End-of-R.S. Stats

Started by zg88, March 03, 2002, 01:40:36 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Josh '99

big red apple wrote:
QuoteI don't think that chart really says anythin in our favor. We are a good team in a bad conference. (Mercyhurst is a mediocre team in a horrible conference.)  The top teams in the better conferences played tougher schedules, and lost more games as a result.
While you're right about the top teams in the WCHA, CCHA, and HEA playing tougher schedules, I think it does say that we've done very well with the schedule we played.

"They do all kind of just blend together into one giant dildo."
-Ben Rocky 04

ugarte

No offense, Josh, but . . . DUH! ::rolleyes::


Josh '99

big red apple wrote:
QuoteNo offense, Josh, but . . . DUH! ::rolleyes::
Well...  yeah.  I almost wrote that at the end of my post too.  :-)

"They do all kind of just blend together into one giant dildo."
-Ben Rocky 04

Sarli

I'm sure I'll get corrected if wrong but see if this is logical:

CU has the best winning percentage in the weakest of the 4 major conferences:
Do you penalize us for being in the easy conference?
Do we get disrespected because no one else in our conference played well consistently?  
Do you see that all the teams are basically equall except CU and UVM, indicating we beat up on a bunch of mediocore teams, and thus taking away from our huge point total?
Or Do you just say CU dominated the league and whenever you dominate a league to that extent its a big deal?

I thought one of these things was going to put a positive spin on this (added the last one to do so),  but now I'm just flailing around looking for something.

I think if we had won in the Fla tourney we'd get the benefit of the doubt as opposed to just doubts.  

I'll shut up now.  If anything in there made sense point it out to me tomorrow.

We're gonna beat the hell out of you...

Greg Berge

I think they argue that PWR is their best tool for capturing all of these issues, and punt.  It seems black and white to me -- either you accept an ECAC's standing in PWR, or you exclude the ECAC as a "questionable" conference.  I doubt there's any chance of the latter, partially because the ECAC is genuinely closer to the big three than the little two, and partially because the history and prestige of the ECAC and its member schools would make that a really unpopular decision.