First I was going to post something, because I had been thinking
about this question (who gets to play in the tournament) for a
while, and was beginning to change my mind (more on that later),
then I was going to stay out of it, since the discussion was
getting to be too much (especially when there are game to be played!)
but, I think I'll chime in anyway....
 
In the past, I have been part of the "best N teams" school of
thought on choosing tournament teams. Recently I have had other
thoughts, but I guess I am still with the best N teams,
regardless of conference. Note that this doesn't say anything
about any conferences, this year or in any other year.
 
Ok, lets back up th discussion:
 
	1. The purpose of the tournament is to determine the best team.
	   (Ignore all other related issues like what if the "best
	   team" was team X the weekend X beat Y in December).
 
	2. If every team could be in the tournament, or was
	   selected by straight-forward, totaly equal methods (for
	   example, a league tourney where everyone plays everyone
	   else the same number of times in the regular season, and
	   the top N teams qualify for the tournament. No arguments,
	   no disputes.) then there is no problem.
 
	3. The most important criteria for choosing teams for the
	   tournament should be that every possible likely national
	   champion is in the tournament. Sure there are always
	   Cinderalla teams, and if you take only N teams, who is
	   to say that team N+1 wouldn't have been that team. But
	   still, the stated most important purpose remains the
	   same.
 
Given these started points, there are the same two choices:
 
	1. Let each conference send its share. If the pool is
	   large enough, #3 above is satisfied, and therefore it is
	   hoped that #1 will be too.
 
	2. Take the "best" N teams. If you take "best" to mean the
	   teams that meet criteria #3, or if N is large enough,
	   this works.  Of course, there is subjectivity involved
	   here.
 
The real problem, now that N is modestly large (12), is that
teams consider a tournament bid as either a right or as a reward,
goals which are secondary to #1, determining the best team.
 
THROUGHTS and IDEAS
===================
 
If the NCAA didn't exist, and the College Hockey community was
starting from scratch to make a national tournament, the
following might happen:
 
	1. most teams are already organized in conferences. The
	   conferences are therefore the natural organizing entity for
	   the tournament.
 
	2. Each conference could "nominate" a certain number of
	   entrants in the tournament. It could be that each
	   conference gets the same number, or it could be
	   weighted by size of the conference, Each conference
	   would use its own criteria for nominations (ie regular
	   season standings, tournament standings, alphabetical
	   order, whatever).
 
	3. The independent teams would either be out of luck, or
	   would organize into a "conference" of their own, for
	   purposes of the tournament.
 
If the total number of teams, and the number from each conference
is alrge enough, criterion #3 would be met: all likely candidated
for the national championship would be in the tournament.
 
This still leaves the problem of tournament seeding and getting
the thing on national TV.
 
I guess I am stil in favor of the best N teams going, but I don't think
a situation like I described above is terrible. What I don't like is
the situation we have now, which looks like "the best N teams, unless
something else comes up"
 
 
	--david
 
--------
david parter				university of wisconsin -- madison
[log in to unmask]			      computer sciences department