We let them decide it on the ice

[Mike Nevin]

Cornell definitely got screwed on this one, but it was more luck than anything else.  It was an odd set of randomn events -- CC losing, BC winning, the exact set of teams that ended up as the TUCs, etc.  moreso than  the selection commitee that conspired to screw us.  

I think the constructive thing to do (if there is anything constructive to do at all) is to lobby for either a better objective system to decide who gets # 1 seeds, or to lobby for subjectivity being injected back into the process.  

If the commitee considered current polls, recent performance, bonuses for conference championships etc, maybe that would actually improve things.  

I think that one criteria for being a number one seed  should be that it be conceivable that the selected team is actually the number one team in the country.  Minnesota pretty much proved that they are not the best team in the country -- being clearly only third best in the WCHA.    I could easily see a rule for the future in which no conference could contribute more than two number one seeds.  

In general,  I think that when the statisticians stormed the castle and took over the seeding process with their nearly mathematical calculation of who should be in a few years ago, they probably improved things for the better.  But they have ignored the fact that the statistics of college hockey and PWR in particular are really imperfect, and end up giving extreme importance to otherwise insignificant games and teams.  Maybe its time the commitee quit hiding behind the hard and fast process (well hard and fast except for DU/CC, apparently) and do its job by attempting to use their insight, and the wealth of knowlege available about college hockey to try and properly seed this thing.  

[Stephen Turner]

The process should be more subjective, as I suggested to them 2 years ago at the Frozen Four.  Minnesota gets 10 TUC wins against Mankato and St. Cloud, and goes 2-4-1 against Mich Tech and Anchorage which doesn't count.  Plus Brown drops out of the TUC, which would have made all the difference.  Everything worked against us this year, and it totally sucks.  Impossible to get to Minnesota, and I was really looking forward to going to the games next weekend.

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]Stephen Turner Wrote:

 The process should be more subjective, as I suggested to them 2 years ago at the Frozen Four.  Minnesota gets 10 TUC wins against Mankato and St. Cloud, and goes 2-4-1 against Mich Tech and Anchorage which doesn't count.  Plus Brown drops out of the TUC, which would have made all the difference.  Everything worked against us this year, and it totally sucks.  Impossible to get to Minnesota, and I was really looking forward to going to the games next weekend.[/q]
There are clearly flaws in the TUC process, and I'd like to see the RPI weightings changed.  St. Cloud a TUC?  Gimme a break.

[abmarks]

Calgari- FF ratings?   The ratings are next to zero REGARDLESS of who is playing.  If you are arguing about money, I think gate attendance is a better argument.

[mjh89]

The national championship game, primetime on ESPN, will probably do alright during a season in which there is no NHL. Yes, I know the NHL prometime ratings for ESPN are not great.

[abmarks]

Go back and check the NCAA final four ratings - I'm pretty sure you'll find them down below candlepin bowling.  I don't expect any NHL to NCAA Crossover.  Lots of NHL final watchers are facetimers.

[jeh25]

[Q]Mike Nevin Wrote:

 Cornell definitely got screwed on this one, but it was more luck than anything else.  It was an odd set of randomn events -- CC losing, BC winning, the exact set of teams that ended up as the TUCs, etc.  moreso than  the selection commitee that conspired to screw us.  
[/q]

And our 0-2-2 record from 11/12 to 11/20 had nothing to do with it? A loss to DC and a tie with  UVM, both bubble teams didn't help one bit. And what about the loss and tie to Michigan State?

And what about the loss to BC in Florida?

And what about the loss to archrival Harvard?

Or the Colgate tie?

[Q]Mike Nevin Wrote:
 Maybe its time the commitee quit hiding behind the hard and fast process (well hard and fast except for DU/CC, apparently) and do its job by attempting to use their insight, and the wealth of knowlege available about college hockey to try and properly seed this thing.  
[/q]

Bleh. They do that in lacrosse and IT SUCKS SWEATY UNWASHED MONKEYBALLS.

[Scersk '97]

[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote:
The committee was sure nice to Minnesota in giving them three far away schools and three schools that don't play on Olympic Ice.[/q]

Yeah, playing in Minnesota sucks.  My first thought:  I wonder if the boys will be spending some time in Lake Placid this week.  I hear we might have some connections up there...

[KP '06]

[Q]Scersk '97 Wrote:

 [Q2]calgARI '07 Wrote:
The committee was sure nice to Minnesota in giving them three far away schools and three schools that don't play on Olympic Ice.[/Q]
Yeah, playing in Minnesota sucks.  My first thought:  I wonder if the boys will be spending some time in Lake Placid this week.  I hear we might have some connections up there...
[/q]

When's the last time we played on an Olympic sheet?
Michigan State was NHL-size, correct?

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]KP '06 Wrote:

 [Q2]Scersk '97 Wrote:

 [Q2]calgARI '07 Wrote:
The committee was sure nice to Minnesota in giving them three far away schools and three schools that don't play on Olympic Ice.[/Q]
Yeah, playing in Minnesota sucks.  My first thought:  I wonder if the boys will be spending some time in Lake Placid this week.  I hear we might have some connections up there...
[/Q]
When's the last time we played on an Olympic sheet?
Michigan State was NHL-size, correct?[/q]
Yes, Munn is NHL-size.  

Ohio State played its first two games on an Olympic-sheet at UNH, losing to both UNH and St. Cloud, 5-1 and 3-1 respectively.