Adam Wodon writes:
 
> This I would say, is absolute hooey ... maybe that's just opinion,
> because I haven't crunched the numbers on it ... but the 10th place ECAC
> team is usually stronger than the other conference's weakest teams ...
> and I'd say the same for 9th and 8th place too.  The ECAC has no real
> national powerhouse contenders -- though someone could surprise -- but
> top to bottom, it's quite strong.
 
Really?  Why, then, do we find the 10th place ECAC team at #42 in the
RPI, below all other conference affiliates?  Or 4 ECAC teams at #33,
#34, #36, and #42?
 
I'm not sure what the proper standard of comparison is for teams at the
bottom of their conferences.  The RPI isn't really designed to compare
teams with poor records.  Still, if the RPI is the standard, the
argument doesn't hold water.
 
-- Erik
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.