Jeffrey T. Anbinder wrote:
> 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.
 
I don't know how highly Cornell was ranked in '91, but height of ranking has
EVERYTHING to do with Lowell gripes.  A number 3 seed in a region has EARNED
the right to stay in the region based on MERIT.
 
> Cornell hardly "squeaked in" to the NCAA tournament
 
Say what?  If they'd lost in the finals 2-1 instead of winning 2-1, they
wouldn't have made the tournament.  Making it by a one goal swing can certainly
be called "squeaking in."
 
> Lowell also had an impressive late-season run, including a defeat of Hockey
> East #1 Boston University,
 
make that two defeats, one in their barn.
 
> 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.
 
*Of course* they were a lot closer than before.  Before, Cornell was light
years behind; after, they closed to within the same solar system but Lowell
still had a comfortable lead 10-7.
 
Lowell had to play the #1 and #6 ranked teams in the country accoring to PWR.
Cornell had to beat #11 and an unranked team.   If you think Cornell would
have done as well against top teams like BU and Maine, then I'll take Lake
State and give you Cornell...   Any takers?
 
> 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?
 
Apparently Riverhawks fans will never get the chance to find out until they
become a number two seed.  :-(  :-(  :-(
 
And perhaps the total number of tickets RiverHawks fans would have bought for
TWO games would have exceeded the number Cornell fans will buy for ONE.  If
you catch my drift.
 
If the committee's past decisions to protect the host team can be compared to
"marrying into money" then their decision to sell out a three seed for the sake
of a six seed NON-HOST team is rutting with the whores in the Combat Zone.  If
a number three in its region isn't sacred to the committee, then not much else
is.
 
DaveH
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.