Well, we've seen what happens when a computer program is considered to have
better judgement than hockey coaches when it comes to NCAA selections.  In
short, a mess.
 
I can't argue with the result, based on the rules set up -- it was done "by
the book," with the top twelve RPI rated teams getting the bids.  However,
I don't think anyone with a straight face could tell me that HALF of the
Hockey East deserved a bid, at the expense of Colorado College's bid.
Having followed the WCHA closely this year, I saw a lot of excellent hockey
-- the parity was due to many good teams, not many mediocre teams.  For CC
to win the McNaughton Cup was quite an accomplishment; they didn't win it
by being mediocre.  The Tigers ran into Jamie Ram, a Hobey Baker candidate
who's one of the best goalies I've ever seen, in the first round of the
playoffs, and lost a close duel.
 
In short, taking the decision essentially out of the hands of the selection
committee left a very deserving team out of the field.  From the hockey I
saw this year, the WCHA could have rated four bids (SCSU being the fourth).
They certainly didn't deserve only two bids.
 
The system's broken, and needs to be fixed.  I think that whatever happens,
there should be some allowance for intangibles....
 
-john nash
 
 
-===-John R. [log in to unmask] Chem. Dept-===-