The tournaments over the last two years have had some discouraging
results:
 
== Last year, all of the eastern teams lost.
 
Both the Hockey East and the ECAC had a week off between their
tournaments and the NC$$ playoffs.  I think this was due to scheduling
conflicts at the Boston Garden, where both tournaments were held.
 
The western leagues held their tournaments the weekend before the NC$$
first rounds began.
 
Thus, you could argue that all of the eastern teams lost their edge
with the extra weekend off.
 
There was one day of rest between the first round and the
quarterfinals, providing the winners of the first nights (MSU and
Wisconsin in the east) with enough time to "recuperate".
 
== This year, all of the teams with byes won.
 
This year, all four leagues ended their tournaments the weekend before
the NC$$ tournament.
 
There was also no day off between the first round and the
quarterfinals and it can be argued that fatigue might have come into
play, especially for Northern Michigan who took two overtimes to beat
Harvard.
 
 
 
I think that all four teams winning due to the byes was just how it
happened to come out.  After all, the reason they received the byes is
that they were supposedly the better teams.  The two games out west
were pretty close, with the Michigan-Wisconsin game going to overtime,
so it is very possible that a team with a bye will be beaten.  It just
happened that this year they all won.
 
I say leave it as it is, it seems to have worked out fine.
 
adam
ps. I much prefered the best of three series, since I think hockey is
a game that can too easily be decided by a fluke goal to let one game
decide it.  Of course, that means that the semi-finals and
championship should also be best of three. :)