League play

[Section A]

No idea if this has ever been discussed here before, but...

Would it be better to schedule ECAC league play similar to, say, the WCHA, where a weekend consists of a doubleheader against the same team? Of course, this would mean that some seasons, you play four games against the same team (2 at home, 2 away), and only two games against other teams. I presume that there is some sort of rotating schedule to determine who you play twice and who you play four times. But on the plus side, the teams get to focus all week preparing for just one team, as opposed to dividing their time and thoughts between two. And besides, imagine having Hahvahd at Lynah twice in one weekend :-D

Any thoughts?

[Keith K]

No!

To elaborate, I like the travel partner setup.  It's nice to see two different teams every week.  More importantly, a balanced schedule is very desirable.  I don't want teams competing for the same title playing different schedules.  Why change a nice, balanced round-robin?

The ECAC league schedule is probably the best in college hockey. The main reason the WCHA wants two game sets is that the travel distances are so large out west.  You can't very well team Anchorage with anyone.

Would it be great to have Harvard in town for two games?  Well the playoff matchups have been fun, but I think that having one game to focus the excitement on might be better.  Also, with the unbalanced schedule you're talking about there'd probably be years where Harvard doesn't come to Lynah at all.  Which would suck.  Unless the scheduling arangement grouped the Ivies together or some such, which would be a terrible idea, IMSHO.

[jeh25]

Well, I think the ECACs balanced travel partner arrangement is the most elegant schedule in all of college hockey, so why mess with it.  In fact, I suspect most other league would rather have an ECAC style schedule if distance and league membership allowed.

However, I would agree that adjusting the schedule so that the Cornell v. Harvard hockey game at Bright doesn't fall on the the same weekend as the Harvard v. Yale football game in New Haven every other year is a good thing.

[kingpin248]

Personally, I prefer the ECAC's balanced schedule, because everything is equalized  - both in terms of opponents played and home advantage.  I think it's the fairest apportionment of opponents.

You also have to consider the implications for the Ivy League.  If you play Princeton four times in a season and Dartmouth only twice, how do you handle that? Do you just say that two of the games against Princeton are "non-Ivy" games?

[rhovorka]

But having the Harvard game fall the first week in January like it's set up to do in 2003-2004 is so much worse.  :-(

And keep the balanced travel partner arrangement.  It's ideal and fair.

[Beeeej]

...and whether or not you count those two extra games against Princeton as non-Ivy (or even non-ECAC), you're losing two possible other non-conference games.  We already play 22 conference games and have room for only 7 non-cons on the schedule; where do you see there being room for four games against any of our ECAC opponents without giving up much more important opportunities?

In other words, why do you presume that any such arrangement like the one you suggest would have us playing any ECAC teams more than twice a season?  Is it logistically impossible to have a schedule where we have eleven ECAC weekends (as we do now) while playing the same opponent twice in those weekends (as we now don't)?

Beeeej

[Greg Berge]

Glad to see many people like the ECAC schedule.  I'm with them -- the ECAC already has the best method in place (good god did I just say that?).  Each league has a schedule that is appropriate to its geography.  Fine as it is.

[ugarte]

I've always liked the balanced travel pairs schedule also.  It also makes the 2 game sets against OOC teams seem more unique and interesting, such as our games against BU, WMU, FSU, etc.