NCAA Tourney Team Selection Options

[Numbers]

Oh, I agree 100%. I was thinking about that yesterday. It wouldn't shock me if any of the #4 seeds won, or if they got swept. I could see the NCHC going 0-4 just as easily as they could go 4-0. I think this is a really balanced tournament.

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.

[SJHovey]

What's great about this year is that even the bottom seed is good enough to upset the number 1. It would not surprise me at all for lower seeds to win games.

Oh, I agree 100%. I was thinking about that yesterday. It wouldn't shock me if any of the #4 seeds won, or if they got swept. I could see the NCHC going 0-4 just as easily as they could go 4-0. I think this is a really balanced tournament.

[manurespreader]

What's great about this year is that even the bottom seed is good enough to upset the number 1. It would not surprise me at all for lower seeds to win games.

[SJHovey]

Well I would hope they could make the Frozen Four with the teams they played that year. Omaha beat Harvard and the #16 overall seed RIT in the regional final to get to the Frozen Four. Wow, pretty tough road. I hope UNO sent RIT an thank-you card for knocking out the #1 seed so that they wouldn't have to play them. That season Providence (who was the #4 seed in their region) beat Miami (7-5), beat Denver (4-1) to advance to the Frozen Four before beating Omaha 4-1. Five NCHC teams in the tourney and none of them even made the championship game...

So yes, sorry to those that prefer to discuss opinions and perceptions over facts, but my "obsession" for factual based discussions will continue.

That #1 seed that couldn't find a way to beat the lowly RIT was also the #1 overall seed that year, as I recall. Who was that again? Hmm. I'll have to go back and check. Probably from one of the power conferences.

[JohnsonsJerseys]

You should tell that to Omaha, who finished in the bottom half of the NCHC a few years ago, yet made the Frozen Four. Of course, they were seeded 8th overall in that tournament, even though they were the fifth best NCHC team.

Well I would hope they could make the Frozen Four with the teams they played that year. Omaha beat Harvard and the #16 overall seed RIT in the regional final to get to the Frozen Four. Wow, pretty tough road. I hope UNO sent RIT an thank-you card for knocking out the #1 seed so that they wouldn't have to play them. That season Providence (who was the #4 seed in their region) beat Miami (7-5), beat Denver (4-1) to advance to the Frozen Four before beating Omaha 4-1. Five NCHC teams in the tourney and none of them even made the championship game...

So yes, sorry to those that prefer to discuss opinions and perceptions over facts, but my "obsession" for factual based discussions will continue.

[FredsDeadFriend]

This is all nice and all, but Minnesota teams couldn't even beat the Upper Peninsula schools to get to the WCHA final.

I can name you a dozen teams easily, who have lost in their conf tournaments who went on to do well in the NCAA tourney, and could almost do it without looking past the Gophers, lol.

[SJHovey]

Huh, that sounds really familiar. Learn from my experience, there is no room for such logical talk around the NCHC fans in this thread who think they are getting a raw deal because they didn't get 63% of their conference in the tourney field, including teams with losing records. I've tried to have that discussion several times and several ways (lack of play between conferences, teams w/ losing records don't belong in the tourney field, if you can't finish in the top half of your conference you don't belong in the tourney, etc). Trust me, you'll get no logical replies.

You should tell that to Omaha, who finished in the bottom half of the NCHC a few years ago, yet made the Frozen Four. Of course, they were seeded 8th overall in that tournament, even though they were the fifth best NCHC team.

[First Time, Long Time]

Huh, that sounds really familiar. Learn from my experience, there is no room for such logical talk around the NCHC fans in this thread who think they are getting a raw deal because they didn't get 63% of their conference in the tourney field, including teams with losing records. I've tried to have that discussion several times and several ways (lack of play between conferences, teams w/ losing records don't belong in the tourney field, if you can't finish in the top half of your conference you don't belong in the tourney, etc). Trust me, you'll get no logical replies.

Your obsession is really unhealthy.

[SJHovey]

I'd like to hear official reasoning on Bemidji over Bowling Green (more wins vs top teams instead of pairwise?) and Why a 4th from NCHA & BigTen instead of another Atlantic team (Eye test has to be the only reason, right? Or would they really cite historical conference performance)?

In the USCHO podcast Kemp said that an important factor was wins against other tournament teams. He singled out Notre Dame and Omaha as two teams that benefited from this.

[J.D.]

With AIC not playing since January, I thought there was a decent chance they would have gotten an at large had they lost the conference tournament. I can't really get on the committee for not putting Canisius or Army in. AIC got swept by Quinnipiac and a lot of people questioned QUs body of work. With that said, considering BG swept Quinnipiac...had the committee put them in ahead of Notre Dame I would have been ok with that. Plus you could had Jerry York taking on his old team! Better storyline than the boring Jeff Jackson.

I am a Hockey East "fan" and have no issue with HE only getting 3 in. That's why they are bubble teams. There was no egregious mistake in putting in Omaha/ND/Bemidji and leaving out the likes of PC/BG/DU/Canisius/Army.

[JohnsonsJerseys]

That's why in a year like this one, I would have liked to have seen another Atlantic team (or 2) get a shot. They probably are not as good as the other conferences; but, that hasn't really been proven on the ice this year.

Huh, that sounds really familiar. Learn from my experience, there is no room for such logical talk around the NCHC fans in this thread who think they are getting a raw deal because they didn't get 63% of their conference in the tourney field, including teams with losing records. I've tried to have that discussion several times and several ways (lack of play between conferences, teams w/ losing records don't belong in the tourney field, if you can't finish in the top half of your conference you don't belong in the tourney, etc). Trust me, you'll get no logical replies.

[LordofBrewtown]

Mike Kemp mentioned Bemidji's record against top teams in WCHA compared to BG. BG was 1-7 or something and Bemidji had tougher schedule. The loss to NMU finished BG off.

Thanks!

[LordofBrewtown]

So, will the hockey tournament be as crazy as the basketball tournament has been? I've got an AIC-Quinnipiac final. *smilie*

That's why in a year like this one, I would have liked to have seen another Atlantic team (or 2) get a shot. They probably are not as good as the other conferences; but, that hasn't really been proven on the ice this year.

How crazy can the tournament really get? Quinnipiac's been to the frozen four recently. I think about the craziest thing one could hope for is a AIC/Omaha final, with Bemidji or LSSU also making the frozen four. I'm not sure that anyone in the BC/ND/SCSU/BU region would be a complete shocker. I guess Notre Dame being the last team in; but, they've also had recent success.

I would have been more intrigued to watch an AIC/BC first round matchup then Notre Dame (replacing Notre Dame with Canisius or Army and slotting them into the #16 overall)

[J.D.]

Mike Kemp mentioned Bemidji's record against top teams in WCHA compared to BG. BG was 1-7 or something and Bemidji had tougher schedule. The loss to NMU finished BG off.

[LordofBrewtown]

I haven't heard any post-selection analysis, but I would suppose the only thing interesting is Notre Dame instead of Providence, right?

I'd like to hear official reasoning on Bemidji over Bowling Green (more wins vs top teams instead of pairwise?) and Why a 4th from NCHA & BigTen instead of another Atlantic team (Eye test has to be the only reason, right? Or would they really cite historical conference performance)?