NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Yeah, except in this case it really didn't. The difference between the BC team that won the conference regular season title, and the HE teams that actually made the NCAA's, were a few ties. BC managed to not tie a single game, while BU, NE, etc..., had a handful of them. Very little separation in the overall performance of any of those teams "in conference", and certainly not enough to overcome a putrid OOC record by BC.

None of this is an argument against what I was claiming.
But as long as you bring it up... Wins, losses, AND TIES are how standings are determined. The team that ends up with the most points had the best season within that conference, period. Whether there is "very little separation" or if they run away with it doesn't really matter.
So I get that you don't feel BC deserved a tournament bid. Since I never argued that they did, necessarily, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

[SJHovey]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Give me a break. You know what I meant. But just case it didn't sink in, I'll qualify that by saying "in-conference season long excellence". I was only referring to comparisons between teams in the same conference. If you had read the entire post, you'd know that. I was not arguing that BC should necessarily have made the NCAA tournament this season, just that when comparing teams that play basically the same opponents for 24 to 28 games of their schedule, the conference regular season is much more indicative of who had the better season than a short single elimination tournament.

Yeah, except in this case it really didn't. The difference between the BC team that won the conference regular season title, and the HE teams that actually made the NCAA's, were a few ties. BC managed to not tie a single game, while BU, NE, etc..., had a handful of them. Very little separation in the overall performance of any of those teams "in conference", and certainly not enough to overcome a putrid OOC record by BC.

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

The problem with your statement is the assumption that winning the regular season championship in a conference constitutes "season long excellence." No, it doesn't.

Yeah, BC won maybe 3/4 of their conference games to win the regular season crown, but those 18 wins only constituted about half the total games they played. Playing .500 hockey isn't season long excellence. It's mediocrity.

Give me a break. You know what I meant. But just case it didn't sink in, I'll qualify that by saying "in-conference season long excellence". I was only referring to comparisons between teams in the same conference. If you had read the entire post, you'd know that. I was not arguing that BC should necessarily have made the NCAA tournament this season, just that when comparing teams that play basically the same opponents for 24 to 28 games of their schedule, the conference regular season is much more indicative of who had the better season than a short single elimination tournament.

[owslachief]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Thought the reason for the big 10 conf was so mich st never again makes the tourney

Heh. We didn't need the B1G for that. MSU's failed the last 5 years all on its own.

[SJHovey]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

If this statement had any logic to it, then why don't we just skip the regular season and have a 60 team single elimination tournament and declare that winner the "Best" team in the nation? Please.

Lots of teams are "good enough" to win the title, not just the 1st place teams. Nobody's arguing that. I can't speak for other posters, but I imagine the main point is just that season-long excellence from October through February against for the most part the same competition is a better gauge of how good a team's season has been than a 3 or 4 round single elimination conference tournament in March. I completely agree with this line of thinking, but that only holds water when comparing teams from the same conference. How they compare to others outside their conference is a completely different issue. We can love it or hate it, but the conferences themselves choose to award the auto-bids to the tournament champs rather than the regular season champs. This is usually only an issue when dealing with "mid-majors" like AHC that may only send one team. The big 4 (5?) aren't usually as concerned since the auto-bid gives them a shot at an extra bid if upsets happen in their tournament. It's pretty unlikely that a regular season champ in those conferences will be so bad in their OOC games that they can't get in. It has happened, but not very often historically outside of the MAAC, AHA, AHC, CHA, and ECAC.

The problem with your statement is the assumption that winning the regular season championship in a conference constitutes "season long excellence." No, it doesn't.

Yeah, BC won maybe 3/4 of their conference games to win the regular season crown, but those 18 wins only constituted about half the total games they played. Playing .500 hockey isn't season long excellence. It's mediocrity.

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

That's pretty much what we have with the conference tourneys forward. Granted, a few teams can lose in the conference tourney and still advance, but there are 57 teams playing for the NC at the end of the regular season.

Exactly. The good teams high in PWR rankings earn a right for a mulligan in the conference tourney. The conference tourneys represent Round 1 and 2 of a 64 team tournament essentially.

[CLS]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

...We can love it or hate it, but the conferences themselves choose to award the auto-bids to the tournament champs rather than the regular season champs. This is usually only an issue when dealing with "mid-majors" like AHC that may only send one team. The big 4 (5?) aren't usually as concerned since the auto-bid gives them a shot at an extra bid if upsets happen in their tournament. It's pretty unlikely that a regular season champ in those conferences will be so bad in their OOC games that they can't get in. It has happened, but not very often historically outside of the MAAC, AHA, AHC, CHA, and ECAC.

Of course the problem is that this was an aberrant year. BC won HE, but failed to make the tournament largely because of their poor OOC record and because they didn't even do that well against the good teams in HE. They played a tough OOC schedule. Providence and Northeastern had weak OOC schedules. They did win the OOC games and did will enough against HE opponents that they did make the tournament. I can sympathize with freedomfighter's initial confusion; he clearly didn't understand how the system works. What I can't sympathize with is that he appears to either be making no attempt to understand it, is incapable of understanding it, or is arguing against it based on the results of what even fellow BC fans know was a very unusual year. BC should be applauded for having a tough OOC schedule; the result in a more typical year is that they do better in the OOC games, and they know they're in the tournament by the end of February.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

If this statement had any logic to it, then why don't we just skip the regular season and have a 60 team single elimination tournament and declare that winner the "Best" team in the nation? Please.

