At 3:33 PM 3/18/96, Jeff B wrote:
>Mike Machnik <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>>I can buy letting the host team stay at home (although I would prefer
>>it wasn't done) because as Rick said, it encourages teams to host
>>the regional and they're having trouble getting bids as it is.  I
>>can't buy letting low-ranked non-hosting teams stay near home just
>>because they are perceived to have good fan support.  If Cornell's fan
>>base is so great, then they will go anywhere to support their team -
>>even to Michigan.  So that's where they should have gone.  That's
>>where they belong.  Getting to play a virtual home game because you're
>>hosting the tournament is one thing.  But getting to play one when you
>>squeaked in is another.
>
>I'm surprised to hear invective like this from Mike.
 
I'm sorry you characterized my comments as such, since no malice was
intended or even conceived when I wrote the above.
 
>"That's where they
>belong"???
 
Yes, Cornell belonged in the West, because they were one of the bottom two
of the six teams chosen from the East.
 
>And how, exactly, do you mean that Cornell "squeaked" into
>the NCAA?  They won the conference tournament.  That gets them an automatic
>bid.
 
But they won the game by one goal, and if they had lost, they would not
have received a bid.
 
Bill also made reference to my use of the word "squeaking".  I'll change it
to "Cornell barely got in."  (As did Providence, with a one-goal win in the
HE Championship Game that they had to win to get a bid.)  But the point is
not whatever word I use or whatever teams are involved...it is that Team A
(Lowell) ranked far ahead of Team B (Cornell), yet Team B stayed in their
region so that their home fans could see them play, while Team A's fans
were left out in the cold.
 
>Do you begrudge Providence's presence as well?  They were lower ranked,
>yet won their tournament, so they earned their bid, right?
 
I have been against automatic bids from the start...I understand the need
for them, but I would prefer that the best 12 teams get chosen to compete
for the national championship.  This has always been my position regardless
of whatever teams are involved.
 
I don't begrudge anyone's presence.  I do feel bad for teams that have had
a strong enough season to deserve a bid but get knocked out by a weaker
team that gets hot for a few games in the tournament.  That happened to BG
this year.  They deserved to go more than PC did.
 
I'm personally happy that Cornell has had as great of a season as they have
had, and I think it is a great story.  But I don't believe they deserved an
East seed more than Lowell did.
 
>Apparently you
>believe that a lower RPI ranking should mean that the team must play far
>from home.  I think that's a debatable point of view.
 
It's a point of view that you've ascribed to me but which I don't hold.  I
haven't said anything about the RPI.  What I did say was that since Lowell
ranked higher than Cornell according to the criteria, then Lowell deserved
to have a higher seed and thus play in their region.
 
>>Lowell really lost out to two teams that seemed to have been ranked
>>lower than they were.  They lost out to Cornell on the attendance
>>issue.  And they lost out to Clarkson simply so that a second-round
>>all-HE matchup could have been avoided.  Yet they were apparently the
>>third-highest ranked team from the East.
>
>I don't think the all-HE matchup was the reason.
 
Rick Comley, head of the selection committee, said it was.  As I mentioned
in a post last night, in response to a question on the conference call by
Jon Barkan, Rick said that the factors in deciding what teams played where
were 1) attendance 2) minimizing regional matchups between teams from the
same conference.
 
You may disagree if you like, but I am providing facts.
 
>I agree that Lowell seems to have gotten screwed here.  IMHO, Clarkson
>should have been shipped west, and UML should have been the #5 seed out east.
>It seems like BOTH Cornell and Clarkson were kept east for "the attendance
>issue".  But it's hard to speculate.
 
You are the one who is speculating.  I listened to Rick say that out of
Lowell, Clarkson, and Cornell, Cornell got the nod to stay East based on
attendance.  He then said that Lowell and Clarkson were deemed about equal
on the attendance factor.  The deciding factor was that Lowell could have
met another HE team in Albany, while Clarkson could not have met another
ECAC team.
 
>I guess we just saw some of Mike's
>true anti-Cornell colors...
>
>Jeff Benensohn
 
Jeff, I find it interesting that you reached that conclusion based on no
evidence whatsoever.  I am anti-Cornell?  I wish I had known that before I
sent that congratulatory note to Mike Schafer a couple of weeks ago.  He
must be quite confused about me right about now. :-)
 
Pretend that it was some other team instead of Cornell that was lying in
the 6E slot (5E before the crossover).  My comments would not have changed.
It doesn't matter to me that it is Cornell or anyone else who got that
slot.  I disagree with the decision, and my disagreement is based on an
objective analysis of the situation - and I have provided evidence for my
analysis.  But you seem to have allowed your pro-Cornell feelings to creep
into your response here.  Try to be objective and forget that it is your
team that is involved.  On the other hand, my team was gone long ago and
doesn't enter into the equation at all.
 
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                   [log in to unmask]            *HMM* 11/13/93
>> Co-owner of the College Hockey Lists at University of Maine System  <<
*****       Unofficial Merrimack Hockey home page located at:       *****
*****   http://www.tiac.net/users/machnik/MChockey/MChockey.html    *****
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.