1)
 
Lawrence Weintraub wrote:
> >         Question:  It's my understanding that the 5 minute overtime was
> > played in order to count as the NCAA's official record of the game
> > for use in determining tournament bids and seedings.
 
Mike Machnik replied:
> Not that I'm aware of.  The game goes into the books as a win for Cornell
> and loss for Providence.  The NCAA rule book allows for unlimited o.t.
> in games in which a winner must be decided for advancement in a
tournament
> (in-season or post-season).
 
I assume, then, that the first o.t. was played at five minutes so that they
didn't have to resurface the ice before it (or rest the players).
 
Maybe it's because the Providence goalie had such a gut-wrenching
experience (sorry...), but in thinking about the time alotted for rest
between o.t.'s, has it ever been suggested that the rest breaks should be
progressively longer?  It seems logical that a body would recover more
slowly as the extra stanzas piled up.
 
2)
 
Thanks to everybody who has posted so far about the SIT.  Good coverage
from a variety of perspectives.
 
3)
 
Although the turnaround in the ECAC/ HE record has been noted, I
haven't read any theories as to why this has happened.  Speaking as someone
who sees anywhere from 10 to 12 of the ECACs members each year, I'd opine
that the middle through bottom of the ECAC has undergone gradual but steady
improvement over the past 2-3 years.  The polite line on the relationship
of the 2 leagues has hitherto been that elite squads matched well, but the
less accomplished ECAC squads were not competitive.
 
This year's results:
 
Team            Conf.   All NC  v HE
-----------------------------------------------------------
RPI             4-1-1   5-3-1   3-2-1
Cornell         6-2-1   2-1     2-0
Princeton       6-2-1   5-1-1   1-1
Clarkson                4-3-0   5-3     3-0
Colgate         4-4-1   4-3     4-2
Harvard         4-4-2   1-3     1-1
St. Lawrence    3-3-1   4-5     2-1
Dartmouth       2-3-0   5-0     4-0
Vermont         2-3-0   7-2     5-1
Yale            3-5-1   2-0-1   0-0-1
Union           2-4-1   6-3     1-2
Brown           1-7-1   1-3     0-0
------------------------------------------------------------
Total                   47-27-3 26-10-2
 
Which gets us no closer to identifying the tide that's raising the ECAC.
The conference as a whole does appear to be stronger this year.  The
"payoff" should be a translation of this success to the rankings, NCAA
seeds, etc..., but we're all benefiting right now just by seeing better
hockey.  :-)
 
Happy New Year, all.
 
 
Greg R. Berge
Let's Go Red!
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.