> It's been repeated over and over again.  How many more times does it
> have to be said?
 
It should be explained around tourny time every year.  Hopefully, *many*
people are new to the list every year, and they have no way to know this
gets thrashed through each year.  Also, there has been so much
poorly-phrased and even incorrect information about the selection process
the last few seasons, even those of us who have been here forever are still
not entirely confident that anybody knows what's really going on.  It's up
to those who do really know to put the information in an accessible form
and clear up the inevitable misunderstandings.
 
As far as USCHO having the articles on it -- personally I've never been to
USCHO for any reason other than to pick up scores, and I consider myself a
fairly atypically highly adverb-abusing and motivated (read: obsessed) fan.
 You can't assume everyone uses the resources available.  The list is, at
its best, an inclusive entity.
 
 
> I don't understand the reluctance of people to believe a simple fact:
> The committee goes strictly by the numbers.
 
Just because the system is not arbitrary does not mean it is simple.  The
NC$$ does not have a stellar reputation for fairness or logic (ill deserved
or not), and as mentioned above, we are so awash in predictions,
explanations, and ratings that the straight dope gets lost.
 
You're an invaluable resource because you not only understand the way it
works, but because you have also put a lot of effort into explaining it.
It really is appreciated -- I wasn't being a wise-ass (well, much) a few
posts back.  But, teaching and explaining just *never* end.  "You knew the
job was dangerous when you took it, Fred".
 
(And I'll give a virtual ceramic dalmatian to *any* Jay Ward fan who got
that reference -- I'm not exactly sure how the heck it floated into my own
consciousness...)
 
-- Greg
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.