It's getting pretty ridiculous to compare college basketball and hockey,
especially with respect to post-season tournament seeding and scheduling.
 
Aside from the amazing differences inherent in the sport themselves --
chiefly the fact that just 1 player can suddenly make any basketball team
into a powerhouse, 2 or 3 can turn them into "Sweet Sixteen" contenders --
basketball has MONEY, and a heck of a lot more than hockey.
 
It also has 200-some-odd teams, from schools large and small.
 
Additionally, many of these schools with "lesser" basketball teams are very
large universities with a lot of money -- and alumni support. Harvard is a
prime example; they could easily afford the necessary steps if they wanted
to focus on building a better basketball team.
 
But compare the resources of Harvard to a school like Quinnipiac or Iona.
You can't.
 
Or compare the impact that Tunji Awojobi had on BU's basketball team (worst
to first in two years and an 11th seed NCAA berth) with the impact that
Rejean Stringer has on Merrimack (still no tournament appearance). Again,
you can't.
 
Compare the fact that Duke students camp out for 2 days for ticket to a
regular season game to waking up at 7am for a ticket to the Beanpot
(although in the good ol' first-come-first-serve days of the 80s we'd at
least camp out overnight). Again, no comparison.
 
 
So let's stop comparing hockey and basketball, because we really can't.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.