-- [ From: Kepler * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- > The banner makes no reference to the fact that the title was shared or was for > regular season honors. The conference champion is the team that wins the > tournament. Ordinarily, such banners do say "regular season" on them. But, technically speaking, UNH *was* co-champion of the HE regular season. Their standing would be 1(t), with the tie resolved against them for the tournament seed. The banner is valid, though terse. > For UNH to claim title to the Hockey East championship would be > like Michigan claiming the 1997 NCAA title by virtue of their having the > highest PWR at the close of the regular season. Actually, it is *this* argument which makes an analogous error. The regular season and the tournament are separate. UNH wins a share of the RS title and should be permitted to claim that. For a team to claim it has won sole possession of the RS title because it wins the tie breaker for the conference seed is invalid in the same way that (cut/paste Michigan comparison to here). OK, for anyone who has read this far, here is a reward so that this has some token content of interest for someone not involved with the two teams or who has a woody for predicate calculus: In the early days of the ECAC, teams played different numbers of league games and were ranked for the tournament by winning percentage. If team A finished 17-5 and team B finished 16-4, which do you think is entitled to call itself the regular season champion? -- Greg R. Berge [log in to unmask] http://www.spiritone.com/~kepler "Ne te quaesiveris extra." HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.