Conference Tournaments / NCAA Bubble

[Trotsky]

This is unacceptable. The league needs to come down hard on Allain and Yale.

Hell hath no fury like the media scorned.

I think the beat writers of the ECAC might have just a bit of a case of inflated self-importance.  ::wank::

Is it really inflated? The press might have outnumbered the fans in Atlantic City this year.

Is that our measuring stick for importance?  

When media types feel snubbed (as they appear to more often than operatic divas) they have the luxury of reporting about themselves to themselves using themselves.  That's not news; it's a circle jerk.

I don't disagree with you; I was mostly making a flippant comment about the lack of interest in ECAC hockey.

That said, if there's a league policy about attending post-game press conferences and Allain violated it, he should be sanctioned. The alternative is an even bigger media black hole for the ECAC, which struggles as it is to get coverage for a league that very few people give a crap about. (24 years and counting. Is this the year? I'll go out on a limb and say, "Probably not".)

The media circle-jerk isn't the issue here: rather, the issue is that college hockey media could completely ignore the ECAC and almost no one would care. The ECAC is like the sub-Saharan Africa of college hockey: virtually no one covers it, and everyone—including most of the alumni and students of the ECAC schools themselves—mostly seems okay with that.

If Allain violated a league rule then by all means fine him.  I just don't need Ken Schott using his column to bray that not getting his post-game cliche to pad out his paint-by-numbers article is a Crime Against Humanity.

[Rosey]

This is unacceptable. The league needs to come down hard on Allain and Yale.

Hell hath no fury like the media scorned.

I think the beat writers of the ECAC might have just a bit of a case of inflated self-importance.  ::wank::

Is it really inflated? The press might have outnumbered the fans in Atlantic City this year.

Is that our measuring stick for importance?  

When media types feel snubbed (as they appear to more often than operatic divas) they have the luxury of reporting about themselves to themselves using themselves.  That's not news; it's a circle jerk.

I don't disagree with you; I was mostly making a flippant comment about the lack of interest in ECAC hockey.

That said, if there's a league policy about attending post-game press conferences and Allain violated it, he should be sanctioned. The alternative is an even bigger media black hole for the ECAC, which struggles as it is to get coverage for a league that very few people give a crap about. (24 years and counting. Is this the year? I'll go out on a limb and say, "Probably not".)

The media circle-jerk isn't the issue here: rather, the issue is that college hockey media could completely ignore the ECAC and almost no one would care. The ECAC is like the sub-Saharan Africa of college hockey: virtually no one covers it, and everyone—including most of the alumni and students of the ECAC schools themselves—mostly seems okay with that.

If Allain violated a league rule then by all means fine him.  I just don't need Ken Schott using his column to bray that not getting his post-game cliche to pad out his paint-by-numbers article is a Crime Against Humanity.

I think we all, in some form or another, inflate the importance of our little hockey league and/or our place in it. Schott is a small fish in a small pond: again, I agree with you, but I have a hard time getting worked up over it.

[Trotsky]

This is unacceptable. The league needs to come down hard on Allain and Yale.

Hell hath no fury like the media scorned.

I think the beat writers of the ECAC might have just a bit of a case of inflated self-importance.  ::wank::

Is it really inflated? The press might have outnumbered the fans in Atlantic City this year.

Is that our measuring stick for importance?  

When media types feel snubbed (as they appear to more often than operatic divas) they have the luxury of reporting about themselves to themselves using themselves.  That's not news; it's a circle jerk.

I don't disagree with you; I was mostly making a flippant comment about the lack of interest in ECAC hockey.

That said, if there's a league policy about attending post-game press conferences and Allain violated it, he should be sanctioned. The alternative is an even bigger media black hole for the ECAC, which struggles as it is to get coverage for a league that very few people give a crap about. (24 years and counting. Is this the year? I'll go out on a limb and say, "Probably not".)

The media circle-jerk isn't the issue here: rather, the issue is that college hockey media could completely ignore the ECAC and almost no one would care. The ECAC is like the sub-Saharan Africa of college hockey: virtually no one covers it, and everyone—including most of the alumni and students of the ECAC schools themselves—mostly seems okay with that.

If Allain violated a league rule then by all means fine him.  I just don't need Ken Schott using his column to bray that not getting his post-game cliche to pad out his paint-by-numbers article is a Crime Against Humanity.

I think we all, in some form or another, inflate the importance of our little hockey league and/or our place in it. Schott is a small fish in a small pond: again, I agree with you, but I have a hard time getting worked up over it.

Well, as things go my Urge To Kill is only about a 6 on this.  And since it baselines at a 5, that's not too bad.

Let's not talk about Barry Melrose as the ESPN resident "expert" for college hockey, however.  That's 9 territory.

[Rosey]

This is unacceptable. The league needs to come down hard on Allain and Yale.

Hell hath no fury like the media scorned.

I think the beat writers of the ECAC might have just a bit of a case of inflated self-importance.  ::wank::

Is it really inflated? The press might have outnumbered the fans in Atlantic City this year.

Is that our measuring stick for importance?  

When media types feel snubbed (as they appear to more often than operatic divas) they have the luxury of reporting about themselves to themselves using themselves.  That's not news; it's a circle jerk.

I don't disagree with you; I was mostly making a flippant comment about the lack of interest in ECAC hockey.

That said, if there's a league policy about attending post-game press conferences and Allain violated it, he should be sanctioned. The alternative is an even bigger media black hole for the ECAC, which struggles as it is to get coverage for a league that very few people give a crap about. (24 years and counting. Is this the year? I'll go out on a limb and say, "Probably not".)

