>No, this is not true at all.  My whole point is that season long
>performance is what should be used to determine the 12 best teams and where
>they are seeded.
 
Why?  Why not consider the tournament as well.  Take Cornell's case this
year.  Our first game was against MSU, and it wasn't pretty.  We didn't
have all of our players eligible (not the fault of the current coaching
staff), we didn't know the best combination of lines (who does in the first
game), and we had only a few weeks of on-ice practice.  The players were
trying to adjust to a new coach.  Why should it count as much as a game
later in the season?
 
It takes teams time to work out the best gameplan.  For Cornell, this took
several months to overcome the damage done in the past.  Now that they've
done it, I think they should be judged based on where they are now, not
where they were at the beginning of the season.  By only considering the
regular season, you penalize teams who have worked out problems such as
strategy issues and injuries.
 
When you do any kind of selection, you should select with the same
conditions you will be using after the selection process.  If I want to
pick out ampicillin resistant bacteria in my experiments, I select with
ampicillin.  If I want to select the best skaters for my hockey team, I
hold my training camp on an ice surface, not a swimming pool.  If I want to
pick the teams who will best compete in a tournament, I pick the teams who
performed best in previous tournaments.
 
Think about how many regular season champions flop during the conference
tournaments.  Why is this?  If you can beat these teams all season long,
why can't you do it in the playoffs?  The only reason I can think of is
because you know that even if you lose, you will still get a bid and go on
with your season.  Vermont didn't care about winning against Harvard on
Friday, and I still don't understand why.  The only reason I can come up
with is that they went to Lake Placid to be crowned.  They were so sure
they were going to win the tournament, based on the regular season, that
they didn't have to try.  They were wrong.
 
If anything, I think giving the regular season champs a bid hurts them come
tournament time.  I'd hate to be Vermont or Clarkson, trying to win an NCAA
game coming off the poor performances the had in Lake Placid.  Both teams
knew they were getting bids going into the ECACs, and neither gave as
strong a performance as they did in Lynah rink during the regular season.
Cornell was focused on the task at hand, and they got the job done.
Providence knew that the only way to go on was to keep winning.  They did.
Both teams are set up well for playing on Friday.  They'll have much more
confidence than a team like Clarkson, since they know that, when push comes
to shove, they can get the job done.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.