Charlie Shub writes:
>> met with NCAA staff members to discuss RPI and asked staff to review
>> the current system (identical to mans BB womans BB baseball & womans
>> volleyball) with a mathematician to determine  whether it meets the
>> needs of the committee
>
>ah, the "fix the CC travesty" syndrome, part 1.  I'd certainly hope
>they used a STATISTICIAN instead of a mathematician.
 
Of course we will agree to disagree on this one! :-)  I still haven't
identified what the travesty was in CC's case...if it was that the reg
season champ did not make the tourney, then I wonder if CC fans feel
the same about Harvard not getting a bid in 1992...in both cases, teams
had weak schedules which kept them out, yet before the use of the RPI,
people were upset that teams with weak schedules could beat up on
others and get in.  You can't please everyone!
 
>> recommend to exec that there be 2 automatic bids to each of the four
>> conferences
>
>the CC rule, part 2.  Betcha both the regular season champion and the
>tourney champion make it if this passes.
 
What happens if they are one and the same?  Who gets the other bid?
Is it taken away?  Does it go to the reg season runner-up, or how
about the tourney runner-up?  Whatever happens, someone will be
unhappy.
 
If they give each conference 2 bids, it won't eliminate the controversy.
 
If each conference had received 2 bids this past season and CC had
gotten in ahead of MSU, then we would have heard the argument that MSU
had a stronger schedule and performed better against it
proportionally, but that CC benefited from a weaker conference
schedule than some of its opponents (Minnesota) which allowed it to
capture the conference title.
 
I would prefer not to see the current system changed.  That a reg
season champ did not make the tourney is not enough of a reason for
me, especially when I can see very clear reasons why that team should
not have received a bid.  I felt the same way about Harvard in 1992.
 
>> ask for proposal and cost estimates for the use of instant replay
>> during the championship
>
>I wonder what prompted that?  I certainly did not see anything even
>remotely resembling controversial in the championship game this year.
>Maybe they mean for ALL the playoff games.
 
Not in the championship game, but maybe in the earlier rounds...a
replay in 1994 would have meant eventual champ LSSU's elimination in
the first round.
 
Thanks, Charlie, for typing all this in!  We will disagree on CC, but
that is okay.
 
Have a good holiday, everyone, and drive safely...
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                                            [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc.                                    *HMM* 11/13/93
<<<<< Color Voice of the Merrimack Warriors (station TBA for 94-95) >>>>>