Has anyone heard from College Hockey Inc.??

They're supposed to be the be all and end all for Division I (and ignores
D-III).

Joe LaCour
Sent from my mobile phone
CCT '77 & '78
On Jul 10, 2011 11:20 AM, "Mark Lewin" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Splitting a league into two divisions has nuances. I agree that a six team
> league is supposed to be entitled to an autobid but a league with two six
> team divisions probably does not. To call it a league implies that the two
> divisions should compete at seasons end for a "league" championship, the
> winner of which would get the autobid.
>
> Cutting down on the at-large bids has good and bad points. One of the good
> things about the autobid is that it gives a team who has not had a great
> season but finds its groove and is building momentum at seasons end, to
> qualify for the NCAA's by winning its championship. It gives more emphasis
> to the league championships while the at-large system gives more emphasis
to
> the regular season record. The fact that it enhances the league revenues
for
> the championships doesn't hurt either.
>
> The bad point of at-large bids is that it eliminates a team who has had a
> good season but is bumped by a "lesser" team from a "lesser" league
> (however you define this) because this lesser team has won a few games in
a
> row in the league championship.
>
> Whichever way it goes, its better than the old days when the field was
> determined in a smoke filled back room (unless it was YOUR guy in the back
> room).
>
> One of the good things that might come out of a group of 6 team leagues is
> that it would allow a larger number of non-league games during the season.
> This might be a small step towards normalizing the referee-ing philosophy
> across leagues and should help with the accuracy of the RPI, PWR and other
> rankings since teams would play against more opponents
>
> As far as the fairness of determining which is the "best" team each year,
> there is no good way. The only thing we can agree on is that the best
> method of determining the best team is a method that emphasizes YOUR teams
> successes and minimizes YOUR team's weakness. You can debate that forever.
> Meanwhile, the best compromise is the one we have. Define the best team as
> the one who wins the national tournament.
>
> Sorry to ramble on like this. I think I really need a hockey "fix"
>
> Mark Lewin
> RPI 1969
>
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:32 AM, William Sangrey <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
>> A couple thoughts,
>>
>> I believe (i.e. correct me if I am wrong, but I do not think I am) that
any
>> league in any sport that has at least 6 eligible members is entitled to
an
>> auto bid in a tournament. So if the remaining WCHA, CCHA teams and UAH or
>> members of AHA reorganize into two 6 team leagues, they would get two
auto
>> bids, period. Thus the net effect of creating the Big Ten in hockey may
>> turn out to be fewer at-large (something that could become even more
>> pronounced if the left out smaller western teams drop D-I hockey and the
>> NCAA reduces the field size accordingly).
>>
>> Based on what has happened over the past few days and weeks, it seems
that
>> Notre Dame is the final piece of the puzzle (I wonder why they did not
join
>> the not-Big 10 western league - do they really think that HE wants them
that
>> badly?). I just hope that when the music stops we don't have any more
>> programs like UAH who are left without a chair.
>>
>> Finally, why do people keep suggesting that the Ivy teams would want to
>> leave the ECAC? The teams in the ECAC share many things in common and are
>> very competitive with each other athletically and academically. The
schools
>> are geographically concentrated, and there are many strong rivalries both
>> between and among the Ivies and non-Ivies. It is a league where anyone
can
>> beat anyone else, home or road (and often do), and over the long term
(since
>> 1983 split with HE) every team has had at least a time when they have
>> realistically competed for or won league titles. I am probably naive, but
>> shouldn't that be the goal of any athletic conference?
>>
>> William Sangrey
>> Cornell '87&'94
>> Let's Go RED!!!
>>