In article <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask] (Yaron Steinhauer) writes:
|> I was wondering if you think it would be a great idea to make the hockey
|> tournament a 16 team tournment so more teams make it and for all teams to play
|> an equal number of games to win the championship instead of letting the top
|> 4 teams to get a bye in the first round and get an extra day to prepare for the
|> tournament?
 
No, it is a bad idea.  There are only 43 teams in Div I hockey, and 16 is more
than one third of them.  An expanded brackett only puts less importance on
the regular season.  The NHL (an extreme example) regular season is almost
meaningless, unless teams are on the bubble.  The current 12 team format
requires teams on the bubble, like Brown was, to respond in their own
conference tournament in order to qualify.  Based on your earlier post, you
are disappointed about RPI being beaten out by Brown for a bid.  However,
if 16 teams got bids, RPI wouldn't have to worry about their ECAC final four
finish.  In other words, the conference quarterfinals would become the big
games.  (i.e. If Yale had beaten Brown, in the 16 team tourney, they would
probably get a bid.  However, RPI had only to get by Colgate and they would
have gotten a bid.  There would be very few "crucial" games in the conference
tournaments, as the top 3 teams would probably be assured a NCAA bid regardless
of their tournament performance.)
 
                        JOHN