I believe the most deserving teams should get bids for the NC$$ tourney, but I don't think it's right to compare teams across conferences and to rank them using a series of mathematical models. I would like to see a season-end conference tourney, as is currently enstated. But, reduce the number of teams that make this tournament. For example, 10 out of 12 teams get the chance to play for a conference title. Even as an RPI hockey fan/band member, I don't think RPI should be able to upset higher ranked teams to capture the ECAC title. RPI turned itself on and off throughout the season, and their performance cannot compare to those of Harvard, Clarkson, and SLU. RPI has wiggled into the possibility of a ECAC title, and a bid to play in the Kinck. At most, 1/2 of the teams should be in the conference tourney. I feel the most deserving teams are those that consistently earned points through the season. Points shold also be awarded to non-conference games, as this is a hockey game just as any other. By earning points through season games, the team can qualify for the conference title, and each conference could award a first, second, and third place team following a playoff format similar to the Olympics. These teams are then mathced-up in the NC$$, preferably by a random draw of first vs third,or first vs. first, depending on how everyone else feels about this format. I think the most deserving team of the conference is the one with the title. And the runners-up and in the conference tourney also get bids. Yes, it sounds like a team that played terrific throughout the season can lose it in one game, and that's true, and part of hockey. A team that goofs up a playoff game doesn't deserve to advance in the tourney. The playoffs should emphasize the end result of the hockey game a win or a loss. Forget how many goals were scored by team #1 against team #4 and this team #3 beat #4, but #4 still gets a bid and #3 doesn't. It's as simple as this. If an Olympic team loses in the first medal round, they're out (except for consolation rounds which only place them for non-medal positions), no matter how good they played against other teams. Extend this to college hockey and I think we have a fair, competitive system for finding a conference tourney and NC$$ tourney champion who got there by playing well in regular season and playoff games, and a bit of luck. If the other team's star goalie gets sick, all that can be said is better luck next year. -Tim Richter RPI '92 Let's Go Red! P.S. Why is NC$$ NC$$ and not NC-followed-by-AA's ?