PDA

View Full Version : Why does the West even have hockey?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

westscout
03-10-2010, 11:20 AM
The way the NCAA and the Eastern higher ups run things, why do the Western teams even play?

The NCAA Tourney is a farse. It is really just an East Region Tourney.

It would be amazing to see how many Eastern teams would win the Title if they had to do what the West has to do each year.

I will tell you,

Slim and none and slim just left. This is JOKE that needs to be looked into.



Westscout

goonshow
03-10-2010, 11:28 AM
here we go.. break out the violins and red whine...

Russell Jaslow
03-10-2010, 11:32 AM
The way the NCAA and the Eastern higher ups run things, why do the Western teams even play?

The NCAA Tourney is a farse. It is really just an East Region Tourney.

It would be amazing to see how many Eastern teams would win the Title if they had to do what the West has to do each year.

I will tell you,

Slim and none and slim just left. This is JOKE that needs to be looked into.



Westscout

If it means getting you off these boards, I'll be the first one to campaign getting rid of all Western hockey teams.

You're a fine example of Western hockey. I'm sure they are really proud of you.

CARDS_rule_the_Burgh
03-10-2010, 11:39 AM
The way the NCAA and the Eastern higher ups run things, why do the Western teams even play?

The NCAA Tourney is a farse. It is really just an East Region Tourney.

It would be amazing to see how many Eastern teams would win the Title if they had to do what the West has to do each year.

I will tell you,

Slim and none and slim just left. This is JOKE that needs to be looked into.



Westscout

I will preface my response by saying that I am a fan of 2 Eastern teams, and my knowledge of Western Hockey consists of the 2008 national championship game, the 2 Stout Primelink games this year, and Adrian @ Oswego back in January. The west is 1-3-0 in game I've attended, with the 1 being a National Championship.

That being said, my response to your post is this: I would agree with you logically IF the West had the same number of teams as the East, or even close. The East Region has 48 DIII teams (soon to be 47), and the West has 24 teams. That's a 2:1 margin. In terms of representation, or 7-4 is probably MORE than they could ask for. If they expanded to 12 teams with no change in the membership ration, 8-4 would be about right.

In terms of the whole bye situation: Yes, SNC got robbed by the NCAA (note that the committee wanted to do it right, but NCAA refused), but to give SNC the bye, given the restrictions on travel, would have robbed Oswego of a Bye as well, and would have put ALL FOUR west teams in the quarterfinals.

It sucks, but we knew it was going to happen. Where were all these protests when the tournament speculations started acknowledging the possibility (and, to some extent, likeliness) of this bracket? I say that if you didn't complain then, you have no right to complain now.

norm1909
03-10-2010, 11:50 AM
... Yes, SNC got robbed by the NCAA (note that the committee wanted to do it right, but NCAA refused),...

Is there anything beyond hearsay that this is true? Can you - or anyone - post a link to a committee statement to that effect?

I do believe that everyone on the committee has the common sense to know what the right thing to do was, that said, I haven't seen anything from the committee saying it was over-ruled and by whom? I do concede, that they WERE over-ruled last year, after awarding Ridder the tournament, so it is plausible - but until someone on the committee speaks up, I don't believe it to be the case. I also believe that SOME on the committee wanted to do the right thing, but the chair failed to acknowledge that the NCAA rules on Geographic Proximity were less important than proper sportsmanship.

CARDS_rule_the_Burgh
03-10-2010, 11:53 AM
Is there anything beyond hearsay that this is true? Can you - or anyone - post a link to a committee statement to that effect?

I do believe that everyone on the committee has the common sense to know what the right thing to do was, that said, I haven't seen anything from the committee saying it was over-ruled and by whom? I do concede, that they WERE over-ruled last year, after awarding Ridder the tournament, so it is plausible - but until someone on the committee speaks up, I don't believe it to be the case. I also believe that SOME on the committee wanted to do the right thing, but the chair failed to acknowledge that the NCAA rules on Geographic Proximity were less important than proper sportsmanship.

