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 Tournament: Bracketology

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

The BC win really messes up the pairwise.


1 Ferris State (CC) 31
2 Boston Coll (HE) 29
3 Boston Univ (HE) 28
4 Minn-Duluth (WC) 28
5 Michigan (CC) 27
6 Mass-Lowell (HE) 27
7 Denver U (WC) 24
8 Maine (HE) 23
9 Union (EC) 22
10 Northern Mich (CC) 22
11 Merrimack (HE) 21
12 Mich State (CC) 20
13 Miami (CC) 19
14 Minnesota (WC) 18
15 Ohio State (CC) 17
---
16 North Dakota (WC) 17
17 Cornell (EC) 17

We have to avoid a UMD-Minnesota first round game AND we have to protect Ferris State as the overall #1 seed, and sending them to St. Paul to play the Gophers is hardly protecting them.

We could do


Code: 
[B]Bridgeport	Worcester	St. Paul	Green Bay[/B]
Minn-Duluth	Boston Coll	Boston U	Ferris St
Michigan	Denver		Lowell		Maine
Merrimack	Mich State	Northern Mich	Union
Miami		Ohio State	Minnesota	AHA Champ

but that is a total disaster for attendance.

So, since Ferris has to fly anyway...


Code: 
[B]Bridgeport	Worcester	St. Paul	Green Bay[/B]
Ferris St	Boston Coll	Boston U	Minn-Duluth
Maine		Lowell		Denver		Michigan
Union		Northern Mich	Mich State 	Merrimack
AHA Champ	Ohio State	Minnesota	Miami

It would be so much easier if the Gophers either move back up to a #3 seed or fall out altogether!
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Trying to reward as many high seeds as possible (BU is the one who gets screwed as you've already pointed out), I was able to come up with:

St. Paul:

1. BU
2. Michigan
3. Merrimack
4. Minnesota

Green Bay:

1. Ferris State
2. Denver
3. Northern Michigan
4. Air Force

Worcester:

1. BC
2. UML
3. Michigan State
4. Ohio State

Bridgeport:

1. UMD
2. Maine
3. Union
4. Miami
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

I suppose swapping UML and Maine would help my Bridgeport problem.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

J.D. said:
Ya, I just don't see the committee sending the #1 overall seed to St. Paul so they can play Minnesota.
Click to expand...

We had a strong debate about this. The argument that won out was that at what point are you really just protecting the #14 seed? Further, I think if this was Mankato instead of UMTC, hardly anyone would worry about it.

Also, has the #1 overall seed ever played a regional host in the first round? Or, has there ever been a scenario where the #1 seed was moved to avoid having to play a regional host in the first round?
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

gopher wes said:
So you guys have the Gophers making it back to a #2? I'd be happy with that scenario.
Click to expand...

Well, when 2 of the 8 guys on the voting panel are Gopher fans...:p:D:D

In all seriousness, I have Minnesota as a #2 seed in my ballot. They have a favorable schedule down the stretch, and they usually play well at the X, so it is not unthinkable that they will win the MacNaughton, and at least play for the Broadmoor at the Final Five. If they do that, they will rise in the Pairwise.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
We had a strong debate about this. The argument that won out was that at what point are you really just protecting the #14 seed? Further, I think if this was Mankato instead of UMTC, hardly anyone would worry about it.

Also, has the #1 overall seed ever played a regional host in the first round? Or, has there ever been a scenario where the #1 seed was moved to avoid having to play a regional host in the first round?
Click to expand...

That's just it though. It's my understanding Mankato wouldn't have nearly the home crowd advantage as the Gophers in St. Paul. Not sure on your questions. We know there have been #1 seeds that have been "screwed", but I don't know about #1 overall seeds (for an opening round game at least).
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Well, when 2 of the 8 guys on the voting panel are Gopher fans...:p:D:D

In all seriousness, I have Minnesota as a #2 seed in my ballot. They have a favorable schedule down the stretch, and they usually play well at the X, so it is not unthinkable that they will win the MacNaughton, and at least play for the Broadmoor at the Final Five. If they do that, they will rise in the Pairwise.
Click to expand...
Hope you're right. I'm starting to get worried.:mad:

Also, my apologies for the Gophers not holding up their end of the deal. UND got a split at UMD, but the Gophers crapped the bed in Denver. This will be the end of UND/Minnesota deal making, I'm guessing.;) It was a bad idea in the first place.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

J.D. said:
That's just it though. It's my understanding Mankato wouldn't have nearly the home crowd advantage as the Gophers in St. Paul. Not sure on your questions. We know there have been #1 seeds that have been "screwed", but I don't know about #1 overall seeds (for an opening round game at least).
Click to expand...

