At 12:40 PM -0700 3/16/97, John T. Whelan wrote:
> I provide as a starting point:
>
> >> A straight swap of the bottom teams gives:
>
> >> Plan A:
>
> >>  1 Michigan (C)            2 Clarkson (E)
> >>  3 North Dakota (W)        8 Boston University (H)
> >>  4 Minnesota (W)           5 New Hampshire (H)
> >>  9 Cornell (E)             6 Vermont (E)
> >> 10 Miami (C)              12 Colorado College (W)
> >> 11 Denver (W)             13 Michigan State (C)
>
> Mike Machnik corrects:
>
> >This is not quite the way it is done.  If there is not a 6-6 split, then
> >the committee is required to begin by moving the bottom teams from one
> >region to the other to equalize the regions.  So, MSU would be placed below
> >Cornell in the East to start off.
>
> >Then, they have to move two teams from each region to the other for the
> >regionals.
>
>         That's kind of a strange way to go about things, since it
> seems to favor the lowest seed in the tournament by making them very
> likely to end up in their "actual" region.  But then no one said this
> makes sense.
 
Just to clarify, this is according to Step 2 of the "Seedings and Pairings"
section of the championships information.  If there was an 8-4 split, then
the bottom two from the region with 8 teams would start off in the other
region.
 
Steps 4 & 5 say that four teams from the East region will be placed in the
East along with two teams from the West, and vice versa for the West.  Thus
two of UNH, Vermont, Cornell, and MSU must go West, and two of Minnesota,
Miami, CC, and Denver must go East.
 
> >WEST              EAST
> >1  Michigan       2  Clarkson
> >3  North Dakota   8  BU
> >9  Cornell        6  Vermont
> >4  Minnesota      5  New Hampshire
> >10 Miami          11 Denver
> >13 MSU            12 CC
>
> [...]
>
> >One other note.  The order of the teams as I have them above (WEST/EAST) is
> >really inconsequential.  What really matters is the brackets.  So it looks
> >strange to have #5 UNH below #6 Vermont, and #4 Minnesota below #9 Cornell,
> >but you almost have to forget the rankings at that point.  The committee
> >can juggle the brackets however they wish to do things like avoiding
> >conference matchups.  What I have above is what I believe to be the least
> >painful way of doing this, but there are other ways.
>
>         Although they seemed reluctant to do that last year.  If the
> real reason Lowell went West instead of Clarkson was to avoid the
> Lowell-BU matchup, why didn't they just seed them like so:
>
>  1 BU (H)       2 Colorado College (W)
>  7 Vermont (E)  3 Michigan (C)
>  4 LSSU (C)     5 Minnesota (W)
>  6 WMU  (C)     9 Michigan State (C)
> 11 Cornell (E) 10 Clarkson (E)
>  8 Lowell (H)  17 Providence (H)
>
> There would have been *no* potential interconference matchups.  (Note
> also that last year the #4 team was sent out of its region to avoid a
> conference championship rematch with the #3 team.)
 
But this is not the only factor.  In deciding which teams play where, they
can try to maximize attendance and limit conference matchups.  Remember
that Lowell went West instead of Clarkson or Cornell because of attendance.
This was stated last year.  They could have kept Lowell East and limited
matchups as you say, but then attendance may have suffered.
 
>         I wonder if the actual brackets will match anyone's
> prediction.
 
We will know soon. :-)
 
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                [log in to unmask]               *HMM* 11/13/93
*****   (Part-Time) Color Voice of Merrimack Hockey  WCAP 980 AM    *****
*****       Unofficial Merrimack Hockey home page located at:       *****
*****   http://www.tiac.net/users/machnik/MChockey/MChockey.html    *****
>>>    U.S. College Hockey Online http://www.uscollegehockey.com/     <<<
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.