In article <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
wrote:
 
 
> Adam Wodon wrote:
>
> > c)  Top-to-bottom, I think the ECAC is quite competitive
> >     the top teams aren't as good, but the bottom ones are better than
> > the bottom of the other conferences, clearly.
>
> There really isn't any evidence of this, at least not regarding western
teams (I
>  didn't take the time to do the breakdown vs. Hockey East).  ECAC teams
played C
> CHA or WCHA teams 28 times, and went 7-20-1.  If you only count the
games betwee
> n teams in the lower half of the conferences (7-12 ECAC, 7-11 CCHA, 6-9
WCHA), t
> hen the ECAC teams went 3-6.
 
 
What follows are stats that apparently contradict Adam Wodon's opinion.
While I tend to agree with Adam -- and I've been agreeing with Adam a lot
lately :-) -- I appreciate your substantiating your opinion with hard
numbers.
 
 
 
 
> On the academics issue, [ ...] I believe that for this and other
reasons, Big 10 universities (and
> , on a smaller scale, the other public schools in college hockey) are
actually s
> uperior
> educational institutions to the Princetons and the RPIs of the world.
 
 
How do you substantiate your opinion? Where are the stats about the
academics side of the discussion?
 
 
 
Luiz F. Valente
Brown University
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.