>Tony Buffa, from Ponoma or San Luis Obispo, said, " I have NEVER (since
>being on the list starting in about 1994) understood how, with such
>little
>out of conference play by boht the CCHA and WCHA, they can claim to be
>stronger."
>
>Okay, try this on for size:
>Between 1997 and 1987 (choose your own years)
>the WCHA had 12 teams in the final four, and 4 NCAA champions
>the CCHA had 12 teams in the final four, and 4 NCAA champions
>Hockey East had 13 teams in the final four, and 2 NCAA champions
>and the ECAC had 7 teams in the final four, and 1 NCAA champion.
>
>Gut feelings aside, is that weak enough for anyone willing to claim the
>ECAC is equal to the other three? Does 25% of the leagues, and even a
>larger percentage of total teams, and less than 10% of the NCAA titles
>mean anything?
>Superiority is proven on the ice, and both the WCHA and CCHA have
>results on their side.
>
>Nathan Eric Hampton
>
All the NCAA records prove is that the top teams in one league are stronger
than the top teams in another.  It does not prove that the overall strength
of a league, top to bottom, is better.  The only way to do that is to have
some serious interconference play which, for some reason, the WCHA and CCHA
tend to avoid.  Maybe Ferris State is better than Providence but, if they
never play each other, how will we know?
 
Greg Ambrose
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.