Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

    Too bad we're all not on "KRACH" as then CC might still "shoot" into the mix... Sorry, tough to make my last post of the year after last night's slaughter.

    Go "Bama", ummmm, UAH, Chargers, or whatever, You guys aren't on CRACK or Pairwise... 44th overall but going to the dance...
    I'm thinking Sconi wins it all.... Will see "Those Guys" this weekend..
    F-it till next year..
    Its just a game, but boy is "College Hockey" Cool..

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

      UAH or Chargers, please. "BAMA" is an uncultured institution to our southwest that thinks they rule the world because their football team doesn't suck.

      GFM
      Geof F. Morris
      UAH BSE MAE 2002
      UAHHockey.com

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

        Originally posted by gfmorris View Post
        UAH or Chargers, please. "BAMA" is an uncultured institution to our southwest that thinks they rule the world because their football team doesn't suck.

        GFM
        Gotcha, my bad and am glad you called it out.. Heck I always cheer for the underdog so go get em Chargers!!!
        Its just a game, but boy is "College Hockey" Cool..

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

          Originally posted by Priceless View Post
          No, what criteria did you use?
          http://board.uscho.com/showthread.ph...45#post4697545

          Looks like State loses the tiebreaker to Ferris, even though they are listed first. I hadn't caught that earlier.
          Last edited by nmu_27; 03-15-2010, 05:01 PM.
          Embrace the hate.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

            Originally posted by Billy Blanks View Post
            On the predictor I just came up with a scenario to get Michigan State in with a 14th ranking in the pwr. RIT 15th and Alabama-Huntsville 16th.

            Has anyone else been able to accomplish this?

            My 1st thru 14th.

            1. Denver
            2. Miami
            3. Wisconsin
            4. North Dakota
            5. Cornell
            6. Boston College
            7. Bemidji State
            8. Vermont
            9. St. Cloud State
            10. Northern Michigan
            11. Yale
            12. Alaska
            13. New Hampshire
            14. Michigan State
            The problem with this one is you have UVM up at 8th..that is going to be tough.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

              Originally posted by kdaddy View Post
              The problem with this one is you have UVM up at 8th..that is going to be tough.
              I know, I wish I would have written down who I had winning the games. It was all completely random as I was just throwing it against the wall to see where it had NMU coming out. I was shocked when I saw MSU in as the last team. I think I had UVM winning the HEA.
              TECH STILL SUCKS!

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

                I think BC can fall to as low as 8th should all factors go against them.


                1 Miami (Mm) 24 .5803*
                2 Denver (DU) 23 .5765*
                3 Wisconsin (Wi) 22 .5683
                4 St. Cloud State (SC) 21 .5566 (AQ)
                5 North Dakota (ND) 20 .5558
                6 Ferris State (FS) 19 .5470 (AQ)
                7t Cornell (Cr) 17 .5460 (AQ)
                7t Boston College (BC) 17 .5529
                9 Bemidji State (BS) 16 .5438
                10t Yale (Ya) 15 .5371
                10t Vermont (Vt) 15 .5358 (AQ)
                12 Northern Michigan (NM) 13 .5346
                13 Alaska (Ak) 11 .5297
                14 New Hampshire (NH) 10 .5337
                15 Boston University (BU) 9 .5203
                16t Minnesota-Duluth (MD) 8 .5327
                16t Michigan State (MS) 8 .5236
                18 Union (Un) 7 .5230
                19 Colorado College (CC) 6 .5246
                20t Maine (Me) 4 .5170
                20t Nebraska-Omaha (NO) 4 .5197
                22t Michigan (Mi) 3 .5190
                22t Minnesota (Mn) 3 .5179
                22t Mass.-Lowell (ML) 3 .5169
                25 RIT (RT) 2 .5174 (AQ)
                — Alabama-Huntsville .4675 (AQ)

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

                  Originally posted by slurpees View Post
                  ...especially considering no one from Alaska will come...
                  Maybe they will want to see the sun for the first time in five months??

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

                    Originally posted by BC/HE View Post
                    I think BC can fall to as low as 8th should all factors go against them.

