Back in the 50s and 60s when the west would win boht matchups and there
would be two W teams in the finals year after year.. they moved to this
type of bracket, just to ensure the E would have a team in the finals.
Take alook at some of the results. I think one year (1963?) Denver beat
St. Lawrence like 12-2 or something in the FINALS. What kind of
competition is that? Eventually they dropped this method as the East and
west became more balanced. So this part I dont understand at all.

Tony Buffa
RPI '64

======

Mark Lewin wrote:

>
> The point that took me by surprise was that once all 4 teams
> get to St. Paul, they switched the 1W-2E,1E-2W brackets
> to 1E-2E and 1W-2W.
> What purpose does that serve? All 4 teams are in the same building regardless of who plays who.  And the tournament
> has been a sellout for 9 months; they aren't going to squeak
> out extra ticket sales.  What they did was reduce east vs. west matchups from 2 (possibly 3) down to 1. This change certainly wasn't pre-announced. And it doesn't serve any useful purpose.
> If, as some have claimed, there is a gross imbalance between the strength of east and west,  having 2 east vs. west brackets in the semi-finals could go part way to rectifying that.
> If the west is so much stronger than the east, then the semi-finals could showcase that resulting in an all-west final.
>