Mike said:
>I can buy letting the host team stay at home (although I would prefer
>it wasn't done) because as Rick said, it encourages teams to host
>the regional and they're having trouble getting bids as it is.  I
>can't buy letting low-ranked non-hosting teams stay near home just
>because they are perceived to have good fan support.  If Cornell's fan
>base is so great, then they will go anywhere to support their team -
>even to Michigan.  So that's where they should have gone.  That's
>where they belong.  Getting to play a virtual home game because you're
>hosting the tournament is one thing.  But getting to play one when you
>squeaked in is another.
 
While I understand the frustration inherent in being sent west (it happened
to Cornell in 1991, and although we weren't ranked as high at the time as
Lowell is this year, it was still aggravating), I have to disagree with you
somewhat on the way you characterize Cornell's appearance in the tourney.
 
Cornell hardly "squeaked in" to the NCAA tournament; the Big Red won the
ECAC tournament convincingly, by thrashing a competetive team in two
straight quarter-final poundings, shutting out a higher ranked team in the
semi-finals, and then defeating a perennial rival (for a three-game season
sweep) in the finals.  If that's not convincing enough for you, Cornell's
stretch run was just about the best in the nation - including the four
tourney games, the Big Red is 14-1-1 in their last 16, with the only loss
coming in OT.
 
Lowell also had an impressive late-season run, including a defeat of Hockey
East #1 Boston University, but they didn't fare very well in their
conference tournament.  By the end of the four tourneys, Cornell's numbers
in the RPI were a lot closer to Lowell's than they were before the
conference quarterfinals.
 
As far as Cornell's fan base, you're absolutely right - we'd follow the
team wherever they're sent, even if it's Michigan.  We did it in 1991, when
we *did* "squeak in."  But there will be *more* of us at the tourney
because it's in Albany.  A lot more.  The concept of Albany being a
"virtual home game" for Cornellians, on the other hand, is a laugh - it's
still a three-hour drive, and we still have to find hotel rooms.
 
Cornell was the farthest school from the ECAC tourney this weekend (even
Harvard is a tad closer), and our students are currently on spring break -
yet they still brought an impressive turnout (granted, Vermont won by
numbers, but they're only 70 miles away).  Given half the chance, the
undergrads and alumni of the Lynah Faithful would buy half the Knick.  Do
you honestly think that's true of Riverhawks fans?
 
I agree to some extent that the fan base criterion for seeding isn't
exactly the fairest concept, but somebody has to break even on these games,
and the only way to do it is to sell enough tickets.  As long as that
remains one of the criteria for seeding, I think this was the right
decision (and yes, I was prepared to drive or fly to Michigan, but I'm
pretty happy not to have to do so).
 
Hopefully, Cornell and Lowell will both rise above the regional level (I
don't know how likely it is, but it's nice to think about); once that
happens, it won't matter where you were seeded, 'cause every road leads to
Cincinnati.
 
Jeffrey Anbinder
Ithaca Times Hockey Columnist
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.