Lots of teams are "good enough" to win the title, not just the 1st place teams. Nobody's arguing that. I can't speak for other posters, but I imagine the main point is just that season-long excellence from October through February against for the most part the same competition is a better gauge of how good a team's season has been than a 3 or 4 round single elimination conference tournament in March. I completely agree with this line of thinking, but that only holds water when comparing teams from the same conference. How they compare to others outside their conference is a completely different issue. We can love it or hate it, but the conferences themselves choose to award the auto-bids to the tournament champs rather than the regular season champs. This is usually only an issue when dealing with "mid-majors" like AHC that may only send one team. The big 4 (5?) aren't usually as concerned since the auto-bid gives them a shot at an extra bid if upsets happen in their tournament. It's pretty unlikely that a regular season champ in those conferences will be so bad in their OOC games that they can't get in. It has happened, but not very often historically outside of the MAAC, AHA, AHC, CHA, and ECAC.

+1

[UncleRay]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

If this statement had any logic to it, then why don't we just skip the regular season and have a 60 team single elimination tournament and declare that winner the "Best" team in the nation? Please.

That's pretty much what we have with the conference tourneys forward. Granted, a few teams can lose in the conference tourney and still advance, but there are 57 teams playing for the NC at the end of the regular season.

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

It seems that an argument that conference standings are the most important consideration rings a little hollow in a season in which Duluth, who finished barely above .500 and a distant 3rd place in its conference, was good enough to win the National Title.

If this statement had any logic to it, then why don't we just skip the regular season and have a 60 team single elimination tournament and declare that winner the "Best" team in the nation? Please.

Lots of teams are "good enough" to win the title, not just the 1st place teams. Nobody's arguing that. I can't speak for other posters, but I imagine the main point is just that season-long excellence from October through February against for the most part the same competition is a better gauge of how good a team's season has been than a 3 or 4 round single elimination conference tournament in March. I completely agree with this line of thinking, but that only holds water when comparing teams from the same conference. How they compare to others outside their conference is a completely different issue. We can love it or hate it, but the conferences themselves choose to award the auto-bids to the tournament champs rather than the regular season champs. This is usually only an issue when dealing with "mid-majors" like AHC that may only send one team. The big 4 (5?) aren't usually as concerned since the auto-bid gives them a shot at an extra bid if upsets happen in their tournament. It's pretty unlikely that a regular season champ in those conferences will be so bad in their OOC games that they can't get in. It has happened, but not very often historically outside of the MAAC, AHA, AHC, CHA, and ECAC.

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

It seems that an argument that conference standings are the most important consideration rings a little hollow in a season in which Duluth, who finished barely above .500 and a distant 3rd place in its conference, was good enough to win the National Title.

Well that's actually part of the problem. You see when a team like Duluth gets in by .0000000000000001 via math and BC is one of the teams on the bubble that didn't make it, the "March BC fans" come around thinking that BC easily could do this type of thing in the NCAA tournament as well (in reality they would likely lose badly in Rd 1 every single year of this make-believe tournament including BC).

It's one of the new schticks from the "March BC fan" brigade along with the ever braindead "no one wants to play us!" (I assure you teams watch tape of some of the recent BC teams and absolutely want BC, never mind the fact that it isn't even a possibility since BC can't seem to even make the tournament lately) and "we have Jerry York" so pretty much just assume they'll win every game in March and April because... Jerry York! It's g**** annoying. Hopefully they jump off the bandwagon... or something a lot taller.

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Ah Jesus Christ this thread is still going? Doesn't look like any progress was made but I applaud the winning advice given out by Uncle Ray.

[Jon]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

This is probably degenerated into hazing the new guy, but heavens to Roboshark... Not even the BC fans think they should have made the NCAA tournament.

Maybe he used to work for the Lowell Sun and he has a bone to pick with those dang new-fangeled computers?

[SJHovey]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

It seems that an argument that conference standings are the most important consideration rings a little hollow in a season in which Duluth, who finished barely above .500 and a distant 3rd place in its conference, was good enough to win the National Title.

[FiveHole12]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Thanks but helps my point that OOC counts more. But Thanx.

OK... throw out OOC. How do you want to rank conference strength? All conferences are equal?
So... 1st and 2nd place from each conference make the NCAA's, plus 4 at large bids? (can't have the top 3 teams from each, there are 6 conferences and that would be 18 teams).

Hockey East this season went 0-10-1 vs tBig, 7-14-1 vs NCHC, and 0-3-1 vs WCHA.
BC performed well against mediocre HE teams and flopped against the stronger OOC teams, and they're deserving? Not in my book.

Your tournament would suck IMO... lots of deserving teams sit home and lots of undeserving teams play for a watered down NC.