Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

    Originally posted by Sean Pickett View Post
    From Spalding’s Official Ice Hockey Guide for 1929-30

    National Rankings of Collegiate Teams, 1928-29
    By Theodore Mills Tonnele (Princeton)

    As the result of a number of years’ study of the ranking of college athletic teams, the writer has concluded that a pragmatic formula may be devised for any sport, which upon application to any group of teams, will result in a surprisingly sound ranking of them.

    A formula worked out for, and applied to, the collegiate hockey teams throughout the country, gives the following ranking this past season:

    A TEAMS
    Ranking Order – Team – Index No.
    1. Eveleth Junior College (19.00)
    2. Yale (16.60)
    3. Minnesota (16.08)
    4. Clarkson (14.00)
    5. Dartmouth (11.44)
    6. Harvard (10.38)
    7. Marquette (9.55)
    8. Princeton (9.50)
    9. Wisconsin (6.33)
    10. Michigan (4.36)

    The index number of each team gives the ranking position of the team as to all other teams. It does not indicate the degree of superiority of any team over any other team. Thus, an index number of 6 shows that the team is stronger than any having a smaller index number, but it does not in any way indicate that a the team is twice as strong as one with an index number of 3. Moreover, in view of the vagaries of competitive sport, the index number manifestly does not show that a team is bound to defeat one having a lower index number, or even that it has defeated all teams of lower index numbers which it met during the course of the past season.

    The index number is the result of applying a general formula for measuring the strength of a team, to the record of the particular team during the season.

    The determination of the formula involves three steps – a broad classification of the teams, a measurement of the relative performance of each team against others teams, and a proper weighting of the differences in performance.

    A study of the records of the forty-seven teams to be ranked, shows that they fall naturally into three well-defined groups, one of which may be divided into two sub-groups. These groups may be described as (A), the extremely good teams; (B), the ordinarily good teams, including (B1), the better of the B teams, and (B2), the merely fairly good teams; and (C), all the other teams.

    A distinctive feature of each class for the past season, is that no C team defeated an A or B team, and no B team defeated an A team.

    Having made this general classification, it becomes necessary, in order to rank the teams within each class, to measure the relative performance of the teams in the class as against the same opponents or against different opponents of equal caliber. A scale of five divisions, representing the varying degrees of victory or loss, proves itself sufficiently accurate in measurement to differentiate in the performance of teams in games within their own class, and avoids undue refinement so that the divisions are sufficiently distinct for the division within which the performance of a team falls to immediately apparent. These five divisions of performance are (1) decisively winning, (2) barely winning, (3) tieing, (4) barely losing, and (5) decisively losing (abbreviated “dw”, “bw”, “t”, “bl”, “dl”, respectively). It appears that in hockey, a difference of two goals constitutes a decisive victory for the winner, and correspondingly, a decisive loss for the loser.

    In dealing with the performance of teams in games with teams of a different class, no debit is given for losing to a team of a higher class, nor any credit for defeating a team of a lower class, except in certain cases of a B team decisively defeating a C team. The same credit is given for defeating a team of a higher class, as a team in that class would receive, and the same debit, for losing to a team of lower class, as a team in the lower class would receive.

    It remains only to give the proper relative weight to these varying degrees of performance. This is done by giving a number of points credit or debit, properly graduated to the divisions of the measuring scale. The following are found empirically to be substantially correct figures for the purpose, and their determination results in the completed formula
    Code:
    dw.			+19	dw.			+4	dw.			+ 3½ 
    bw.			+18	bw.			+3	bw.			+ 2½ 
    t.	an A team	+14	t.	a B1 team	+2	t.	a B2 team	+ 1½ 
    bl.			+ 5	bl.			-2½	bl.			-3
    dl.			  0	dl.			-3½	dl.			-4
    A credit of 1 is given to a B team for decisively winning from a C team if the ranking of the B team is helped by doing so.

