Keith's desire to defend TCHCR has inspired me to ask about
what appears to be built in inequities in the system, and yes, this
is from a fan of a team that does not fair too well in the rankings- Cornell.
 
The Big Red plays 22  league games (ECAC), one tournament (LSSU and Colgate),
and two others (BC and Northeastern) to reach the Ivy limit of 26 games.
 
I am curious if Keith can re-run his program changing the one goal losses
to BC and LSSU into ties for one run, and then into one goal wins for another.
 
This would make Cornell's record against the top teams very strong, but would
leave their schedule strength (over which they have little control) unchanged,
and, I hope, show that because the ECAC teams are forced to play league games
against the weaker teams, they have no hope of being top performers in TCHCR.
 
----------
 
I also would like to ask Keith how he counted the St. Lawrence/Vermont mini-
game in his standings? Did St. Lawrence get 2 wins and 1 loss?
 
----------
 
While I'm asking, I am also curious about Mike's opinion of how the
quarterfinals affected his NCAA prognostications, since Cornell's two
wins against Colgate now gives Cornell a better record than BU against
common opponents.  Would he now seed Cornell third? What if Cornell goes
on to beat St. Lawrence and Clarkson?
 
Waiting with baited I/O
 
Neil