ECAC Resurgence Annoys Western Fans

College hockey season is almost upon us. With this comes the usual debate about polls.

Polls are essentially meaningless. They reflect the opinion of a few observers and have no bearing on tournament seedings or (unlike in the BCS) computer rankings.

But polls do serve other purposes. They matter for issues of prestige -- recruiting and media attention. They can help get a team more games on TV and increase student enthusiasm for hockey at highly-ranked schools.

The College Hockey News released another pre-season poll this week, with a few changes from its summer poll in May, on account of early departures and other issues.

September: (May ranking)
1. Denver (1)
2. Miami (3)
3. Boston University (5)
4. Cornell (4)
5. Michigan (6)
6. Minnesota (8)
7. Princeton (7)
8. Notre Dame (2)
9. Mass.-Lowell (10)
10. Yale (NR)

Notice anything? That's three teams from the ECAC (Cornell, Princeton, Yale) in the top 10, with only two from the WCHA (Denver and Minnesota). Sure enough, the westerners are none too happy about this perceived insult to their side of the country.

North Dakota fan "Goon," who posted a few times on eLynah last fall around the time of the Cornell-UND series, had this to say:

When I saw this CHN poll I thought you have got to be kidding me? This is a joke right? I mean seriously we have three EZAC teams in the top ten. The same three teams that if you put them in the WCHA would be struggling to make the top five to gain home ice for the WCHA playoffs. I know there are many that feel the same way as I do.

Maybe your league should win an national title in this decade and then maybe you will get the props you deserve. This is the same league that went 1-3 in the 2009 NCAA tourney. Please! I think UND and Wisconsin deserved to be in the top ten. I don't have a problem with the top three teams but I am to believe that Cornell is fourth best team in division one hockey.

From top to bottom, there is no doubt that the WCHA (and CCHA and HEA) are stronger conferences than the ECAC. But I think the top teams in the ECAC (Cornell, Yale, and Princeton) can compete with the top teams in any other conference, including the WCHA. Non-conference results from last year tend to agree with this statement. As for the NCAA tournament, Princeton would have advanced if they hadn't choked at the end, while Yale lost to a Vermont team which nearly took out BU in the Frozen Four. Cornell, of course, had the lead in the game which would have sent them to the Frozen Four.

A Wisconsin fan was equally angry:

See when you play a panzy ass schedule like the ECAC (or the CCHA) the PWR favors you because you can rack up wins against bad teams, only facing tough competition on occasion. In the WCHA, where are the bad teams? Oh sure Tech and UAA and Mankato are regularly at the bottom, but while they are bad by WCHA standards they are still better than any team outside of the top 3 in the ECAC, and probably just as good as those.

This is all wrong. The PWR heavily favors schedule strength, which is why Wisconsin was able to make the 16-team NCAA tournament in 2008 with a record of 15-16-7. Five other WCHA teams made the tournament that year as well.

If anything, Cornell is hurt by the PWR, since our relatively easy schedule means we can't afford to lose very many games.

Of course, the teams will have a chance to justify their preseason rankings once the season begins in around a month.