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
Sender:
- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 20 Mar 2005 11:52:14 -0500
Reply-To:
- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Content-type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
In-Reply-To:
<000d01c52d6b$9f9b1aa0$6401a8c0@fnordii>
Content-transfer-encoding:
7BIT
From:
Sean Pickett <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
And if you are going to keep the higher seed closer to home, why did CC
get sent to Grand Rapids and Denver to Amherst?

Sean Pickett

On 20 Mar 2005 at 11:41, Craig Powers wrote:

> Any reactions to the committee's lame justification for giving Denver
> the better first-round matchup than CC?  For my part (as you might
> have guessed by my description of it as "lame"), I'm not at all
> thrilled with them giving Denver the edge based on one extra
> head-to-head win in five games, considering that CC has the edge in
> every single other pairwise category, and breaking with over ten years
> of precedent -- where we may sometimes argue about the specific
> statistics they use, but most of us seem to be pretty happy with
> having a more transparent process.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2