-- [ From: Kepler * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --
 
> The banner makes no reference to the fact that the title was shared or was
for
> regular season honors.  The conference champion is the team that wins the
> tournament.
 
Ordinarily, such banners do say "regular season" on them.  But, technically
speaking, UNH *was* co-champion of the HE regular season.  Their standing
would be 1(t), with the tie resolved against them for the tournament seed.
The banner is valid, though terse.
 
> For UNH to claim title to the Hockey East championship would be
> like Michigan claiming the 1997 NCAA title by virtue of their having the
> highest PWR at the close of the regular season.
 
Actually, it is *this* argument which makes an analogous error.  The regular
season and the tournament are separate.  UNH wins a share of the RS title
and should be permitted to claim that.  For a team to claim it has won sole
possession of the RS title because it wins the tie breaker for the
conference seed is invalid in the same way that (cut/paste Michigan
comparison to here).
 
OK, for anyone who has read this far, here is a reward so that this has some
token content of interest for someone not involved with the two teams or who
has a woody for predicate calculus:  In the early days of the ECAC, teams
played different numbers of league games and were ranked for the tournament
by winning percentage.  If team A finished 17-5 and team B finished 16-4,
which do you think is entitled to call itself the regular season champion?
 
 
--
 
   Greg R. Berge
   [log in to unmask]
   http://www.spiritone.com/~kepler
 
   "Ne te quaesiveris extra."
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.