The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

[pinch]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

That what I was thinking, although in all likelihood I think it would be at earliest Summer 2012.

That works for me.... I am busy until then.

[Rhett]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

#45 Merrimack - π Points

Just rounding that off for you... it's close enough.

[dmjossel]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

How is UMass behind Merrimack?

They both have one NCAA appearance each (at the Division 1 level, anyway) and had similar results. MC advanced in the quarterfinals and fell in the semifinals to the eventual champion.

UMass won one series, then lost one. They both have struggled most seasons, but Merrimack has been playing in Hockey East longer.

Perhaps UMass' years as a Division 1 independent from 1908-1961 was not included?

Merrimack's all-time winning percentage in Hockey East is .377. Amherst's is .393.

MC's all-time winning percentage is .496. Amherst's is .424.

MC participated in the NCAAs once as a D1 Independent, and twice in D2, winning one national championship.

Perhaps the author is considering the likelihood of another NCAA berth for Merrimack this year, which would give them two tourney participation years to UMass' one at the D1 level.

[bcfan131]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

It's more amazing that UMass is so close to Merrimack. What would the argument be for UMass being higher? Is it better than "I've paid attention for only 4 or 5 years and spouted off without considering that hockey was being played before then"?

It's not that I think UMass should be ranked highly at all. I'm just surprised Merrimack was ahead of them, even by one spot. I mean I guess UMass was really bad when they first joined Hockey East. But I feel like Merrimack has always been especially bad (until the past 2 seasons at least), and I'm pretty sure the rankings aren't supposed to include this season. I know Merrimack has a DII national title but I didn't think those counted in terms of these rankings. I guess my opinion has a lot to do with perception. I mean really, if I were to tell you in 2009 that either MC or UMass was 3rd place in Hockey East and 4th in the PWR and you had to guess which one it was, would you have chosen Merrimack? I know I wouldn't have. Besides, if my argument was "I've paid attention for only 4 or 5 years," I should think MC is much better than UMass. Merrimack has been miles ahead of UMass over the past 2 seasons, especially this year. That 11-2 shellacking a couple of weekends ago says it all.

[dmjossel]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

It's not that I think UMass should be ranked highly at all. I'm just surprised Merrimack was ahead of them, even by one spot.

To speak of intangibles, Merrimack has had a hockey team almost as long as it has existed as a school. It's the school's #1 sport, and they are the smallest college (by enrollment) that plays at the division 1 level, and in a top league, besides. It's also a small, young liberal arts college-- not a state university with a multimillion dollar facility.

I don't know that that the author takes any of those things into consideration, either, but I know I sure do.

I mean I guess UMass was really bad when they first joined Hockey East. But I feel like Merrimack has always been especially bad (until the past 2 seasons at least), and I'm pretty sure the rankings aren't supposed to include this season.

The author mentioned Merrimack's potential NCAA berth this season, so I'm assuming he is counting this year.

Even in the past five years, UMass has only one season above .500.

In the past five years, Merrimack has had only one season above .500-- this one.

Umass had two .500 or better seasons in the five years before that, where Merrimack had none. In fact, you've got to go back before Hockey East to find the last season over .500. That was still division 1, though-- just as an Independent. Merrimack had five seasons as an Independent, playing a mixed schedule, and were above .500 all five seasons.

So, Merrimack has been pretty bad for quite a long time, up until the last two seasons, but they were also quite good in the mid-late 80s, aside from the D2 national championship and ECAC championships prior to that.

UMass has been perhaps not quite so terrible for not quite so long, and was respectable more recently (2006-7) but they did go eight consecutive seasons after joining Hockey East below not just .500 but below .400.

The gap between the teams might be different if we looked at league finishes, I'm not sure-- at some point, if you're 9-10 out of a ten-team league it may not matter all that much if you win one game, or three games, or five games-- and both programs have been in that situation more than once in the last decade.

I know Merrimack has a DII national title but I didn't think those counted in terms of these rankings. I guess my opinion has a lot to do with perception. I mean really, if I were to tell you in 2009 that either MC or UMass was 3rd place in Hockey East and 4th in the PWR and you had to guess which one it was, would you have chosen Merrimack? I know I wouldn't have.

I would have, but I'm a Merrimack grad and a fan of the team since before 1988. Also, by 2009 Merrimack had DaCosta on the roster, and once he announced he was coming back to school I definitely would have picked Merrimack to be that 3rd place team and not Umass.

Although 3rd place might have been considered unlikely for either team prior to the season, the USCHO season preview and the Hockey East coaches' poll all picked Merrimack to finish ahead of Umass this season; MC was 7th in the coaches poll, and UMass 9th. So just based on that, if either one of them was to have a breakout season and finish much higher, I'd have still guessed Merrimack and not Amherst.

[Rhett]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

It's not that I think UMass should be ranked highly at all. I'm just surprised Merrimack was ahead of them, even by one spot.

All I'm saying is that due to their longer history and success as an independent it was pretty clear 'Mack was topping UMass in this with the quickest of glances. It's just surprising that wasn't worth a larger difference.

[Dmann]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

What is so amazing about Merrimack is that I believe just two years ago at the beginning of the season, they were ranked dead last in the preseason poll. Not just hockey east but nation wide!! What a turn around! And to think that much of this is due to a kid from Paris??? This feels like the Twilight Zone!! Anyway, I am happy for them, as long as they don't beat DU somewhere down the road. One more interesting tidbit. Speaking of defunct programs, my dad played for Bates in the 30s!! I don't know how they arranged teams back then, but I know they played toe to toe with teams like Bowdoin and Colby!! They are now a club team.

