John R. Nash writes:
[ lots of stuff that I agree with; CC should be in and the WCHA isn't a
  weak conference ]
 
> The system's broken, and needs to be fixed.  I think that whatever     s,
> happens here should be some allowance for intangibles....
                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It's just those "intangibles" that lead to many political or seemingly
political choices.  I agree that the system didn'n function as we all
would like it to have THIS YEAR.  However, some other posts illuminate
why that may've happened (like the committee abdicating their job to a
computer).  The challenge is to come up with a way of selecting the top
teams; an algorithm if you want to call it that.
  License to use "intangibles" could include teams that "historically
do well in the playoffs"; teams that "have the hottest goalie and there-
fore the best chance of winning"; teams that "finished 13th for 3 years
in a row and deserve to go this time just so it isn't 4" etc.
  Personally, I like the idea of each conference getting 2 automatic
bids; one for the regular season and one for the playoff (as was suggest-
ed in another post).  But until that happens (likely when the field
expands to 16), the process needs to be refined YET maintain a way of
explaining exactly why the 13th team is the 13th team and not the 12th.
(Un)fortunately, RPI and the current algorithm do just that.
  Since part of CC's trouble was their weak schedule down the stretch, it
may be worth considering to allow flexibility in the schedules, or (an
idea I like) just restricting the league playoffs to the top 4 or 8 teams
(or 6 with byes? :^).
  The point is, don't bring in "intangibles" because that's a Pandora's
box we don't want to re-open (IMHO).
 
Steve G