Moller Edward N wrote:
>
> The fact that the CHA and MAAC are "minor" conferences is not my point.
> Frankly, I have no complaint with these conferences getting autobids; I
> think it's good for college hockey.  That's fodder for another discussion.
> What does confuse me is that throughout the hockey season PWR classifies
> TUC's as those teams with RPI's equal to at least 0.5000.  Why does this
> definition change come tournament time?

It doesn't change, exactly, as the definition has always been more
specific (i.e. that it includes tourney winners).  But during the RS,
we don't know who the winners will be (obviously), so it's easier to
omit that point.  As an example, my calculator (not publicly available
at the moment, and not updated for the new PWR this year anyway)
always
allows me to select a set of "forced" TUCs.

It's frequently been the case that the conference RS winner doesn't
win
the tournament, sufficiently so that I think there's some
justification
in -not- provisionally using the conference leader in pre-end-of-conf-
tournament PWR calcs.