    In view of the variation in the play of many club teams during a season, and in almost from one game to another, and in the difficulty of classifying club teams, games with club teams are ignored. On the other hand, practically all Canadian college teams are Class A teams, and games with them are rated accordingly.

    A team’s performance in each of its games with other college teams is rated in accordance with the foregoing table; the points are totaled and the sum is divided by number of games so rated. This yields a quotient which is the index number of the team’s comparative ranking. For illustration, Williams’ record, works out as follows:

    dw. Amherst, B2 team +3½
    dw. Amherst, B2 team +3½
    bl. Amherst, B2 team -3
    dw. West Point, C team – (no advantage to include)
    bw. Amherst, B2 team +2½
    bw. Amherst, B2 team 2 ½
    bw. Mass. Agri., B2 team, +2½
    bl. Cornell, B1 team -2½
    dw. Pennsylvania, C team – (no advantage to include)
    dl. Princeton, A team – (not included)
    bl. Middlebury, B1 team -2½
    bl. Princeton, A team +5
    dw. Union, B2 team +3½
    Net total +15
    Divided by number of games 10
    Index number of rating +1.5


    Here is Eveleth Junior College’s record taken from the Guide:
    dw. Hibbing Junior Coll., C team – (not included)
    dw. Marquette Univ., A team +19
    dw. Marquette Univ. A team, +19
    dw. Duluth Central H.S. – (not included)
    dw. Hibbing Junior Coll., C team – (not included)
    t. Virginia City Team, club – (not included)
    dw. Duluth Junior Coll., C team – (not included)
    dw. Fort Frances Leafs (Ontario), club – (not included)
    dw. Michigan Tech, B team – (not included)
    dw. Duluth Central H.S. – (not included)
    dw. Hibbing Junior Coll., C team – (not included)
    dw. Michigan Tech, B team – (not included)
    dw. Univ. of Wisconsin, A team +19
    bw. St. Mary’s College (Minn), B team – (not included)
    dw. Virginia City Team, club – (not included)
    dw. Michigan Tech, B team – (not included)
    dw. Duluth Junior Coll., C team – (not included)
    bw. Eveleth H.S. – (not included)
    dw. Fort Frances Leafs (Ontario), club – (not included)
    Net total +57
    Divided by number of games 3
    Index number of rating +19

    The second place team in this ranking, Yale, played 10 A teams, 3 dw, 5 bw, 1 t and 1 bl. Who do you think was actually the better team in 1928-29?

    Sean
    Sean,

    Thanks for posting the above info. Can you imagine the battles over which teams would be A, B, and C today? A huge amount of work had to be done to get those rankings.
    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX


    The reason for the talent in the west? Because MN didn't rely on Canada.

    Originally posted by MN Pond Hockey
    Menards could have sold a lot of rope

    this morning in Grand Forks if North Dakota had trees.

    Comment


    • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

      Originally posted by Sean Pickett View Post
      From Spalding’s Official Ice Hockey Rules for 1940-41:

      A.A.U. National Championship

      The national hockey championships of the Amateur Athletic Union were held under the auspices of the Adirondack Association of the A.A.U. and the North Elba Park District of Lake Placid at the Olympic Arena, Lake Placid, N.Y., March 1, 2 and 3, 1940. Edward W. Stanley, Clinton, N.Y., was in charge of the games.

      One entry is allowed in the tournament from each Association of the A.A.U., except for the host association, which is allowed two entries. Players must be registered in the A.A.U. before February 1st to be eligible to participate.

      Six teams entered. In the first round the Clinton (N.Y.) Hockey Club defeated the Short Hills (N.J.) Hockey Club, 5-0, and the Brock-Hall club of New Haven, Conn., defeated the Massena Stars of Massena, N.Y., 5-4. University of Minnesota and the Amesbury (Mass.) Maple Leafs drew byes in the preliminary round.

      In the semi-finals Brock-Hall defeated Clinton, 9-6, and Minnesota defeated Amesbury, 9-4. Minnesota defeated Brock-Hall in the finals, 9-1, thereby becoming A.A.U. national champion.


