> It is particularly galling, since the criterion isn't even met.  I think
> that Michigan State is a tougher team than raw computation of the
> numbers indicates.  After all, they beat Michigan twice this year.
 
And lost to BC, Northeastern, Notre Dame, Ohio State (twice). Anyway, this is
hardly the point. If they overlook the numbers that say MSU is the lowest seed
in the tourney, then they completly fly in the face of all logic.
 
Princeton defeated Vermont three times this year (on the road) - do they now
deserve a bid?  No.
 
> is not at all unthinkable that they will beat Minnesota on Saturday.  If
> this happens, what do you get?  A Michigan-Michigan State match-up that
> is not only between conference rivals, but repeats a conference final
> from last night.  Excuse me?  Isn't it to avoid this that Minnesota got
> shifted up a bracket?
 
The idea is to avoid the matchup where it is most possible.  Obviously, you
avoid it in the first round. Avoiding it in the second round is trickier.  So,
it is optimized assuming the higher seed will win.
 
>  Today, the NCAA was both stupid and inconsistent.
 
No they weren't.  They were so consistent, they were almost boring.  The
process is so cut and dried, that all of the mystery was out of it by the time
CC def. St. Cloud in the WCHA consolation game. And all seeding mystery was out
of it by Sat. night.
 
AW
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.