When was the last time you saw any official statements concerning anything discussed in the conference call on selection sunday, besides the official release of the bracket itself? :rolleyes:

Birdwatcher
03-10-2010, 12:19 PM
The way the NCAA and the Eastern higher ups run things, why do the Western teams even play?

The NCAA Tourney is a farse. It is really just an East Region Tourney.

It would be amazing to see how many Eastern teams would win the Title if they had to do what the West has to do each year.

I will tell you,

Slim and none and slim just left. This is JOKE that needs to be looked into.



Westscout

I know I'm getting old, but last year didn't all 4 western teams get the bye?

norm1909
03-10-2010, 12:36 PM
When was the last time you saw any official statements concerning anything discussed in the conference call on selection sunday, besides the official release of the bracket itself? :rolleyes:

Last year, I saw the Ridder announcement for 2010 and I saw it changed due to Women's DI hockey to 2011 - that I believe. Hearsay, rumor, speculation, etc, I do not.

I do not hide behind a pseudonym, and I proudly and always stand up for my beliefs, no one, including employers, have ever forced me to do something blatantly wrong - though some have tried. I would never allow anything with my name on it, that I know to be wrong, to be announced - plain and simple - even in today's economy. A National Tournament, by a National organization, representing 360,000 student athletes, must do the right thing. If not, I have no respect for them.

joeyc3402
03-10-2010, 01:03 PM
Is there anything beyond hearsay that this is true? Can you - or anyone - post a link to a committee statement to that effect?

I do believe that everyone on the committee has the common sense to know what the right thing to do was, that said, I haven't seen anything from the committee saying it was over-ruled and by whom? I do concede, that they WERE over-ruled last year, after awarding Ridder the tournament, so it is plausible - but until someone on the committee speaks up, I don't believe it to be the case. I also believe that SOME on the committee wanted to do the right thing, but the chair failed to acknowledge that the NCAA rules on Geographic Proximity were less important than proper sportsmanship.

Go ahead and call the committee members. I'm sure they'd be glad to shed some light on it.

norm1909
03-10-2010, 01:31 PM
Go ahead and call the committee members. I'm sure they'd be glad to shed some light on it.

I've called them before, with little success, and furthermore, on a National Stage, they can either publically explain it, and I have no use for the "geographically proximity" to the point of blatant unsportsmanship, or they are puppets - at best. Everyone deserves an on the record explanation, not simply more hearsay.

CARDS_rule_the_Burgh
03-10-2010, 01:39 PM
I've called them before, with little success, and furthermore, on a National Stage, they can either publically explain it, and I have no use for the "geographically proximity" to the point of blatant unsportsmanship, or they are puppets - at best. Everyone deserves an on the record explanation, not simply more hearsay.

I can understand the desire for an on-record explanation. I'm simply saying that it's not going to come. Your example of the on-record accounts of the Ridder/Herb Brooks saga is different... The committee has, in the past, released statements about such things. They have not, however, released any such statement about the goings-on in the teleconference on Selection Sunday.

So, while they will not (cannot?) publicly state anything, we can look at the results and try to determine what happened. They are under obligation create the smallest possible number of flights. In this case, they are looking at a maximum of 2 (Adrian to QF, West to LP). Send Adrian to Elmira, and you are looking at a maximum of 3 (Adrian to QF, Adrian to LP, other west to LP). They simply performed a task that was a part of their job description. I agree that it isn't right. But I still contend that there is little the committee could have done about it.

norm1909
03-10-2010, 01:53 PM
...

So, while they will not (cannot?) publicly state anything, we can look at the results and try to determine what happened. They are under obligation create the smallest possible number of flights. In this case, they are looking at a maximum of 2 (Adrian to QF, West to LP). Send Adrian to Elmira, and you are looking at a maximum of 3 (Adrian to QF, Adrian to LP, other west to LP). They simply performed a task that was a part of their job description. I agree that it isn't right. But I still contend that there is little the committee could have done about it.

