Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

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

  • #46
    Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

    Originally posted by CLS View Post
    We all know the weaknesses of the seeding system and debate it annually. Home ice advantage and two out of three is too much of an advantage for the higher seeded team, especially the 4-5 seeds when the seeding system is so controversial.

    I see the advantages in atmosphere, but I'm a competitive purist, and I think having Bemidji and RIT in the FF is a good thing. That's much less likely to happen with this proposal.
    Ok but it works in baseball, would you succeed to the top seed hosting the super regional and it not being best 2 of 3? Yes they have home ice advantage but you aren't playing in front of empty buildings.
    Miamiredhawks08: "Side note: have any of you had to wear a helmet in SLOW PITCH SOFTBALL CAGE?!?!?!?! Are you flipping kidding me?!?!?! Felt like a 30 year old wearing floaties in a wading pool! jeebus!"

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

      Personally, as a fan of good program that is usually a long way from most regional sites, this idea really appeals to me. It's also a nice reward for finishing in the top eight, which puts a little extra emphasis on every game during the season, because hosting is always better than travelling.

      I think back to all those higher-seeded Denver teams that were rewarded for strong finishes by being shipped to far away places, some of them among the most hostile venues in the sport. Denver was one of those top-ranked teams that lost to Michigan at Yost (2002), and lower-seeded Wisconsin at Madison (2008), which are two of the most difficult places to play. Nice reward.

      Higher seeded DU has also lost in less intimidating, but still far-away venues in the last two years - losing to lower-seeded Miami at Minneapolis (2009) and even this year, losing to lower-seeded RIT at Albany. Had DU been able to play any of those four first round NCAA team on campus in a two out of three series, I am sure some of those Denver teams would have certainly advanced.

      Hosting NCAA games on campus is a thrill that has not happened for the University of Denver since 1986 when Cornell came out west with Joe Nieuwendyk leading the way. In those days, it was a 2-game total-goals series (Essentially, a six-period hockey game played over two nights). Denver advanced in aggregate 7-6, and it was some of the most amazing hockey I've ever seen.

      The one tweak I would like to see is play a two-game total goals series rather than a best two out of three. Sunday games are a drag when you are travelling a long distance, and you often miss another day of work.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

        What this would do is maximize the chances of the top seeds making the Frozen Four and really limit any chance of an RIT or Bemidji making it. What are the chances that RIT beats DU twice at Magness or Holy Cross beating the Gophers twice at Mariucci? Probably not likely.

        Keep it the way it is.
        Last edited by Slasher7; 05-07-2010, 11:22 AM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

          Originally posted by redhawkman10 View Post
          Ok but it works in baseball, would you succeed to the top seed hosting the super regional and it not being best 2 of 3? Yes they have home ice advantage but you aren't playing in front of empty buildings.
          Of course for baseball you can lose 4 times and still win the national title; there's essentially 4 "rounds" (regional, super regional, brackets 1/2 in Omaha, and the Championship Series). And were it not for the 10 days of games in Omaha, the tournament would lose money even using campus sites.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

            Any format that gives my team more chances to win the title I am all for.

            Plus the national championship should be about finding the best team, not the best team on that day. Single elimination tournaments are most times not a true indicator of the best teams.
            PSNetwork / XBOX GamerTag: xJeris
            Steam Profile

            Sports Allegiance
            NFL: CHI; MLB: MN, NYM; NHL: MN, MTL; NCAAB: MN, UNLV; NCAAF: MN, MIA; NCAAH: MN; Soccer: USA, Blackburn

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

              I would be a huge fan of this if I was associated with a perennial power. Lets face it, it decreases the probablility that those strong programs will be embarassed by an upstart. The handful of teams that have won championships over the last decade or so will be the only ones to win in the future. The programs in power will stay in power, with almost no chance for any other programs to grow. Might as well accelerate the contraction of NCAA hockey now........
              John Nabors

              RIT Tigers - A Long Hockey Tradition
              AHA Regular Season Champions 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011
              AHA Tournament Champions 2010, 2015, 2016
              NCAA DI - 2010, 2015, 2016
              NCAA Frozen 4 - 2010
              NCAA DII - 1983
              NCAA DIII - 1984, 1985, 1989, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

                Originally posted by JF_Gophers View Post
                Any format that gives my team more chances to win the title I am all for.

                Plus the national championship should be about finding the best team, not the best team on that day. Single elimination tournaments are most times not a true indicator of the best teams.
                Hockey is such a terrible sport for single elimination, basketball too.