      That's all I have.

      Sean
      Very cool. I knew that the Amesbury that they were talking about was in Mass., but I had never heard that they were the Maple Leafs.
      North Dakota
      National Champions: 1959, 1963, 1980, 1982, 1987, 1997, 2000, 2016

      Comment


      • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

        Originally posted by Happy View Post
        Thanks for posting the above info. Can you imagine the battles over which teams would be A, B, and C today? A huge amount of work had to be done to get those rankings.
        Unfortunately the rankings were incomplete as at least one team, Boston University, was not ranked. This shows how hard it was to get complete information at that time, let alone today. I mention BU because that is an obvious team for me to notice missing from the rankings, but there may be others.

        As for placing teams in the three groups, I have no idea how it was done, but if I want to add BU they have to fall into the B1 subgroup as they only played one A team and lost decisively which would give them an index of 0. However, they played and decisively defeated 9 B teams, but as 2 were B2 teams, they would have received an index of 3.88.

        Another problem is Boston College, which is ranked as a B1 team, yet played and lost to 7 A teams (4 US and three Canadian), twice barely losing. So what makes BC a B1 team and not an A team? Rating them as both an A and a B1 team it is apparent that BC, like BU, receives a higher rating as a lower level team. However, BC is also problematical, as the 2 decisive losses to BU are not counted. Ranking BU badly hurts BC whether they are an A team or a B1 team. Furthermore, their schedule is not included in the guide and I'm not able to make their index equal 4.00, as give in the guide, using the results from the BC media guide. Below are the ratings for BC as an A and B1 team, with and without BU:
        Code:
        BC Results                       as ranked       as ranked w/BU  as A team       as A team w/BU
        dl. Dartmouth, A team            –               –               0               0
        dl. Loyola (Montreal), A team    –               –               0               0
        dl. Dartmouth, A team            –               –               0               0
        dw. Pennsylvania, C team         –               –               –               –
        bl. Princeton, A team            +5              +5              +5              +5
        dl. Boston University, B1 team   –               -3.5            –               -3.5
        dw. Holy Cross, B2 team          +3.5            +3.5            –               –
        dl. Boston University, B1 team   –               -3.5            –               -3.5
        dw. Pennsylvania, C team         –               –               –               –
        dl. Yale, A team                 –               –               0               0
        dl. Loyola (Montreal), A team    –               –               0               0
        bl. Sherbrooke (Quebec), A team  +5              +5              +5              +5
        dw. Holy Cross, B2 team          +3.5            +3.5            –               –
        
        Net total                        +17             +10             +10             +3
        Divided by number of games       4               6               7               9
        Index number of rating           +4.25           +1.67           +1.43           +0.33
        So this rating system is incomplete to say the least.

        Sean
        Women's Hockey East Champions 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2010
        Men's NCAA Champions 2009, 1995, 1978, 1972, 1971

        BU Hockey Games
        BU Hockey highlights and extras
        NCAA Hockey Financials
        Women's Division I Longest Hockey Games
        I need a kidney; looking for a donor

        Comment


        • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

          Sean,

          do you have rankings for other years, etc?
          XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX


          The reason for the talent in the west? Because MN didn't rely on Canada.

          Originally posted by MN Pond Hockey
          Menards could have sold a lot of rope

          this morning in Grand Forks if North Dakota had trees.

          Comment


          • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

            And the Top 3...

