Originally posted by Lemonade
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
NCAA Tourney Team Selection Options
Collapse
X
-
-
How about they say screw the TV situation, let's play the BU-SCSU game tomorrow and then the regional final on Sunday.
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
I've been clamoring for going back to the 12-team format and giving top seeds byes. This is actually a step in the right direction!!
Leave a comment:
-
Mike McMahon hinted that there were a couple positive tests in Fargo but an unspecified team is ok to play? Not sure if he's got the full story there as it would seem if you are going to let a team play despite 2-3 positive tests (which I support) then why wouldn't that apply to ND as well?
Edit: obviously anyone who tests positive is out. I meant the players who test negative. But now I will get scolded because one negative test might not mean anything.
Leave a comment:
-
PC hasn't practiced all week, team already had their best player sign a pro contract. It would be a gong-show game to make them start practicing again all of a sudden, hop on a bus, hope the NCAA accepts rapid antigen tests, then play a game.
It's a bad situation but there's no good answer and sending out PC <48 hours before game time isn't a better solution.
Leave a comment:
-
The funniest thing is most of the comments I am seeing are simply that ND didn't belong in anyway.
Leave a comment:
-
When the big, bad, superior St. Cloud Huskies kick both BU and BC in the nuts this will be a non issue!
Leave a comment:
-
Obviously it's not ideal, who would say it is? But that's the situation we have here and the same would apply to any team.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Nick Papagiorgio View PostNO exceptions. Walkover win for BC I guess. Good, ND didn't belong there anyway.
The fact that BC could benefit is going to make for some amazing reading. Schlossman is going to have a heart attack.
Leave a comment:
-
NO exceptions. Walkover win for BC I guess. Good, ND didn't belong there anyway.
The fact that BC could benefit is going to make for some amazing reading. Schlossman is going to have a heart attack.
Leave a comment:
-
ND is out according to several reports with Covid positives. Past the deadline to add PC but NCAA should make exception here and put them in. 2.5 hour bus ride, rapide test PC and they bus in on Saturday for game.
Leave a comment:
-
Things I hope happen:
The refs do a good job! ( I know dreaming)
Barry Melrose keeps his mouth shut. ( Dreaming)
The underdog teams rule the day. ( I am so sick of the big name teams getting all the ink)
No one gets hurt.
We don't have ice or facility issues
No one gets Covid from this.
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Since the seismic Holy Cross upset of #1 seed Minnesota in 2006, the top seeds in regionals have been vulnerable.
Counting that 2006 field, there have been 56 number one seeds in a region (4 per tournament). 23 of them lost to the #4 seeded team in their first game, that's more than 41% of them. The 2005 tournament was the last one where all the #1 seeds won their opening game of the tournament.
2006
Holy Cross 4, Minnesota 3 (OT)
2007
UMass 1, Clarkson 0 (OT)
Miami 2, New Hampshire 1
2008
Notre Dame 7, New Hampshire 3
2009
Air Force 2, Michigan 0
Bemidji State 5, Notre Dame 1
Miami 4, Denver 2
2010
RIT 2, Denver 1
2011
Colorado College 8, Boston College 4
New Hampshire 3, Miami 1
2012
Cornell 3, Michigan 2 (OT)
2013
Yale 3, Minnesota 2 (OT)
St. Cloud State 5, Notre Dame 1
2014
North Dakota 5, Wisconsin 2
2015
RIT 2, Minnesota State 1
Providence 7, Miami 5
2016
Minnesota Duluth 3, Providence 2 (2OT)
Ferris State 5, St. Cloud State 4 (OT)
2017
Notre Dame 3, Minnesota 2
2018
Air Force 4, St. Cloud State 1
Boston University 3, Cornell 1
2019
American International 2, St. Cloud State 1
Providence 6, Minnesota State 3
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Numbers View Post
I don't have access to watch anything. And, there are very few non-conference games this year. So, just curious. On what basis do you call this a "really balanced tournament"?
Not arguing. Just asking.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: