minnesota it is

#1 minnesota
#2 cornell
#3 osu
#4 maine

Let's go Red!!!!
Let's go Maine!!!!

Worcester
1. bc
2. und
3. bu
4. mercyhurst

others coming

[Q]Rita Wrote:

#1 minnesota
#2 cornell
#3 osu
#4 maine

Let's go Red!!!!
Let's go Maine!![/q]Absolutey!

Screw the NCAA. Not only did they put us in Minn, which I expected, but they put us against #10 OSU, instead of #11 Wisc, who has sucked lately.

Also, I could be wrong, but they *did* seem to save Mich for Grand Rapids, when they should have been in Worcester to be as close to perfect as possible, but they stuck is in Minn anyway. Bullshit.

Oh well, LGR!

If they could put the 8-9 pairing in a region with #3, they could've certainly put #5 with #3 and kept us east.

i caught the end of the bill-fishing on espn2.. on right before the selection show, and i was thinking if cornell had lost 29% of its games and the last 2 games of the ecachl tourney the cornell coaching staff would be looking into fishing charters and tee times, not basking in the glow of a #1 seed.

I hope after this the committee will consider making record in the last 20 (16) one of the components they look at.... maybe as a "bonus" like good wins on the road......

Hail to those mother @#$%ers!
Hail to those big @#$% suckers!
Hail! Hail! to Michigan
The cesspool of the world!

No big surprise. Sucks though. It's the Everblades Regional in Minnesota.

but there is some comfort in that... we know them, and they know us as well. too bad minnesota has to host the party. i'm all in favor of moving it to estero....

It would've been perfect had they put the Everblades Regional in Amherst with BC as the host...

Just think.. I f we played 5 more games, and only increased our "quality wins" by, say 2, what seed would we have, and where would we play. Somebody else, besides me, has got to get our Pres. off a stick and get the ivies to play 34 games like the re st of the hockey world. We are always at a disadvantage if we play only 7 NC games a year. Enuff said.

Just think, if Brown had only beaten Princeton back in November (L5-1, 11/12) we'd be hosting the Amherst regional. Or if the Freakout hadn't propelled RPI to a last second win in February. Argh!

You said it. Could we have been more unlucky? The commitee sucks, though, and still should have put us as #2 in Amherst!

[Q]icethepuck Wrote:



Just think.. I f we played 5 more games, and only increased our "quality wins" by, say 2, what seed would we have, and where would we play. Somebody else, besides me, has got to get our Pres. off a stick and get the ivies to play 34 games like the re st of the hockey world. We are always at a disadvantage if we play only 7 NC games a year. Enuff said.

[/q]

what if we hadn't gone 0-1-1 at mich state...that would do it too.

I've also been told that a Colgate tie or win against Army back before Halloween would have made Brown a TUC and us a #1 seed. Insane.

this is why i think they need to factor in record over the last 20. If you are a young team, a team that starts late, or just take some time coming together as a team, you can really be screwed by aggressively scheduling tough NC games and taking hits on the PWR. also, you don't have much control over who your common opponents schedule for NC games.

being "penalized" because one of colgate's early season losses wasn't a win/tie or because brown had a bad weekend v. princeton, just isn't right.

however, unlike the auburn football team, we have the opportunity to "rectify" these injustices on the ice.

i like the maine-minnesota match-up. maine plays a few games on big ice (unh's whittmore rink is olympic size, correct?), so it won't be strange. maybe the cornell team will have a mini-training camp at lake placid before heading out to minnesota.

let's go red!!

Record in last 20 (or 16) is a terrible criteria. Those games are exclusively conference, except the Beanpot. Maybe 20 gets you back to the holiday tourneys for some teams. With conference strengths so different, not to mention that the difficulty within a conference will be wildly spread based on who you play early and who you play late. Also, the ECAC is the only conference with a balanced schedule, so that'd be even more of a problem.

Yes, the TUC suffers from this too, but it has a motivation, these are the types of teams you'd play in the tourney, so there's some relevance there. I can't see why to count a game in late Jan more than one in mid-Nov.

i just think "last 20 (16) should be *one* of the factors... some of the pwr are determined by early season NC games, which don't always reflect how a team is at the end of the season. it appears that those early nov. nc games do weight more heavily than any of the ones we played in march. in addition, we get hurt by what our opponents did (didn't) do in early november (see prior posts about colgate's loss to army...). I just think there needs to be something that balances out the effects of early season losses by "your opponents" and your "opponents-opponents".

just my 0.02 cents and wishing they could be converted to 0.02 bonus points....