The media circle-jerk isn't the issue here: rather, the issue is that college hockey media could completely ignore the ECAC and almost no one would care. The ECAC is like the sub-Saharan Africa of college hockey: virtually no one covers it, and everyone—including most of the alumni and students of the ECAC schools themselves—mostly seems okay with that.

If Allain violated a league rule then by all means fine him.  I just don't need Ken Schott using his column to bray that not getting his post-game cliche to pad out his paint-by-numbers article is a Crime Against Humanity.

I think we all, in some form or another, inflate the importance of our little hockey league and/or our place in it. Schott is a small fish in a small pond: again, I agree with you, but I have a hard time getting worked up over it.

Well, as things go my Urge To Kill is only about a 6 on this.  And since it baselines at a 5, that's not too bad.

I think mine was a 9 in college. I'm down to about a 4. I consider this a great improvement, though I'm probably still at elevated risk for a heart attack.

Let's not talk about Barry Melrose as the ESPN resident on college hockey, however.  That's 9 territory.

The reason I'm at a 4 is that I turn the TV off whenever he's on. That's the key: avoiding the stressful inputs.

[Trotsky]

I think mine was a 9 in college. I'm down to about a 4. I consider this a great improvement, though I'm probably still at elevated risk for a heart attack.

Car keys rule in reverse.  Do not exceed the number of decades you have left.

(Arthur should announce "one minute to play" at 90th birthday parties...)

[Jim Hyla]

This is unacceptable. The league needs to come down hard on Allain and Yale.

Hell hath no fury like the media scorned.

I think the beat writers of the ECAC might have just a bit of a case of inflated self-importance.  ::wank::

Is it really inflated? The press might have outnumbered the fans in Atlantic City this year.

Is that our measuring stick for importance?  

When media types feel snubbed (as they appear to more often than operatic divas) they have the luxury of reporting about themselves to themselves using themselves.  That's not news; it's a circle jerk.

I don't disagree with you; I was mostly making a flippant comment about the lack of interest in ECAC hockey.

That said, if there's a league policy about attending post-game press conferences and Allain violated it, he should be sanctioned. The alternative is an even bigger media black hole for the ECAC, which struggles as it is to get coverage for a league that very few people give a crap about. (24 years and counting. Is this the year? I'll go out on a limb and say, "Probably not".)

The media circle-jerk isn't the issue here: rather, the issue is that college hockey media could completely ignore the ECAC and almost no one would care. The ECAC is like the sub-Saharan Africa of college hockey: virtually no one covers it, and everyone—including most of the alumni and students of the ECAC schools themselves—mostly seems okay with that.

If Allain violated a league rule then by all means fine him.  I just don't need Ken Schott using his column to bray that not getting his post-game cliche to pad out his paint-by-numbers article is a Crime Against Humanity.

I think we all, in some form or another, inflate the importance of our little hockey league and/or our place in it. Schott is a small fish in a small pond: again, I agree with you, but I have a hard time getting worked up over it.

I read somewhere that there is no rule, but your point above is one important issue. We need the coverage, and all coaches should realize that and work to help it. The other issue was that he told the league officials that they would be out, and then just left, leaving them with egg on their face. If there is no rule, just say there won't be a post-game interview. Don't say yes, then walk out the back door.

[Give My Regards]

The new WCHA is getting off to a great start. As written on USCHO they announced their new format for their Final Five Tournament.

The top eight teams in the final regular-season standings will play in a best-of-three first-round series at the home site of the top four finishers, followed by the four first-round winners advancing to the WCHA Final Five the following weekend, which would consist of two semifinal games on the first day of the event followed by the Broadmoor Trophy title contest on day two.

Read more: http://www.uscho.com/2013/03/24/wcha-announces-future-playoff-sites-new-playoff-format/#ixzz2Ob4U322V

Or is it The Final Four, or just bad writing?::screwy::

The article is in error; it's still going to be a Final Five.  Each semifinal will actually consist of a two-game total goals series, followed by the championship game, which brings the total to five.



No, not really, but couldn't you just see that happening?

[Rita]

The new WCHA is getting off to a great start. As written on USCHO they announced their new format for their Final Five Tournament.

The top eight teams in the final regular-season standings will play in a best-of-three first-round series at the home site of the top four finishers, followed by the four first-round winners advancing to the WCHA Final Five the following weekend, which would consist of two semifinal games on the first day of the event followed by the Broadmoor Trophy title contest on day two.

Read more: http://www.uscho.com/2013/03/24/wcha-announces-future-playoff-sites-new-playoff-format/#ixzz2Ob4U322V

Or is it The Final Four, or just bad writing?::screwy::

The article is in error; it's still going to be a Final Five.  Each semifinal will actually consist of a two-game total goals series, followed by the championship game, which brings the total to five.



No, not really, but couldn't you just see that happening?

You are a few days early. And you should probably have posted it in this thread.  

[Trotsky]

The new WCHA is getting off to a great start. As written on USCHO they announced their new format for their Final Five Tournament.

The top eight teams in the final regular-season standings will play in a best-of-three first-round series at the home site of the top four finishers, followed by the four first-round winners advancing to the WCHA Final Five the following weekend, which would consist of two semifinal games on the first day of the event followed by the Broadmoor Trophy title contest on day two.

Read more: http://www.uscho.com/2013/03/24/wcha-announces-future-playoff-sites-new-playoff-format/#ixzz2Ob4U322V

Or is it The Final Four, or just bad writing?::screwy::

The article is in error; it's still going to be a Final Five.  Each semifinal will actually consist of a two-game total goals series, followed by the championship game, which brings the total to five.



No, not really, but couldn't you just see that happening?

That would have actually fooled me, I must admit.

It's just dumb enough for somebody to do.

(Hey, in a world with the Memorial Cup, any configuration is possible.)