            Michigan
            2009-2010 Final Ranking: 1
            2009-2010 Final Points: 475.5292
            2010-2011 Points Earned: 15.8631
            2010-2011 Final Points: 491.3923
            Percent Change: +3.34%

            2010-2011 Final Ranking: 1

            North Dakota
            2009-2010 Final Ranking: 2
            2009-2010 Final Points: 414.1636
            2010-2011 Points Earned: 21.997
            2010-2011 Final Points: 436.1606
            Percent Change: +5.31%

            2010-2011 Final Ranking: 2

            Minnesota
            2009-2010 Final Ranking: 3
            2009-2010 Final Points: 397.684
            2010-2011 Points Earned: 5.6731
            2010-2011 Final Points: 403.3571
            Percent Change: +1.43%

            2010-2011 Final Ranking: 3
            North Dakota
            National Champions: 1959, 1963, 1980, 1982, 1987, 1997, 2000, 2016

            Comment


            • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

              And here is where things stand after the 2010-2011 season...

              *****http://www.undhockey.net/programsat.jpg******

              I am working on an "update" of sorts to show where things stood after the 1999-2000 season per a request. I will post that as soon as it is done. Other than that, we wait until next season to see what changes lie ahead. Thanks for all the support with this, and I hope it spurs a lot of discussion, especially historically.
              North Dakota
              National Champions: 1959, 1963, 1980, 1982, 1987, 1997, 2000, 2016

              Comment


              • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

                Originally posted by Fighting Sioux 23 View Post
                And here is where things stand after the 2010-2011 season...
                Excellent work! I've enjoyed following this thread and even learned a few things about the history of the sport.
                Quinnipiac Bobcats
                2023 National Champions
                ECAC Regular Season Champions: 2012-13, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24
                ECAC Tournament Champions: 2016
                East Regional: 2013 (Champions), 2014, 2016 (Champions), 2023 (Champions), 2024
                Northeast Regional:
                West Regional: 2015, 2021
                Midwest Regional: 2019, 2022
                Frozen Four: 2013, 2016, 2023 (Champions)

                Pass complete. Lipkin has a man in front! Shot... SCORE!!!

                Comment


                • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

                  The Official Ice Hockey Guides have Tonnele's rankings from the 1928-29 season through the 1932-33 season. He added a three season composite ranking starting with the 1930-31 season through the 1932-33 season.

                  Sean
                  Women's Hockey East Champions 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2010
                  Men's NCAA Champions 2009, 1995, 1978, 1972, 1971

                  BU Hockey Games
                  BU Hockey highlights and extras
                  NCAA Hockey Financials
                  Women's Division I Longest Hockey Games
                  I need a kidney; looking for a donor

                  Comment


                  • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

                    Originally posted by Fighting Sioux 23 View Post
                    And here is where things stand after the 2010-2011 season...

                    *****http://www.undhockey.net/programsat.jpg******

                    I am working on an "update" of sorts to show where things stood after the 1999-2000 season per a request. I will post that as soon as it is done. Other than that, we wait until next season to see what changes lie ahead. Thanks for all the support with this, and I hope it spurs a lot of discussion, especially historically.
                    If Dean Blais sticks around at UNO, I don't think they'll be stuck at #45 very long.

                    Great piece of work on this thread, FS23.

                    Comment


                    • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

                      Originally posted by Red Cows View Post
                      If Dean Blais sticks around at UNO, I don't think they'll be stuck at #45 very long.

                      Great piece of work on this thread, FS23.
                      Thanks.

                      I wouldn't think they would sit at #45 for too long if Blais sticks around. They moved up three places this past season. If they have a similar type year next year, they would be prime for a push into the top 40. If they were to make the Frozen Four, they would probably jump into the low 30s. If they were to win it all, I would guess they would be somewhere in the top half, probably mid 20s.
                      North Dakota
                      National Champions: 1959, 1963, 1980, 1982, 1987, 1997, 2000, 2016

                      Comment


                      • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

                        I was curious about what conference titles you credited teams with. Was credit given for Great West titles, or Tri-State and Ivy League titles before the formation of the ECAC? Also, I know teams in the CCHA won NAIA titles, so at what point did you start to consider the CCHA a division 1 conference and start crediting their conference titles?
                        SCSU Hockey: 2001 WCHA Playoff Champions, 2013 WCHA Champions & Frozen Four, 2014 NCHC Champions, 2016 NCHC Playoff Champions
                        UMD Women: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, 2010
                        Gopher Football: 1934, 1935, 1936, 1940, 1941, 1960
                        Johnnie Football: 1963, 1965, 1976, 2003
                        UMD Football: 2008, 2010
                        UMD Men: 2011

