What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

OnMAA said:
Agree they had a great second half of the season. Win one or two of those early games, and they are probably in the tournament.

This is where Harvard got it done in a different way, they won early and often. They were 16-2 when they got to the meat of their schedule in late January and then played about 500 down the stretch in 9 games against teams in the TUC and this got them in.
Click to expand...
Maybe TUC should be expanded similar to the Men's side to include teams above .500 RPI. Some teams play so few OOC games with most only in their own conference, adding QU, SLU, Dartmouth, OSU, UMD, and SYR this year for TUC comparison would improve/expand the comparisons.
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

mnpokecheck said:
Maybe TUC should be expanded similar to the Men's side to include teams above .500 RPI. Some teams play so few OOC games with most only in their own conference, adding QU, SLU, Dartmouth, OSU, UMD, and SYR this year for TUC comparison would improve/expand the comparisons.
Click to expand...

I don't suppose anyone would have the time to do this out and see who the top 8 would be?
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

NUWH DogHouse said:
I don't suppose anyone would have the time to do this out and see who the top 8 would be?
Click to expand...

Oh for pittance sake!!! give it up already with all the talk of possible ways to determine favorable angles..This goes on every year and it's absolutely pointless
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

myStuff said:
Oh for pittance sake!!! give it up already with all the talk of possible ways to determine favorable angles..This goes on every year and it's absolutely pointless
Click to expand...

Relax. We didn't earn a bid. I was just curious as to what it would look like if they did it like the men's. It would be an interesting look since it takes more info into consideration.
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

mnpokecheck said:
Maybe TUC should be expanded similar to the Men's side to include teams above .500 RPI. Some teams play so few OOC games with most only in their own conference, adding QU, SLU, Dartmouth, OSU, UMD, and SYR this year for TUC comparison would improve/expand the comparisons.
Click to expand...

I'm bored. I might take a crack at it.
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

NUWH DogHouse said:
Relax. We didn't earn a bid. I was just curious as to what it would look like if they did it like the men's. It would be an interesting look since it takes more info into consideration.
Click to expand...

I'm always relaxed..always..it just gets so tiresome to watch all the pointless chatter go on and on and on with every possible mathematical or philosophical reasoning that people can conjure that in essence has nothing to do with "the game"

PS..I am a "hockey fan" so even though I currently hope for the best for MU..I appreciate the skill level and talent of a multitude of players including some from NU
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

myStuff said:
I'm always relaxed..always..it just gets so tiresome to watch all the pointless chatter go on and on and on with every possible mathematical or philosophical reasoning that people can conjure that in essence has nothing to do with "the game"
Click to expand...
Sure, but I wish we didn't have such a mathematically and philosophically flawed selection system, so wouldn't have to waste our time chattering about it. I agree it's tiresome but I disagree that it's pointless.
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

myStuff said:
I'm always relaxed..always..it just gets so tiresome to watch all the pointless chatter go on and on and on with every possible mathematical or philosophical reasoning that people can conjure that in essence has nothing to do with "the game"
Click to expand...
Fine. Start a Mercyhurst at Cornell thread and go talk about hockey while letting others continue on about hockey mathematics.
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

mnpokecheck said:
Maybe TUC should be expanded similar to the Men's side to include teams above .500 RPI. Some teams play so few OOC games with most only in their own conference, adding QU, SLU, Dartmouth, OSU, UMD, and SYR this year for TUC comparison would improve/expand the comparisons.
Click to expand...
Just wanted to point out, the women did used to have the same TUC as the men, but they CONTRACTED it to 12. The way the women's committee operates, with a more careful and less automatic weighting of criteria than the men, it's easier to have a smaller number of teams under consideration.
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

ARM said:
Fine. Start a Mercyhurst at Cornell thread and go talk about hockey while letting others continue on about hockey mathematics.
Click to expand...

awwww...perhaps you should find a different forum all together and just play around with numbers and formulae...then you might be happy..this IS a hockey forum
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

myStuff said:
awwww...perhaps you should find a different forum all together and just play around with numbers and formulae...then you might be happy..this IS a hockey forum
Click to expand...
Which makes discussion of hockey rankings pros, cons, faults and merits perfectly acceptable. If it doesn't interest you don't read it.
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

brookyone said:
Which makes discussion of hockey rankings pros, cons, faults and merits perfectly acceptable. If it doesn't interest you don't read it.
Click to expand...

my point is that hockey ranking discussion is merited, however, it is getting to the point where some people are near the point of justifying a theory based on every possible idiosyncrasy that can be conjured up ... it's not that complicated
 
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

myStuff said:
I'm always relaxed..always..it just gets so tiresome to watch all the pointless chatter go on and on and on with every possible mathematical or philosophical reasoning that people can conjure that in essence has nothing to do with "the game"
Click to expand...

Some contributors to the board are clearly in Spring training. In a few weeks there will be little else to discuss besides pointless chatter, hopeful speculation, what ifs, and whatever, some with a basis in fact, or mathematics, some not;)

It would be a long summer if we couldn't dream.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012-13 D1 Scores and Results

Well put! After all, on this board we (rightly) self-censor one of the spicier staples of Hot Stove League discussion, namely the failings or alleged failings of individual players (for example, notice how the Boston Globe columnists have recently made Carl Crawford, who doesm't even play for the Red Sox any more, the new Billy Buckner). Makes for less saucy (but generally more thoughtful and interesting) on- and off-season discussions on this board. Better to be debating statistical formulas than asserting that Samantha and Amanda, the first D pairing on Poster X's Lady Gerbils, are worse goons, chokers or whatever than even Judy and Trudy, the seldom used mistake-prone oxen on Poster Y's awful Lady Hermit Crabs, which sort of invective is such an integral part of so much sports discussion.

Although I did get in a good two-handed crosscheck on Phil Kessel recently (another mega-target of Boston criticism despite having left the Hub quite awhile ago), on the theory that highly paid 25-year old professionals are fair game for fair or unfair criticism.
 
Last edited:
Watson Rink said:
Well put! After all, on this board we (rightly) self-censor one of the spicier staples of Hot Stove League discussion, namely the failings or alleged failings of individual players (for example, notice how the Boston Globe columnists have recently made Carl Crawford, who doesm't even play for the Red Sox any more, the new Billy Buckner). Makes for less saucy (but generally more thoughtful and interesting) on- and off-season discussions on this board. Better to be debating statistical formulas than asserting that Samantha and Amanda, the first D pairing on Poster X's Lady Gerbils, are worse goons, chokers or whatever than even Judy and Trudy, the seldom used mistake-prone oxen on Poster Y's awful Lady Hermit Crabs, which sort of invective is such an integral part of so much sports discussion.

Although I did get in a good two-handed crosscheck on Phil Kessel recently (another mega-target of Boston criticism despite having left the Hub quite awhile ago), on the theory that highly paid 25-year old professionals are fair game for fair or unfair criticism.
Click to expand...

I now want to win Powerball so I can create a women's program and name them the Lady Hermit Crabs!
 
Lady Hermit Crabs

Lady Hermit Crabs

Have to 'fess up....I stole the name from Veritas, who wrote way back on June 15, 2012: "Note to fans of other colleges: Just a suggestion but note that I included both school name and nickname in the thread name. I did this as I know others will have the same problem I have. I cannot remember all of the team nicknames. I therefore and looking for a thread and cannot decipher "Lady Hermit Crabs" or "Fighting Gerbils" into a connection with a college. I would love it if others would do the same."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top