HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Regional rinks
From:
Craig Powers <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 31 Mar 2005 02:08:42 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines) 
Arik Marks wrote:
>
> **OK, let's make it proportional representation - 8/58 is ~14%, so 1
> in 7 regionals can be on a big sheet. But what you leave out is that
> the western cluster of big sheets gives all western teams far more
> experience on those size sheets.  There are what, 2-3 in the east?
> And is there anyone who would argue that it's easier to adjust up
> than adjust down in size of ice?

In Hockey East:
* New Hampshire is full Olympic at 200x100
* UMass is close at 200x95
* BU and Northeastern are upsized at 200x90 but it probably plays closer to
NHL size than Olympic size
* BC has a practically-NHL 200x87

I don't think anyone in the ECACHL or AHA is above 200x85, but I could be
wrong there.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2