HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Kurt Stutt <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Kurt Stutt <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 7 Dec 1995 23:46:17 GMT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
[log in to unmask] (Mike Machnik) wrote:
 
>The RPI is not meant to be looked at midway through the season.  It has one
>sole purpose: it is to be used in selecting the teams for the NCAA
>tournament after all the games are played.  After ALL games are played.  It
>is not intended to be used at a random point in the season to tell us
>anything about the teams.
 
I have to go with Wayne on this (in disagreeing with Mike).
 
Whatever manner is used to select teams for post-season play should be
available, clearly explained and known ahead of time.  I don't believe
it makes a difference as to how a team plays (they play to win), but
it certainly seems unfair to keep someone in the dark as to their
chances of advancing.
 
In all the major professional sports, everyone knows what they need to
do, mostly because there are no qualitative criteria used to select
teams.  Better records go ahead of worse records (regardless of
strength of schedule) and tie-breakers are well known.
 
In the college world, this is (by most accounts) unpractical to do.
So the qualitative "ratings" are thrown in, putting strength of
schedule, and other such items, into the mix.  So long as that is
done, everyone should have knowledge of how their team is doing, just
as they know where their team is in the standings.
 
The way I see it, the NCAA does nothing except create greater
difficulties when they do not explain these things clearly or even
release the information.  It's as though they want to blindside
everyone at the last minute.  In actuality, I believe they would get
less heat if they were straight-forward.  The argument would shift
from discussing the efficacy of using a ratings system to finding a
better system (and I don't want to debate RPI vs. the other systems
out there).
 
Of course, they could duck the whole thing by coming up with a new,
quantitative method of assigning tournament bids that absolves anyone
of having to make a decision at the end of the season (just like the
pros do).
 
I think I'll come up with one today.
 
Kurt Stutt
[log in to unmask]
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2