For some reason, I only got part of Brian Farenell's posting about polls,
but the part I did get referred to Cornell's being given an NCAA bid over a
"more deserving" St. Lawrence last year.  Well, the Saints may have been
"hotter" than the Big Red at the end of last season (ouch -- I would rather
not be reminded of how last season ended...), but the NCAA uses a number of
criteria in determining the participants, and none of them have to do with
polls.  The NCAA does not give any more weight to league tournament games
than to regular-season ones (with the exception of the automatic bid given
to each tournament champion), so St. Lawrence's ECAC semifinal win over
Cornell meant no more than either of Cornell's two regular-season victories
against the Saints.
 
The criteria the NCAA uses are:  head-to-head competition between teams,
record among common opponents, strength of schedule, and record against
other teams "under consideration" for NCAA tournament berths.  Let's see how
Cornell and St. Lawrence stacked up last year:
 
1.   Head to head
     Cornell won twice, St. Lawrence once.  Edge to Cornell.
 
2.   Record among common opponents
     The common opponents were the remaining ECAC teams plus Northeastern
     and Boston College.  Cornell went 15-7-3 against those teams, while St.
     Lawrence went 18-7-1.  The slight edge goes to St. Lawrence.
 
3.   Strength of schedule
     I'm not sure how the NCAA determined this, but Keith Instone did some
     work for them last year in compiling stats and working up some kind of
     power rating based on winning percentages for the selection committee.
     As a ballpark estimate, I looked at the schedule strength ratings from
     The College Hockey Computer Rating for the week before the NCAAs last
     year.  (which reminds me, we haven't seen a TCHCR for this season, have
     we?  Or did I miss it?  More polls!  More polls!)  Anyway, Cornell had
     a 45.57 rating, while St. Lawrence had a 48.78.  Again a slight edge to
     St. Lawrence, although the NCAA's ratings may have been a little
     different.  I wish to hell they would release the numbers they use when
     they decide on tournament seedings!
 
The deciding factor appears to have been the fourth criterion, the record
against teams under consideration.  Among such teams, Cornell played St.
Lawrence (three times), Clarkson (twice), Lake Superior State, and Boston
College, and had a record of 4-3.  St. Lawrence played Cornell (three
times), Clarkson (three times), Boston College, Providence, New Hampshire,
Wisconsin, and Boston University, emerging with a record of 2-9.  That's a
good-sized margin in Cornell's favor.  So the two teams were pretty close
according to the NCAA's criteria, but Cornell legitimately came out ahead.
 
Actually, my understanding was that at the end, the committee was not
deciding on whether to give the sixth Eastern bid to Cornell or St.
Lawrence, but whether to put Cornell in the East and the independent bid in
the West or put the independent bid in the East and give the sixth Western
spot to Ferris State or North Dakota.  In other words, the committee had
eliminated St. Lawrence earlier.
 
As for "politics" being involved, I'm guessing this refers to Cornell
athletic director Laing Kennedy chairing the selection committee.  Well, the
committee has a rule that whenever discussion arises about whether a certain
team should get a bid, any committee member involved with that team must
leave the room until that discussion has ended.  Thus, when Northern
Michigan was under consideration, coach Rick Comley had to be out of the
room (probably only for about a minute), and when the discussion centered
around BU, coach Jack Parker had to leave.  Kennedy also did not participate
in the discussion on Cornell.
 
This is not to say that there is no political brouhaha involved in the
selection committee.  They passed a rule, effective this season, that each
of the four Division I conferences must have at least two representatives in
the NCAAs.  Ordinarily, that wouldn't be much of a problem, but Hockey East
teams picked up four of the Eastern slots last year (the first time ever
that any conference sent more than three teams), and they could very well
have had FIVE, because New Hampshire (who lost in the HE quarterfinals to
Providence) was good enough to merit serious consideration.  Kennedy did
mention after the selection process was over that he was happy the ECAC was
able to send two teams and how important it was for them to do so, so
perhaps there was a little something going on there.  I doubt the committee
will be faced with that kind of situation this year.
 
Aside to Mike:  a "ceramic dalmatian", huh?  I have to wonder about the
inner workings of a mind that would come up with something like that :-)
--
Bill Fenwick
Cornell '86 and probably '94
LET'S GO RED!!
"I used to work in a delicatessen.  I got fired, though, because I would refuse
 to serve tongue to the customers.  I thought it was disgusting -- I don't like
 the idea of tasting something that might be tasting me back."
-- Elayne Boosler