Not too surprising, really.  The winners get two games to show their stuff,
the losers only one.  Almost by definition, the players on the winning team
played better.
 
As you say, it's hard to argue with any of the choices, and to argue FOR
someone on MSU or BC, you'd have to argue that he played better than one of
the guys who did make it.  Who would you put on that wasn't?
 
The regionals are a bit different, because of the byes.
 
Clay
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rowe, Thomas [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 12:45 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: All-Tournament Team
>
> Now this is interesting:
>
> > Yes, Alfie was indeed named the Tournament MVP.
> >
> > 1999 All-Tournament Team:
> > G:  Alfie Michaud, Maine
> > D:  David Cullen, Maine
> > D:  Jamie Filipowicz, New Hampshire
> > F:  Jason Krog, New Hampshire
> > F:  Niko Dimitrakos, Maine
> > F:  Mike Souza, New Hampshire
> >
> I certainly would not want to argue against any of these players - but
> really!  There wasn't anyone from the other two teams who deserved to be
> named to the all tournament team?  Or is "all tourney" just a euphemism
> for
> "Championship Game?"
>
> HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
> [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.