They used to have a group who decided and we complained of that as "the men
in the smoke filled back room"

The trouble is that leaving it to the discretion of people will always look
like a conspiracy to the teams left out and defining strict rules will
sometimes produce results that make the "rules" look frivolous.  As long as
there are limited cross conference schedules, there is no perfect way.

That's not to say that tweaking the rules occasionally is a bad thing (such
as using KRACH rather than RPI), but, all in all, we're a lot better off
than we used to be.

As far as "forcing" the leagues to change their inter-conference scheduling,
good luck.  When was the last time someone in power gave up that power for
the "common good".

On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 10:53 AM, mike <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> The system would be better if they had a group to decide who belongs and
> provided some basic rules. Using a formula should be part of the system
> but
> to the general public its going to look pretty bad if a under .500 team
> wins the whole thing doesn't at least win something to earn their way in.
>
>