                It is what it is, but it bothers me because hockey doesn't work well for single elimination.
                Feed The Hungry! Click once a day!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

                  Originally posted by XCTiger View Post
                  I would be a huge fan of this if I was associated with a perennial power. Lets face it, it decreases the probablility that those strong programs will be embarassed by an upstart. The handful of teams that have won championships over the last decade or so will be the only ones to win in the future. The programs in power will stay in power, with almost no chance for any other programs to grow. Might as well accelerate the contraction of NCAA hockey now........
                  Really? You think RIT or BSU would drop hockey if they never win a D-I national title? Look at Ferris State or St. Cloud State or the Alaska schools. As it is they have very little chance of winning a N/C, but they are all doing just fine.

                  And as an aside - I think it's a fantastic idea - and I've covered Bemidji State for the last 11 seasons. This after covering North Dakota and Minn-Duluth before that, and attending NMU. Now, it will be more difficult for BSU to get a 1 or 2 seed than it was last year, but think of how sweet it will be when it happens again. Plus, BSU proved that a team from the CHA (or even AHA) could get an at-large top-2 seed. Now, it isn't easy, but if an AHA team wins a few tough OOC games and just about rns the table in conference, they sure could replicate BSU's feat. The RIT fans were universaly considered the top fans in this past regional and FF. How crazy would Ritter be if the first rd. was there?
                  Current NCAA D-I rinks I've been to:

                  AHA:
                  B1G: UMich, MSU, UMinn, Notre Dame, OSU, UWisc
                  CCHA: BSU, BG, FSU, LSSU, MSU, MTU, NMU
                  ECAC:
                  HEA: UMass
                  NCHC: Miami, UMD, UND, SCSU, WMU
                  Independant: ASU


                  Inactive: UAH, ASU, BSU, UMD, UND, NMU, Notre Dame

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

                    Theoretically, it's more important to me the best 4 teams end up in the FF, and not a Cinderella. The best teams need to be there, not the more fortunate. Cinderalla's make a nice story, but not great hockey.

                    The next weekend, after the best 2 out of 3, I'd have a round robin series at the super regionals. The 2 highest point scoring teams from each regional go onto the FF, where the region 1 teams play the region 2 teams in the semi's.

                    I hate the total goal idea. If a team in game 1 gets blitzed 7-1, the series is over 99.727823% of the time.
                    Wisconsin Hockey: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 WE WANT MORE!
                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Come to the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod
                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Originally Posted by Wisko McBadgerton:
                    "Baggot says Hughes and Rockwood are centering the top two lines...
                    Timothy A --> Great hockey mind... Or Greatest hockey mind?!?"

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

                      Originally posted by Timothy A View Post
                      Theoretically, it's more important to me the best 4 teams end up in the FF, and not a Cinderella. The best teams need to be there, not the more fortunate. Cinderalla's make a nice story, but not great hockey.
                      RIT notwithstanding, the BSU/Maimi game last year was 2-1 at the half-way mark, and was just 3-1 until there were 2 minutes left...
                      Current NCAA D-I rinks I've been to:

                      AHA:
                      B1G: UMich, MSU, UMinn, Notre Dame, OSU, UWisc
                      CCHA: BSU, BG, FSU, LSSU, MSU, MTU, NMU
                      ECAC:
                      HEA: UMass
                      NCHC: Miami, UMD, UND, SCSU, WMU
                      Independant: ASU


                      Inactive: UAH, ASU, BSU, UMD, UND, NMU, Notre Dame

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

                        One part of this new arrangement I'm not a huge fan of is the advantage it gives some teams at the margins. While the 1-16 matchup is pretty clear who the superior or more "deserving" team is to host, the 8-9 or the 7-10 is a lot murkier. You're handing one team an enormous advantage based on a razor thin and probably debatable margin.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

                          Originally posted by redhawkman10 View Post
                          Ok but it works in baseball, would you succeed to the top seed hosting the super regional and it not being best 2 of 3? Yes they have home ice advantage but you aren't playing in front of empty buildings.
                          Not sure what you mean by "works in baseball". That's how they do it? Works well? I don't know the history, but I'm guessing that either it's always been done that way, so who's to know whether some other sysetm would produce a better result? And what do you consider a better result?

