Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 26 Apr 2002 17:04:16 -0500 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 [log in to unmask] wrote:
> I'm kind of tired of this. If everyone wanted to end
> Michigan's perpetual advantage, they've had a
> perfectly viable option: they could have submitted
> bids. Michigan got the 2002 and 2003 West Regionals
> because they were the *only* school that submitted a
> bid for either one.
> If St. Cloud doesn't want to play in Michigan, they
> could have bid themselves. They didn't, so they
> really don't have much to complain about. Ditto
> Michigan State's feelings about playing in Ann Arbor.
It doesn't change the fact that schools without the resources to host
a regional are at a habitual disadvantage, both by never getting a
home game and by being sent to the other region more often. Then
again, schools which don't help the NC$$ maximize the attendance in
their home region are also at a disadvantage.
> You won't get any Western schools to bid on regionals
> if the host doesn't get to play there.
I think that's true at this time; I was just mentioning it since
basketball works this way, which they can get away with because all
their regionals are big draws even without the local team.
> You can't send them to the other regional if there isn't anyone
> that's going to host it.
Well, that would say having four regionals is hopeless, if only one
Western school is ever willing to host.
John Whelan, Cornell '91
[log in to unmask]
http://www.amurgsval.org/joe/
Enjoy the latest Hockey Geek tools at slack.net/hockey
|
|
|