[Rhett]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

I don't know how they arranged teams back then

They didn't.

No divisions, no national championships... I don't think NCAA was even governing hockey at the time. There may have been less formal conferences or scheduling arrangements, but I don't know of any before the 1950's. A lot of teams were playing seasons consisting of about 10 games (give or take) back then. They could have played some future major programs though... their Maine rivals Bowdoin & Colby certainly did.

[bcfan131]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

To speak of intangibles, Merrimack has had a hockey team almost as long as it has existed as a school. It's the school's #1 sport, and they are the smallest college (by enrollment) that plays at the division 1 level, and in a top league, besides. It's also a small, young liberal arts college-- not a state university with a multimillion dollar facility.

I don't know that that the author takes any of those things into consideration, either, but I know I sure do.




The author mentioned Merrimack's potential NCAA berth this season, so I'm assuming he is counting this year.

Even in the past five years, UMass has only one season above .500.

In the past five years, Merrimack has had only one season above .500-- this one.

Umass had two .500 or better seasons in the five years before that, where Merrimack had none. In fact, you've got to go back before Hockey East to find the last season over .500. That was still division 1, though-- just as an Independent. Merrimack had five seasons as an Independent, playing a mixed schedule, and were above .500 all five seasons.

So, Merrimack has been pretty bad for quite a long time, up until the last two seasons, but they were also quite good in the mid-late 80s, aside from the D2 national championship and ECAC championships prior to that.

UMass has been perhaps not quite so terrible for not quite so long, and was respectable more recently (2006-7) but they did go eight consecutive seasons after joining Hockey East below not just .500 but below .400.

The gap between the teams might be different if we looked at league finishes, I'm not sure-- at some point, if you're 9-10 out of a ten-team league it may not matter all that much if you win one game, or three games, or five games-- and both programs have been in that situation more than once in the last decade.





I would have, but I'm a Merrimack grad and a fan of the team since before 1988. Also, by 2009 Merrimack had DaCosta on the roster, and once he announced he was coming back to school I definitely would have picked Merrimack to be that 3rd place team and not Umass.

Although 3rd place might have been considered unlikely for either team prior to the season, the USCHO season preview and the Hockey East coaches' poll all picked Merrimack to finish ahead of Umass this season; MC was 7th in the coaches poll, and UMass 9th. So just based on that, if either one of them was to have a breakout season and finish much higher, I'd have still guessed Merrimack and not Amherst.

When I said "2009," I meant at the end of the 2008-2009 season (the year MC missed the league playoffs and before anyone really knew about DaCosta). Even so, if we were talking the beginning of the 2009-2010 season, I think most people would've said UMass. Don't forget, around this time last year, UMass was ranked in the top 5 or 6 in the PWR. Then they completely collapsed after BC curbstomped them in Amherst the Friday before the Beanpot Final. They really fell off this year after Marcou and Wellman decided to leave. Obviously now, we can see that Merrimack is in much better shape than UMass is and is definitely a better program today (plus they have a BC guy at the helm so they're obviously in better shape ). I was just surprised to see that Merrimack actually finished ahead of another Hockey East team (I was expecting them to be the last place program in Hockey East) but I guess MC was better prior to joining the league and UMass has been around for a lot less of a time.

[unhpuckfan2001]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

What is so amazing about Merrimack is that I believe just two years ago at the beginning of the season, they were ranked dead last in the preseason poll. Not just hockey east but nation wide!! What a turn around! And to think that much of this is due to a kid from Paris??? This feels like the Twilight Zone!! Anyway, I am happy for them, as long as they don't beat DU somewhere down the road. One more interesting tidbit. Speaking of defunct programs, my dad played for Bates in the 30s!! I don't know how they arranged teams back then, but I know they played toe to toe with teams like Bowdoin and Colby!! They are now a club team.

Not to nitpick, but the Warriors are about A LOT more than just Stephane Da Costa. They've got a helluva goalie in Joe Cannatta, and a team full of hustlers and skaters and grinders . . . They've had a new coach for about 6 years in Dennehey, along with new support from the AD and School Prez, and have really turned that program around, from the Arena's basement (if it has one) up.

[PAULE]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

To speak of intangibles, Merrimack has had a hockey team almost as long as it has existed as a school. It's the school's #1 sport, and they are the smallest college (by enrollment) that plays at the division 1 level, and in a top league, besides. It's also a small, young liberal arts college-- not a state university with a multimillion dollar facility.

Where do you get your enrollment numbers? Not being picky, just curious.

Union and St. Lawrence also have enrollment of 2000, American Int'l has 1200. Colorado College has 1950.

I will be following Merrimack next season. The son of a friend will be playing there next year.

[owslachief]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

Obvious east coast bias here.

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

To clear a couple things up:

1) This season is NOT included. The data only goes through the end of last season. I will be including this season's results once the season is over and provide an update of the rankings, probably within a week of the title game.

2) The MAIN reason that Merrimack is ahead of UMass is that they have 2 NCAA victories to UMass's 1. UMass has a slight edge against NCAA Title competition, while Merrimack has a slight edge in overall winning percentage. They both have 1 NCAA Tournament appearance, and their Tournament Winning percentage is identical.

3) As for UMass's D-1 record before they joined a conference, it is included. The only games that were NOT included, were games when the program was a D-2 or D-3 program.

Hopefully that clears up things up a bit.

My list should be resuming shortly here...

[darker98]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

I didn't expect the scratching and hair pulling this early.

[Driftryder]

Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

It should build into a frenzy by the top 20 or so.