> I've got to be honest and say I just don't see it.  Putting aside an
> occasional comment by fans here or there, I don't hear people ridiculing
> the ECAC or any other conference, not among those I talk to anyway.  At the
> same time, the cries of "no respect" often do seem to come from ECAC
> followers, and in the light of what I just said, it doesn't make sense to
> me.
 
It's certainly not the majority -- but it clearly occurs. Maybe those who have
covered the conference on a regular basis just notice the remarks more.
 
> Perhaps it is a case of me becoming jaded in my old age :-), but the
> discussion of which conference is better or worse, or which one gets
> respect and which doesn't, seems pointless and unproductive.  I'd rather
> watch what happens on the ice.
 
This was essentially my point. So we agree.
 
And in response to the person who said the top of the ECAC can compete, but the
bottom is bad (I'm paraphrasing) -- My response is, that is goes in cycles --
and from what I've seen, the bottom half of the ECAC is superior to the bottom
of the other four conferences THIS YEAR.  Last year it was pathetic.  The year
before, it was outstanding (see Princeton def. previously unbeaten Maine at
Maine).
 
On the ECAC preview show on Around the Rinks (plug) -- Commissioner Joe
Bertagna spoke about the fact that there's always one team to carry the mantle
of the league.  There isn't 4 national contenders, but there's usually two --
and the beauty of it, and what the league hangs its hat on, is the diversity of
those teams.  From 1985 (the split up with HEA) to 1996, the ECAC has had 6
different teams make the Final Four, and this doesn't include strong Cornell
teams that never made it.
 
Bertagna also pointed out the internal competition of the league as a strength.
 
> You can make almost any case you want to try to show that one conference is
> better or worse than another.  There's no real answer.  People who know the
> game know which teams are good and which ones have a ways to go.
 
This is true, and I don't wish to get into this.  I do feel, however, that
there are some people who have perceptions that are inaccurate.  I would not
argue that the cumulative strength of the ECAC is lower than the others ... but
my points are 1) it's not by much  and 2) so what.
 
So again, my point was not to start a huge debate on which conference was best
-- it was merely to point out that, as part of the hockey community, we should
root for what's best for hockey.
 
Adam Wodon - AC Productions
Host: "Around the Rinks" - The only National College Hockey talk show
Listen 24 hours/day, 7 days/week at:
http://www.audionet.com/sports/shows/rinks/
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.