Now the WCHA has a logic question

[bgpuckster]

So we tied with Alaska Fairbanks in the standings with total points. The first tie breaker for teams tied in points is head to head play with the team getting the most points winning the tie IF THE TEAMS PLAY 4 GAMES. We went 1-0-1 against them getting 3 points and them 1, but obviously only played them twice. So we win head to head but since it was only 4 games it doesn't count and we move on to the next tie breaker which is total conference wins. Fairbanks has one more conference win and thus wins the tie breaker. My problem is either head to head means more than conference wins or it doesn't. Whether you play them 2 or 4 games shouldn't matter if the tie can be broken on that basis. Lake Superior tied Bimidji in the standings and had two more conference wins but lost the head to head having played four games so Bimidji gets into the playoffs and Lake Superior does not. This seems rather illogical.

[Freddie]

Head-to-head means more with 4 games played than with 2 because neither team had the advantage of playing all the games in question at home. Also you need to remember the WCHA isn't some totalitarian monster that tells us what to do. The tournament procedures and tie-breakers were made up and voted on by the members.

[bgpuckster]

I understand the uneven home games, however if the visiting team of a 2 game series gets 3 or more points then that point is moot. I just want them to have consistent rules. Either pick conference wins or head to head, not a hybrid like they have, unless they put a provision in for a visiting team winning a two game series. Personally I think conference wins makes sense.

[Freddie]

I agree, conference wins OUGHT to be the first tiebreaker...but it isn't.