David Parter wrote:
> As a Wisconsin fan, I'd like to point of that it isn't the Wisconsin
> fans who are complaining, and saying that "we" deserve to be in the
> tournament. The fact is, if the Badgers had won even a few more games --
> especially some critical games -- they would be in a stronger position
> in the pairwise. Wisconsin had a rough season, no doubt.
>
> The point being made isn't about one particular team -- but is there
> something in the current selection process that is flawed (yes, I'm sure
> we can all find something -- maybe not the same thing -- flawed in the
> current process) in a way that is creating a tournament field that isn't
> "the best"?
>
> I can't say - I've seen less college hockey this year (and most years)
> than some of you. I haven't seen enough of the other teams. But I do
> think it isn't just Wisconsin -- a couple (perhaps even "several") WCHA
> teams that are not in the tournament this year would probably be favored
> to beat several of the teams that are in the tournament. I don't know
> enough about the other leagues to evaluate if others can say the same.


This is all true.  I'm only using Wisconsin as an example because I had 
already examined their schedule pretty thoroughly in order to answer a 
completely different question that I had.  What I am saying is that the 
selection system is broken, because it does not give sufficient credit 
for playing a difficult schedule.  One of the absurdities is the whole 
RPI bonus for road non-conference victories.  Why is it more valuable 
for Maine to win in Grand Forks than it is for Wisconsin to win in Grand 
Forks?  Aren't they the same accomplishment?