IMO, their obligation is to do the right thing - that is proper sportsmanship. There are legitimate purposes for confidentiality agreements, if they are sworn to secrecy by some "confidentiality agreement", then at least publicly say so - and identify the individuals that can release the information. I am bound by several "confidentiality agreements", and when I must abide by one, I provide the avenue to get the information, if I feel the confidentiality agreement requires me to cross a line of what is right or wrong – I will fight for the right thing – or leave.

joeyc3402
03-10-2010, 01:56 PM
IMO, their obligation is to do the right thing - that is proper sportsmanship. There are legitimate purposes for confidentiality agreements, if they are sworn to secrecy by some "confidentiality agreement", then at least publicly say so - and identify the individuals that can release the information. I am bound by several "confidentiality agreements", and when I must abide by one, I provide the avenue to get the information, if I feel the confidentiality agreement requires me to cross a line of what is right or wrong – I will fight for the right thing – or leave.

...but what do they have to gain from coming out and stating it "on the record?"

norm1909
03-10-2010, 02:08 PM
...but what do they have to gain from coming out and stating it "on the record?"

Their decision to award Plattsburgh a bye and St Norbert a play-in was by most observers; not what anything other than the "Geographical Proximity" clause would dictate. What do they have to gain, by publically announcing why they were forced to do what they did, is the removal of blame from them into the party responsible for the injustice. That said if they lacked the control of the situation, then they need to take corrective action - begin a program to eliminate whatever forced them into what from the stands appears to be blatant unsportsmanship. I’ve witnessed many accidental trips, but they still were called as penalties, being unable to control yourself doesn’t make you right. They, IMO, owe it to their stakeholders, to explain their actions – their reward? Knowing they did all they could, and hid behind nothing.

joeyc3402
03-10-2010, 02:15 PM
Their decision to award Plattsburgh a bye and St Norbert a play-in was by most observers; not what anything other than the "Geographical Proximity" clause would dictate. What do they have to gain, by publically announcing why they were forced to do what they did, is the removal of blame from them into the party responsible for the injustice. That said if they lacked the control of the situation, then they need to take corrective action - begin a program to eliminate whatever forced them into what from the stands appears to be blatant unsportsmanship. I’ve witnessed many accidental trips, but they still were called as penalties, being unable to control yourself doesn’t make you right. They, IMO, owe it to their stakeholders, to explain their actions – their reward? Knowing they did all they could, and hid behind nothing.

...in other words, "nothing."

norm1909
03-10-2010, 02:17 PM
...in other words, "nothing."

True, if they are cowards, or otherwise have something to hide - such as incompetency.

LakerEagleLover
03-10-2010, 02:23 PM
Larry, why not ask them when you see them in Lake Placid? We can lock the doors, dim the lights and waterboard, I mean beerboard them until they give you the answer you are looking for.....;)

joeyc3402
03-10-2010, 02:25 PM
True, if they are cowards, or otherwise have something to hide - such as incompetency.

People are mad - I get that. However, how many people are mad enough to start a lynch mob to demand answers besides yourself?

We know the NCAA is all about money. By not making public statements saying "we proposed it, but the NCAA shot it down," I would argue that the committee as a whole is performing a more admirable action by taking the blame, something that "cowards" wouldn't do.

But if you don't believe the "hearsay," then contact the committee yourself. Start an online petition. Make a blog posting. Contact Mitch Albom and have him demand answers. There are many more ways to waste your time on this issue.

norm1909
03-10-2010, 02:28 PM
Larry, why not ask them when you see them in Lake Placid? We can lock the doors, dim the lights and waterboard, I mean beerboard them until they give you the answer you are looking for.....;)

Sounds like fun, but I doubt they will won't make a public appearance, and I'll be in Boston. :mad: But it does sound fun :D

PSUChamps2001
03-10-2010, 02:35 PM
Sounds like fun, but I doubt they will won't make a public appearance, and I'll be in Boston. :mad: But it does sound fun :D

They were actually very open when I asked about the noisemaker rule and why it was allowed per their handbook, and then was given a totally different rules and guidelines for the "Championships"... hey maybe thats what we are all missing. Maybe the NCAA (not the committee) have a totally different set of rules that none of us know about...