                          And no I wouldn't buy the top seed hosting the super regional or the first round game even if it weren't two out of three. But like I said, I'm a competitive purist and if given the choice between a system that produces what I perceive as an unfair advantage, and a system that has games in empty buildings, I'd pick the empty buildings.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

                            Originally posted by XCTiger View Post
                            I would be a huge fan of this if I was associated with a perennial power. Lets face it, it decreases the probablility that those strong programs will be embarassed by an upstart. The handful of teams that have won championships over the last decade or so will be the only ones to win in the future. The programs in power will stay in power, with almost no chance for any other programs to grow. Might as well accelerate the contraction of NCAA hockey now........
                            Really? The preception of "they can't make it" was true 2 years ago and those leagues were making progress. The problem was the CHA had a geographic issue and no new programs were being created.

                            While Bemidji and RIT have certainly changed preceptions and attitudes I don't see how this is going to lead in the backwards direction for these programs. On the other hand they certainly won't be accelerated to the degree that they have been. I can understand not being in favor... but the reaction is too strong.
                            BS UML '04, PhD UConn '09

                            Jerseys I would like to have:
                            Skating Friar Jersey
                            AIC Yellowjacket Jersey w/ Yellowjacket logo on front
                            UAF Jersey w/ Polar Bear on Front
                            Army Black Knight logo jersey


                            NCAA Men's Division 1 Simulation Primer

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

                              Originally posted by XCTiger View Post
                              The handful of teams that have won championships over the last decade or so will be the only ones to win in the future. The programs in power will stay in power, with almost no chance for any other programs to grow. Might as well accelerate the contraction of NCAA hockey now........
                              Actually, I think it is it's the opposite. It's important for college hockey's "mealticket" programs to stay strong, as the league tourney revenues from the large fan bases of those schools floats not only the big leagues like the WCHA and CCHA, but the TV visibility of the sport in general. Michigan generates far more eyeballs and brand recognition than Ferris State does. If there is total parity, I think college hockey will be weakened. If the mealticket schools aren't winning and making money, the small schools will suffer far worse fates, as the league revenues dry up and TV visibility drops. That's when you get contraction.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: NCAA Tourney Format Changing?

                                Originally posted by CLS View Post
                                And if you're really bored, you could calculate a ten-year KRACH and PWR. Over 10 years, there might be enough interconference games to make KRACH more meaningful.
                                KRACH from 2002-2010

                                Code:
                                1	Denver U		361.10
                                2	North Dakota		345.00
                                3	Minnesota		337.20
                                4	Boston Coll		331.90
                                5	CO College		328.00
                                6	Michigan		322.80
                                7	New Hampshire		293.20
                                8	Boston Univ		283.10
                                9	Wisconsin		272.90
                                10	Miami		        236.00
                                11	St Cloud		229.40
                                12	Cornell		        215.70
                                13	Mich State		202.70
                                14	Maine		        197.00
                                15	Minn-Duluth		187.80
                                16	MSU-Mankato		179.30
                                17	Notre Dame		163.40
                                18	Vermont		        160.90
                                19	Northern Mich		160.10
                                20	Ohio State		151.50
                                21	Mass-Lowell		131.70
                                22	Mass-Amherst		128.30
                                23	Ferris State		126.60
                                24	NE-Omaha		126.40
                                25	NorthEastern		125.80
                                26	Harvard		        124.10
                                27	AK-Fairbanks		117.50
                                28	Dartmouth		106.40
                                29	St Lawrence		106.30
                                30	Bemidji State		101.40
                                31	Providence		101.20
                                32	Michigan Tech		 97.97
                                33	AK-Anchorage 		 94.07
                                34	Colgate		         91.36
                                35	Yale		         88.27
                                36	Clarkson	         87.78
                                37	Lake Superior		 80.17
                                38	Union		         80.12
                                39	Western Mich		 75.82
                                40	Quinnipiac		 75.75
                                41	Niagara		         70.14
                                42	Princeton		 69.61
                                43	Merrimack		 65.39
                                44	Bowling Green		 65.34
                                45	RPI		         56.42
                                46	Brown		         53.41
                                47	AL-Huntsville		 52.80
                                48	RIT		         43.86
                                49	Robert Morris		 43.47
                                50	Air Force		 38.86
                                51	Mercyhurst		 31.00
                                52	Sacred Heart		 28.00
                                53	Holy Cross		 24.90
                                54	Canisius                 20.53
                                55	Army		         20.12
                                56	Bentley		         18.87
                                57	Connecticut		 14.43
                                58	American Intl		  8.32

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X