                        Comment


                        • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

                          Originally posted by HumRsky View Post
                          I was curious about what conference titles you credited teams with. Was credit given for Great West titles, or Tri-State and Ivy League titles before the formation of the ECAC? Also, I know teams in the CCHA won NAIA titles, so at what point did you start to consider the CCHA a division 1 conference and start crediting their conference titles?
                          Or the New England Intercollegiate Hockey League, Intercollegiate Ice Hockey Association of America, Big Ten/Western Conference (I wonder if the revived one will include records from the first one) or International Intercollegiate Hockey League?

                          Sean
                          Women's Hockey East Champions 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2010
                          Men's NCAA Champions 2009, 1995, 1978, 1972, 1971

                          BU Hockey Games
                          BU Hockey highlights and extras
                          NCAA Hockey Financials
                          Women's Division I Longest Hockey Games
                          I need a kidney; looking for a donor

                          Comment


                          • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

                            Originally posted by HumRsky View Post
                            I was curious about what conference titles you credited teams with. Was credit given for Great West titles, or Tri-State and Ivy League titles before the formation of the ECAC? Also, I know teams in the CCHA won NAIA titles, so at what point did you start to consider the CCHA a division 1 conference and start crediting their conference titles?
                            All of the "defunct" conferences were counted (although, I have not ranked defunct programs), so yes to the Great West (along with CHA and MAAC). As for the Tri-State League, anything prior to the formation of the ECAC was counted. As for the Ivy League (or Quadrangular League, or Pentagonal League (w/Army)), it was counted (along with the Big Ten from pre-WCHA days) up until the ECAC was formed. As for the CCHA, I counted everything from its inception, as it has always been a D-1 Conference. I hope that answers those questions for you.
                            North Dakota
                            National Champions: 1959, 1963, 1980, 1982, 1987, 1997, 2000, 2016

                            Comment


                            • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

                              Originally posted by Sean Pickett View Post
                              Or the New England Intercollegiate Hockey League, Intercollegiate Ice Hockey Association of America, Big Ten/Western Conference (I wonder if the revived one will include records from the first one) or International Intercollegiate Hockey League?

                              Sean
                              NEIHL yes, Big Ten yes, the others...no. I've honestly never heard of the International Intercollegiate Hockey League.

                              EDIT: After doing a little bit of research, it looks as though the International Intercollegiate Hockey League (IIHL from now on) was basically the Ivies and some Canadian schools (I could be wrong, I've done minimal research). I don't know the years that the IIHL played, but it looks it at least partially overlapped with the Ivy League. Either way, the IIHL was not counted, nor will it count. Perhaps this could be revisited if the day ever comes when a Canadian School joins the NCAA and D-1 hockey.
                              Last edited by Fighting Sioux 23; 05-03-2011, 11:08 PM.
                              North Dakota
                              National Champions: 1959, 1963, 1980, 1982, 1987, 1997, 2000, 2016

                              Comment


                              • Re: The Greatest Programs of All-Time: #1 - #58

                                It does answer my question, thanks. It brought up an additional question though...were teams able to compete in both the NCAA and NAIA in those days? Or, more specifically, why was CCHA member Lake State winning NAIA titles if they were in a NCAA D1 conference?
                                SCSU Hockey: 2001 WCHA Playoff Champions, 2013 WCHA Champions & Frozen Four, 2014 NCHC Champions, 2016 NCHC Playoff Champions
                                UMD Women: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, 2010
                                Gopher Football: 1934, 1935, 1936, 1940, 1941, 1960
                                Johnnie Football: 1963, 1965, 1976, 2003
                                UMD Football: 2008, 2010
                                UMD Men: 2011

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X