2004 All Over Again?

[billhoward]

[quote ajec1][quote billhoward]
Hockey can have Cinderellas, too.[/quote]
I guess it depends on how you define "Cinderellas". For instance, last year, North Dakota was surely a surprise to the outsider watching only the tournament games (there were a 3 seed if memory serves). However, to anyone who watched the last couple of weeks of the regular season and the WCHA tournament, this was simply a team finally playing to its potential. The talent was there, and things finally clicked (for them it was the freshmen Spirko-Zajac line and defensemen like Matt Smabby finally finding their role/game). So while ranking-wise they were a "Cinderella" after seeing the Final Five at the Xcel Center I pretty much expected them to make it (not to sound like a know-it-all). Of course, the talent may be there for Cornell to do a similar thing, but remember NoDak lost when they played a better team (which Minnesota definitely is this year).[/quote]
The tournament should be big enough that Cinderalla can get in and be good enough to make the final or frozen four. Eight teams is not enough for the outlier with late-season talent, 12 is probably right, and 16 may be a little too big for a 60-team sport, but it makes sense to have a 2^4 number of teams for two weekends of action.

In hoops, it's good to root for the newest team that makes the dance and hope Cinderalla knocks off one or two old-line powers, or for the team that snubs the NCAA where possible (U Hawaii for wearing rainbow color shirts until the NCAA put an end to free expresson), or else the academically superior team (Cal, Duke grudgingly). I'd love Gonzaga in the final four. As a little kid I thought it was cool that UTEP started five blacks against Kentucky (and won!) and now it's sort of cool that 40 years later Montana (?) starts five minorities. That Bucknell or Vermont that scores a first round upset improves the tournament ... so long as you're not the first-round upsettee.

It would have been a nice twofer in 1973 if Syracuse and Cornell won the NCAAs. Syracuse did its part.

[KeithK]

[quote Al DeFlorio][quote KeithK]Well, if I were starting college hockey from scratch I'd get rid of league tournaments (you don't need 'em with balanced schedules) and send just the league RS winner to the NCAAs.  So I'm only inconsistent insofar as the current system forces me to be.[/quote]
The ECAC has a balanced schedule, but it isn't clear to me that all of the other "big four" conferences do--particularly if you differentiate between playing a team "at home" or "on the road."[/quote]The other conferences don't have a balanced schedule.  The CCHA and WCHA have an unbalanced number of games - some teams  you play twice and some four times per year.  HE has three games per team, but that leaves the home/road problem.  (I don't really know about AH and the CHA.)

But if I get to start college hockey from scratch then I get to insist on truly balanced schedules! :-D

[KeithK]

[q]The tournament should be big enough that Cinderalla can get in and be good enough to make the final or frozen four. [/q]By this logic, the squeakball tournament is way too big.  To be honest it probably is.  It's definitely one too many - the 64-65 playin game thing is ridiculous.

[RichH]

[quote billhoward]
It would have been a nice twofer in 1973 if Syracuse and Cornell won the NCAAs. Syracuse did its part.[/quote]
Also in 2003, but we've already been down Sadism Boulevard in this thread.

[ajec1]

[quote KeithK][q]The tournament should be big enough that Cinderalla can get in and be good enough to make the final or frozen four. [/q]By this logic, the squeakball tournament is way too big.  To be honest it probably is.  It's definitely one too many - the 64-65 playin game thing is ridiculous.[/quote]

I don't see what's wrong in giving teams, in the words of Amarillo Slim, "A chip, a chair and a chance."

[KeithK]

[quote ajec1][quote KeithK][q]The tournament should be big enough that Cinderalla can get in and be good enough to make the final or frozen four. [/q]By this logic, the squeakball tournament is way too big.  To be honest it probably is.  It's definitely one too many - the 64-65 playin game thing is ridiculous.[/quote]

I don't see what's wrong in giving teams, in the words of Amarillo Slim, "A chip, a chair and a chance."[/quote]To clarify, I don't mind the #65 team getting in.  that slot was added when a new conference qualified for an auto-bid.  But they should have taken away one of the at large bids at the same time to keep it a 64 team tournament.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote KeithK](I don't really know about AH and the CHA.)[/quote]

AH will be anything but balanced with the addition of Air Force next year - which, I remember correctly, will lead to a situation in which each team only plays them every other year (other than Army).

And due to the same move, it still looks like the CHA may be a non-factor.

[Steve M]

[quote Winnabago][quote Steve M]  I won't ever be completely over it unless we win an NC in my lifetime.  I hate to blame officiating for an outcome of a game, but every time I see a deflected goal reviewed and hear the announcers invariably say "the video replay has to be conclusive to overturn the call," the memory of that day makes my blood boil all over again.
[/quote]

The one and only thing that makes it just a little better is remembering back to the QF game that year against BC, where they had a late goal wiped off because of a questionable in-the-crease call which allowed us to regroup and close them out.

With all the twists and turns of a game - the 8 minute delay that comes with a video review was far more damaging than the actual call of "batted in with a high stick."[/quote]

The in-the-crease call on BC wasn't at all questionable.  Lenny would have stopped the shot easily had he not been interfered with.

Agree with you on the 2nd point.  The delay was pathetic.

[djk26]

I don't think this will make anyone feel better, but I rememember Minnesota being SCARY good that year.  I think they proved that they were the best team in the country.

But yeah, of course I wish Cornell could have beaten New Hampshire and gotten their shot at Minnesota and a chance to prove that THEY were the best.  Ugh...that disallowed goal...  ::worry::

[Winnabago]

[quote djk26]I don't think this will make anyone feel better, but I rememember Minnesota being SCARY good that year.  I think they proved that they were the best team in the country.

But yeah, of course I wish Cornell could have beaten New Hampshire and gotten their shot at Minnesota and a chance to prove that THEY were the best.  Ugh...that disallowed goal...  ::worry::[/quote]

Yeah, the Vanek-lead Gophers were quite deserving that year, but it will always be a what-if year for our boys.  What if Dougie had hit the net on just ONE out of those ten blue line cannons, what if Lenny had covered the top corner just a little better on their third (or was it second?) PP goal, and of course - what if Ayers' mask didn't get in the way in the winding seconds?  Does this wreck with anyone else's sleep?