Additional comments on Division II-III hockey:
 
> Thanks for posting this. Some comments:
>
> >Although it made no recommendation to the NC$$ Executive
> >Committee, the ice hockey committee discussed the issue at length
> >and agreed to study further the concept of implementing
> >geographical ratios for at-large participation in future
> >championships.With schools in the East outnumbering those in
> >the West by more than a two-to-one margin, the committee
> >agreed to gather input from coaches and administrators as to
> >whether a geographical ratio should be implemented for at-large >selection.
>
> We talked about this on hockey3 this past season. Things recently
> got more unbalanced now that the 8 NESCAC schools have been
> granted permission to participate in the 1994 tournament. I now
> count 15 elligible teams from the ECAC East, 7 from the SUNYAC,
> 4 from the ECAC West, and 18 from the ECAC North/South/Central
> for a total of 44 D-III teams in the East. The West has a total of 14
> teams (9 from the MIAC and 5 from the NCHA).  The ratio is therefore
> 3.14 to 1
>
> However, one could argue for the exclusion of the ECAC
> North/South/Central as they practically never get a bid. That would
> make the ratio 1.86 to 1. Also, there's the arguement that the West
>  is stronger and deserves an equal number of teams - a Western
> team has won something like 5 of the last 6 NCAA D-III
> championships. Perhaps the large number of D-III and club teams
> in the East dilutes the talent there.
 
We in NESCAC would like to think that the reason the West has won so many
titles in recent years is the result of members of our conference not being
able to go to the big show. Would Middlebury and Bowdoin (the two teams that
probably would have received bids had they been eligible) won? I do know that
we in NESCAC have often wondered how we would do -- and we finally will get
our chance. 8-)
 
I do wonder, BTW, whether NESCAC involvement in the NCAA will force the
Division I members of ECAC East (like UConn and their famous outdoor rink) to
move up to Division I. Frankly, I think that this would be in the best
interest of hockey at all levels, if the Division II tournament is disbanded
and we go back to the old system. Division I would get a few more members, and
we would have a true Division III league in the East. The only remaining
problem is what to do with the North/South/Central teams, which are not going
to receive any national bids.
 
Craig Cheslog
Bowdoin College Sports Information Intern