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 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

The team that clearly has the right to be most furious is Mercyhurst. The criteria suggested they still had a decent argument to host, but instead they ended playing at the top seed.

That said, nobody really thinks Mercyhurst is No. 4. They'll probably 8th-10th in the next USCHO poll when it comes out.

It's almost like this committee picked the field based on the PWR, then arranged everything else based on some combination of geography and KRACH, and then double-checked to make sure they could reverse-engineer the KRACH as some kind of interpretation of the actual criteria.

For what it's worth, I actually like this bracket better than what the straight PWR would've produced. Carry on.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

Some game times:

Sat March 10th: North Dakota @ Minnesota, 4 p.m at Ridder
Sat March 10th: Mercyhurst @ Wisconsin, 7 p.m. at Kohl

I assume these are CT.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

Any chance that Wisconsin and Minnesota are seeded one/two to increas the chance of an all WCHA final, thus increasing attendance?

As for Mercyhurst, they lost any right to complain about a lack of a home game when they lost to Robert Morris in the CHA championship game. Being "seeded" 8 instead of 5 (per the PWR) is going to be a talking point. Hopefully, Coach Sisti will turn it to a positive. You will likely have to beat Wisconsin in order to be champions, you just don't want to try to do that in their own barn. If they had only won on Saturday...
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

I'm not even blinking... WCHA national champs again no question. Gophers on the upswing get thru next sat. my moneys on them
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

LakersFan said:
Any chance that Wisconsin and Minnesota are seeded one/two to increas the chance of an all WCHA final, thus increasing attendance?
Click to expand...
I mean the seed is meaningless except giving Minnesota last change in a potential semi with Cornell. I really don't think that was part of the thinking. I do think you saw a committee with 2 of 4 WCHA members and a WCHA chair have their way in getting the seedings they wanted -- and frankly, which make more sense.

As for Mercyhurst, they lost any right to complain about a lack of a home game when they lost to Robert Morris in the CHA championship game. Being "seeded" 8 instead of 5 (per the PWR) is going to be a talking point. Hopefully, Coach Sisti will turn it to a positive. You will likely have to beat Wisconsin in order to be champions, you just don't want to try to do that in their own barn. If they had only won on Saturday...
Click to expand...
But the thing is nobody who had a shot at home ice this weekend distinguished themselves.

I'm usually the first to shoot-down conspiracy theories, but I think if BC had Mercyhurst swapped profiles, you'd still have BC hosting. I do think the ability to save on travel costs was a factor in the decision of selecting BC to host, and when Mercyhurst lost, the committee was thrilled to have Mercyhurst out of that 4th spot, and they also recognized that few would question that decision since BC had the RPI edge over Mercyhurst.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

Cornell-BU is a 2 p.m. game, and SLU-BC is a 1 p.m. game. All games Saturday.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

dave1381 said:
But the thing is nobody who had a shot at home ice this weekend distinguished themselves.
Click to expand...

This was the most interesting/shocking part of this weekend. Many of the favorites lost.......
......Lets revisit what happened since Friday morning....

Fri : Wisconsin loses to UMD
Fri : Harvard loses to SLU (maybe not an upset, but still a lower seed winning)
Sat: Cornell loses to SLU
Sat: NEU loses to PC
Sat: BC loses to BU (maybe not an upset, but still a lower seed winning)
Sat: MC loses to RMU

The only top end seed to win all their games was Minnesota.

As a result, Harvard and NEU lose out on the NCAA sweep stakes, and MC loses out on home ice and then some

What did the winning teams garner:
- SLU gets to stay reasonably close to home with a matchup at BC. Good reward for them.
( Last time they went to BeanTown they swept thru town with two wins.)
- BU gets to stay reasonably close to home with a matchup at Cornell. Good reward for them.
- UMD, PC and RMU did not make the field, but they sure had an impact on it.

