>
>
> On hockey matters, it seems to me the only way the ECAC will get two
> bids this year, with mediocrity and inconsistency the hallmark, except
> for Cornell, is for a Cornell upset, and the tourney winner and Cornell
> woul dthen likely get to go.

Cornell is 11'th in the power - they are squarely on the bubble and would need to
make it to the ECAC semis to have any shot at the at-large bid.  They're head and
shoulders above the ECAC that they should win the tourney.  But if they say,
split this weekend, sweep their first round but then lose the next game - they'll
be at home.  The PWR penalizes playing weak teams to the extent that it's better
to go 1-1 against a top team than 2-0 against a bottom-feeder (as others have
suggested before).  Cornell will be playing Union and their first round opponent
twice so that's three below .500 teams.

Suprisingly the PWR is very fluid even this late in the year, especially between
the #7 and #14 slots, so Cornell could move to 7 or 8, but that's still
precarious.

Iyer