I've gotten several responses to my post from this morning, but they were
all sent off the list.  I would like to reply on the list, so my
apologies if your email to me was meant to stay private.  Flames may
be sent to me personally, and won't be forwarded on...
 
Paul Gentile wrote:
>
> Ken,
>
>     You ECAC'ers have Vermont, thats it!
>
>     Now, granted, Vermont is the legitimate #1 right now. After Michigan
> lost this weekend, Vermont clearly gains their spot. The Catamounts
> have certainly proven themselves during the early going this year playing
> a schedule tougher than Michigan's so far. I'll also concede that as
> events have transpired during this season, I'll second your prediction that
> the NCAA National Champion for 96-97 will be an ECAC'er --- namely you
> know who!
>
>    Now, I'd bet Hockey East's top five against your top five anyday. In
> fact, I'd take that bet against the WCHA or the CCHA too! If Vermont
> doesn't win the title, then the ECAC's chance of getting it is slim. CCHA
> has one chance also in Michigan. WCHA hasn't really anyone who'll
> stand above the rest. Whereas, Hockey East has several teams capable
> of taking on the best from the other leagues.
 
Last year the ECAC had the "Fab 5", a two-team middle eschelon, and the
rest.  Despite SLU's miserable start, I still think they'll be a tough
team.  Cornell hasn't started but they look tough.  Clarkson will be
better, Colgate is really scary, and, of course Vermont.  Add in Harvard's
potential, and you've got an impressive top 5.  If you honestly feel that
any of the other conferences can boast that much depth, I'd like to hear.
 
 
[log in to unmask] wrote:
> The ECAC's lower eschelon is more competitive that the lower eschelon of many
> other divisions.  Look at the HEA before last year (BU, Maine, UNH, Lowell, and
> who?).  The CCHA has its bottom feeders as well (OSU, UIC...well, no more).
> The ECAC's lower teams were tough and still played a tough brand of hockey
> despite being on the losing side of many of the scores.
>
> Clarkson lost to BU because a goal was disallowed because of the proverbial
> blow of the whistle.
 
Again, I think its the strength-of-schedule thing.  Yale was bad last year.
That means that every ECAC team's SOS was brought down, win or loss.  And
since RPI (index, not team) also looks at opponents SOS, well, you can see
how good teams get underrated, and how the problem builds on itself.
 
 
Kevin Todd, SLU '96 wrote:
>
> Dear Ken,
>
> I really think that you hit the nail right on the head with your post to
> the list ... the ECAC *will* be a force to reckon with this year and it
> is just about time;)  I'm pretty sure that Vermont will win the National
> Champ. as you imply...and your right about SLU, Clarkson and Colgate
> being right in there...SLU sucks rocks at the moment, but I feel sorry
> for the team that they are playing when they finally hit their stride:)
> Respect for the ECAC will be regained this year!:)
 
CCHA is and always will be tough.  BU looks like the only REAL powerhouse
in the HE.  As for WCHA, well, ND looks good, but when the teams only
play 4 non-conference games, its hard to compare them to the rest of the
league.  But that's another story.
 
There is another line this conversation can take.  TV coverage.  According
to USCHO, there is NO scheduled ECAC coverage.  Just as Notre Dame gets
a better football rating when they're seen all the time, so ECAC teams
with no publicity stay "out of site, out of mind".  I don't know where
I'm going with this, I'm just enjoying my time on the soapbox.
 
- Ken
 
--
from: LTJG Kenneth A. Pavelle, NOAA
      NOAA, National Weather Service
      Arkansas-Red Basin River Forecast Center
 
      My Homepage:  http://www.abrfc.noaa.gov/kap.html
 
"Its hard to predict anything, especially the future" -- Yogi Berra
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.