On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 [log in to unmask] wrote:

> I'm kind of tired of this.  If everyone wanted to end
> Michigan's perpetual advantage, they've had a
> perfectly viable option: they could have submitted
> bids.  Michigan got the 2002 and 2003 West Regionals
> because they were the *only* school that submitted a
> bid for either one.

> If St. Cloud doesn't want to play in Michigan, they
> could have bid themselves.  They didn't, so they
> really don't have much to complain about.  Ditto
> Michigan State's feelings about playing in Ann Arbor.

It doesn't change the fact that schools without the resources to host
a regional are at a habitual disadvantage, both by never getting a
home game and by being sent to the other region more often.  Then
again, schools which don't help the NC$$ maximize the attendance in
their home region are also at a disadvantage.

> You won't get any Western schools to bid on regionals
> if the host doesn't get to play there.

I think that's true at this time; I was just mentioning it since
basketball works this way, which they can get away with because all
their regionals are big draws even without the local team.

> You can't send them to the other regional if there isn't anyone
> that's going to host it.

Well, that would say having four regionals is hopeless, if only one
Western school is ever willing to host.
                                          John Whelan, Cornell '91
                                                 [log in to unmask]
                                     http://www.amurgsval.org/joe/

Enjoy the latest Hockey Geek tools at slack.net/hockey