>Lets suppose team A and team B finish 12 and 13 respectively in the
>PWR winning 10 and 9 PWR comparisons respectively.
>
>Now lets suppose that if one looks at the individual PWR comparison
>between A and B that B beats A
>
>Who goes to the tournament?
 
B
 
No one knew this until last year when we were a little confused at the
seedings ...
 
It had been assumed that the committee went strictly by PWR  (PWR by the
way, is a monicker given to this system by Keith Instone, Tim Brule and
others -- I don't go back that far -- It didn't actually have a name).
 
Since the committee never actually named the system --- other than to
say "we go by the 'criteria'" -- they were just as confused, in reverse,
when this whole PWR thing kept cropping up.
 
Last year -- Joe Marsh said -- "This PWR thing is just totally wrong --
we don't do it that way"
 
When it was explained to him what PWR was ... a totalling of comparison
wins --- he said "oh, yeah, that is basically how we do it."  -- and
thus, there was a beautiful harmony and understanding between the public
and committee -- music played, bells rang ... the whole nine yards.
 
The only difference, as explained by Marsh, is they  ** DON'T ACTUALLY
PHYSICALLY TOTAL UP THE COMPARISON WINS **
 
They get an idea going by RPI -- of who is strong .... and most of the
time, you can choose the same top teams through RPI and PWR ---- for the
bubble teams, they check each team against each other that are sort of
close together ...
 
Now -- in essence, they are doing the same thing
 
It's just not as methodical as PWR.....
 
The only difference is in Charlie's scenario above.   In PWR, A goes ---
in the committee's mind, B goes.
 
This is where I wish the committee would adopt PWR as strictly as we
once layed it out to be.
 
It's not often that it will make a difference, but it could ...  And I
think if the committee was explained PWR -- they would see how on the
money it is, and that it's logically better.
 
Cause, heck, they don't give the regular season ECAC title to Team B -
just because it was 2-0 vs. Team A --- when Team A had more points
overall --- right?
 
AW
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.