Has there even been a league finals weekend in Women's hockey with this many "upsets". IMHO it is kind off refreshing. Shows the parity and depth in the game compared to the past.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

Saturday Surprise? C'mon. Why isn't there a large story with the bracket on the women's front page? I mean how many people have posted in this forum since the announcement?
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

dave1381 said:
I mean the seed is meaningless except giving Minnesota last change in a potential semi with Cornell. I really don't think that was part of the thinking. I do think you saw a committee with 2 of 4 WCHA members and a WCHA chair have their way in getting the seedings they wanted -- and frankly, which make more sense.


But the thing is nobody who had a shot at home ice this weekend distinguished themselves.

I'm usually the first to shoot-down conspiracy theories, but I think if BC had Mercyhurst swapped profiles, you'd still have BC hosting. I do think the ability to save on travel costs was a factor in the decision of selecting BC to host, and when Mercyhurst lost, the committee was thrilled to have Mercyhurst out of that 4th spot, and they also recognized that few would question that decision since BC had the RPI edge over Mercyhurst.
Click to expand...

[ edit ] n/m, I forgot how silly people are whenever anything vaguely political is mentioned. my bad....
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

I'm just wondering if the UND band will have new jerseys ready for their game on Saturday, given that they were still wearing "Sioux" attire at the WCHA tournament (though, to be fair, that was allowed).
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

CrazyDave said:
I'm just wondering if the UND band will have new jerseys ready for their game on Saturday, given that they were still wearing "Sioux" attire at the WCHA tournament (though, to be fair, that was allowed).
Click to expand...

They have jerseys with no logo on them already. They just put them away and brought the Sioux logo jerseys back when the petition mess went through. So moving along...
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

Ok Joe, it was intuitive to punish Mercyhurst for losing to RMU in the CHA final, and it was convenient that the PWR system pushed Mercyhurst's RPI just below North Dakota's and gave the committee the justification to select BC, even though Mercyhurst won the individual comparison. I agree Mercyhurst clearly was not the 4th or 5th best team in the country, and I don't believe the PWR system penalizes Mercyhurst enough for bad losses. The RPI did penalize Mercyhurst enough, and that's one reason why it makes sense to use the RPI as a tiebreaker when two teams win the same number of comparisons, because the RPI is the one criterion that considers the whole season. I concede.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

GADS!!!!! Quit yer b***n about Mercyhurst University...it's really getting tired
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

mystuff - I think you're confused. I was the one saying Mercyhurst should host based on the criteria in place. Now I think everyone else who was saying they shouldn't had a point. I'm done on this subject.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

dave1381 said:
mystuff - I think you're confused. I was the one saying Mercyhurst should host based on the criteria in place. Now I think everyone else who was saying they shouldn't had a point. I'm done on this subject.
Click to expand...

lol..I am never confused...at no point did I say my comments were directed at you...whining about the CHA Conference has been going on for a long time..It's time to realize the teams in CHA are getting stronger every year
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

I agree it's refreshing to see some parity throughout the nation, and personally, I like the idea of rewarding the conference tournament champions. BU has been on fire, and they get to stay in the east. SLU is 19-2-1, beat #8 and #3 in the country, and get to stay in the east. Meanwhile, Mercyhurst gets punished for losing to Robert Morris. For the first time in recent memory, it seems the committee took who's playing well right now into consideration.

I will say, I'm not sure the BC fans should be so thankful or feel that got an "epic" win by drawing SLU. Having seen Carmen MacDonald play in goal this weekend in Ithaca, she's the real deal. Certainly the game earlier this season was at a semi-neutral site and not on BC's campus, but there aren't many goalies in the country playing better than MacDonald right now, and in this game, sometimes it's all you need.

If nothing else, I think it's a VERY intriguing first round
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Selection Show: March 4th

I have mixed feelings about it. If you want to put more weight on conference tournaments, maybe it should be formally legislated.

I feel like this committee more or less went by the men's book in terms of picking the 8 teams and the 4 hosts. Seeding Minnesota 2nd and sending Mercyhurst to Wisconsin are difficult to justify by the current criteria though.

There may be some good sense in using a very objective system in determining the 8 teams and the 4 hosts, but allowing some more flexibility in terms of determining the pairings. I do find this bracket more appealing than most others in recent years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top