                    7t Cornell (Cr) 17 .5460 (AQ)
                    7t Boston College (BC) 17 .5529
                    BC would get the 7 spot by RPI. They list them second for an unknown reason.
                    Embrace the hate.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

                      Originally posted by Eaglefan06 View Post
                      Agreed. But I think they should do away with Consolations games, rather than implement them in all the leagues.
                      The league championship does not exist for the benefit of the NCAA tournament. That's one of the worst things about hoops, with teams apparently deliberately tanking just so they can be fresh.
                      Cornell University
                      National Champion 1967, 1970
                      ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                      Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

                        Originally posted by Billy Blanks View Post
                        I know, I wish I would have written down who I had winning the games. It was all completely random as I was just throwing it against the wall to see where it had NMU coming out. I was shocked when I saw MSU in as the last team. I think I had UVM winning the HEA.
                        I got Vermont to 8 by winning HEA, too. I was not able to get MSU in, though.
                        Cornell '82

                        "The first time I went to a Cornell game, I was in awe. I'm a big believer that sports fans should get out and see everything -- the Indy 500, the Super Bowl, the Kentucky Derby. I've seen all that, and there's nothing like Lynah Rink." - Carl McKee, father of Cornell Goalie, David McKee

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

                          Originally posted by jcarter7669 View Post
                          I thought the tiebreakers were set? RPI being the first tiebreaker?
                          It is -- I just meant that the two sites list the Pairwise differently in that regard ... CHN seemingly rightly lists it breaking ties by RPI, though it's not like the committee has written this down anywhere. But otherwise, I mean, the lists should look exactly the same in terms of comparisons won, etc...

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

                            Originally posted by gscott13 View Post
                            STL - .5384
                            Massachusetts - .5328
                            Maine - .5306

                            if those are in fact, the season ending rpis, i wonder if they took liberties in seeding in this instance, as all three teams were in the field... if they were all tied for the last spot in the tournament i wonder if it would have played out differently
                            As we've discussed before, the committee has shown it would still take the RPI winner in the 14th slot. If you search the articles from that year from the sites - and the board - the issue was well discussed. ..... I've also pointed out before, and got blasted for it - that the committee does not have this rationale set down on paper anywhere. It's simply what has evolved to be their practice. In fact, in the "old days" - the committee did look at H2H comparison as their tiebreaker - and not the RPI. THEREFORE, they could change their mind at any time!! However, I'm not really sure anyone on the committee even knows this anymore - it's become so mindless for them.

                            But the reason I got blasted was vis-a-vis the Wisconsin/Mankato scenario a couple years ago - this very issue. And I pointed to this article to support my argument that the committee -- while not doing anything wrong (as some tried to say) -- certainly could've opted to do it differently...

                            http://www.collegehockeynews.com/new...3/24_outof.php

                            You can see the rationale there laid out better than I can make it ... I tried to make this point that they do have options. But Scooby yelled at me - and that's why I'm the charter member of his fan club

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

                              Aren't we getting this tiebreaker thing wrong? RPI is the final tiebreaker used to break ties in the comparisons when teams are tied 3-3 or 2-2 etc.. However once they get to total PWC isn't the tiebreaker the winner of the comparison itself as RPI was already used to break the tie, hence it would give a double win by RPI otherwise. That is why teams listed as tied in the PWR are not listed in order of RPI but instead by their relative comparisons.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Bracketology and the PairWise Rankings II

                                Originally posted by BC/HE View Post
                                Aren't we getting this tiebreaker thing wrong? RPI is the final tiebreaker used to break ties in the comparisons when teams are tied 3-3 or 2-2 etc.. However once they get to total PWC isn't the tiebreaker the winner of the comparison itself as RPI was already used to break the tie, hence it would give a double win by RPI otherwise. That is why teams listed as tied in the PWR are not listed in order of RPI but instead by their relative comparisons.
                                Nope. Again, read the history. Especially the Maine/UMass/SLU one mentioned. And the link in my previous post.

                                Yes, it's being double counted - yes, it puts too much weight on the RPI - but yes, that's how they do it.

                                Whether they should or shouldn't - that's another story. They didn't used to.

                                The USCHO listing is not wrong, per se - because, like I said, it's not written in stone. But in practice, it is wrong. CHN started listing it differently (rightly?) after that UMass/Maine/SLU thingy.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X