>Where this is important is in Maine's race with BU for the #1 seed in
>the East.  The loss makes the difference between BU and Maine 1.37 as
>opposed to 0.60.  Since the threshold below which more detailed
>comparisons can occur (including head to head record) is 1.00 (0.01 in
>RPICH), a difference of 1.37 means that Maine's +2 head to head
>advantage (2-0-2) over BU would not come into play if the season ended
>today.  BU would be the top seed in the East.
 
This says something about the validity in the system the NC$$ uses then.  If
a team wins the division (assuming the season ended today Maine would win
Hockey East) has a higher winning % and wins the head to head convincingly
(2-0-2) and finishes behind the other team in the NC$$ tournament rankings,
something is messed up.  I think we know this already since Colorado College
was so "quaintly" excused from the tournament last year.  I know that the
season has a while to go yet, but Mike does bring up an excellent point
here.  Maine simply by playing UMA lost points in the power ratings, the
loss is magnified by the defeat.
 
Here's an opinion, does anyone else think that everything, power-ratings,
winning percentage, division finish and head to head competition should ALL
be taken into effect by the NCAA?  I realize winning % is included in the
power-ratings, but what about these other factors?  I'll certainly be
interested to here your opinions!
 
+--------------------------------------------+
| DERON TREADWELL - [log in to unmask] |
|         University of Maine (22-2-6)       |
|     1994 Great Western Freezeout Champs!   |
|        1995 RPI Invitational Champs!       |
+--------------------------------------------+