you
assert that a system is flawed by using empirical data that indicates that
it isn't flawed, then that is just plain silly.  And if one challenges
Niagara's convincing win over New Hampshire for the purpose of defending
their favorite ranking system, then they're just being bad sports.  Niagara
took their PWR ranking to the tournament and succcessfully defended it.  I
still find it fascinating that people can't just accept that.
 
 >        Its important to remember that no one has trashed Niagara on the
>list - they are getting their due respect.  The argument revolves around the
>point that several other teams who logically could have done as well were
>not invited and that the system which invited Niagara has flaws even though
>everyone agrees that Niagara should have been invited.
>
>        I would like to personally add to this, that until you have a
>tourney that invites all teams over .500 plus all teams over .500 in their
>last 10 or 12 games, there will always be some bubble team that people will
>argue about who, theoretically, really "deserved to be invited" but weren't.
>I would also argue there will never be a consensus perfect system for
>picking teams.  That's just sports and the real world.
>
>> Tom Rowe                                          [log in to unmask]
>> ====================================
>> Home of Division 3 National Champion Pointers
>> 89, 90, 91 & 93 and National Runners Up 92 & 98
>> ====================================
 
T. N. Long
TN Tech. Phi Delta Theta #102
[log in to unmask]
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.