> This is also why I largely dismiss silly comments regarding the ECAC
> when people ask of the Ivies, "who have they played?"  The answer is
> they've played each other.  It isn't that they choose not to play anyone
> else; it's that they choose not to play any more.

but clearly the decision to not "play any more" includes a decision to
not play others. In these circumstances, one follows from the other.

This leads to a more general question that I've been thinking about.

Various people -- members of this list, the media, the coaches and
commissioners -- make statements about "league X is better". It is
relatively easy to compile a composite record, or other ways of ranking
the leagues' performance any given year, but how much of that is in "the
league's" power?

what decisions can a league make that make the league "better"?

  - everyone plays with the same on-ice rule book

  - the league has some influence over game officiating, but all
    within the context of the same on-ice rule book. We know that there
    are differences between the leagues in how games are called. I
    suspect (but don't know for sure) that no actual decisions are made
    "by the league" on that. I think it is more 2nd- and 3rd-order
    effects of what seems to concern the comissioner, who is
    hired as the head ref, who is hired as game refs, what the
    coaches talk to the refs about, and things like that.

  - off-ice rules are different in the different leagues, most
    especially the ECACHL game limits. I don't remember what Atlantic
    Hockey and CHA have done (as a league) as far as scholarships and
    number of games

If you were the commissioner, and wanted to make your league "the best",
what could you -- as the commissioner, or as the league do?

You can try to "hire the best", but the league only employs a handful of
people (plus of course, the refs). A bigger impact on overall league
quality comes from who the coaches are, and the commissioner doesn't get
to hire them.

This isn't to say that the league offices and staff don't do a lot, and
clearly there are times when a commissioner or head ref ready to step up
and do what has to be done will make a huge difference -- but those are
few and far between (fortunately). A bad league office staff can make
things miserable for everyone, but a good staff can't do much to make
the games any better -- that falls on the coaches and players.

Does what league a school is in mean more to a recruit than the school
itself, the coach, the attitude of the current players?

anyway, just some thoughts....

        --david