The big thing for us during our discussions was that we thought the NCAA would want to capitalize on having two Boston #1 seeds out East. That being said, the selection committee has done a pretty good job of not going after serious money grabs when they've had the chance. At this point, it obviously doesn't really matter because these aren't the final pairwise standings, but it is still fun to talk about.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

gopher wes said:
Hope you're right. I'm starting to get worried.:mad:

Also, my apologies for the Gophers not holding up their end of the deal. UND got a split at UMD, but the Gophers crapped the bed in Denver. This will be the end of UND/Minnesota deal making, I'm guessing.;) It was a bad idea in the first place.
Click to expand...

It was disappointing, but it happens. I think Minnesota fans need to realize (and many already do) that the Gophers are not the best team in college hockey this year. They are inconsistent, but have the talent to make a run. If Patterson plays well (something he did not do this past weekend from what I saw), and they get timely scoring they will be alright. I guess my advice would be to enjoy the rest of the season, celebrate the hell out of a MacNaughton or Broadmoor (or both) if they come, and enjoy the NCAA Tournament. Anything can happen, so long as you make the tourney.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
We had a strong debate about this. The argument that won out was that at what point are you really just protecting the #14 seed? Further, I think if this was Mankato instead of UMTC, hardly anyone would worry about it.

Also, has the #1 overall seed ever played a regional host in the first round? Or, has there ever been a scenario where the #1 seed was moved to avoid having to play a regional host in the first round?
Click to expand...

BC (#3 overall) was moved last year to avoid host UNH (also a conference rival). That is the only time a host has been a #4 seed since going to 16 teams.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Priceless said:
BC (#3 overall) was moved last year to avoid host UNH (also a conference rival). That is the only time a host has been a #4 seed since going to 16 teams.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Obviously, that was primarily done to avoid the intra-conference matchup. In 2006, was Minnesota the #1 overall seed, or was Wisconsin?
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
It was disappointing, but it happens. I think Minnesota fans need to realize (and many already do) that the Gophers are not the best team in college hockey this year. They are inconsistent, but have the talent to make a run. If Patterson plays well (something he did not do this past weekend from what I saw), and they get timely scoring they will be alright. I guess my advice would be to enjoy the rest of the season, celebrate the hell out of a MacNaughton or Broadmoor (or both) if they come, and enjoy the NCAA Tournament. Anything can happen, so long as you make the tourney.
Click to expand...
I just want them to make the tourney, that is all I care about. The way they played last weekend, I don't see that happening though. I'll still cheer them on, but they sure are making it tough on themselves.

EDIT: Patterson played ok on Saturday but he sucked on Friday. They need him to be rock solid to succeed right now because they aren't scoring as much as they did early in the year.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Whatever happens in the Springs, the pairwise should look like this


1 Boston Coll (HE)
2 Ferris State (CC)
3 Boston Univ (HE)
4 Minn-Duluth (WC)
5 Michigan (CC)
6 Mass-Lowell (HE)
7 Denver U (WC)
8 Maine (HE)
9 Union (EC)
10 Minnesota (WC)
11 Mich State (CC)
12 Miami (CC)
13 North Dakota (WC)
14 Ohio State (CC)
15 Northern Mich (CC)
---
16 Merrimack (HE)
17 Cornell (EC)

Which gives us


Code: 
[B]Bridgeport	Worcester	St. Paul		Green Bay[/B]
Boston U	Boston Coll	Minn-Duluth		Ferris St
Lowell		Maine		Michigan		Denver
Mich State	Union		Minnesota		Miami
Northern Mich	AHA Champ	Ohio State		North Dakota
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

gopher wes said:
I just want them to make the tourney, that is all I care about. The way they played last weekend, I don't see that happening though.
Click to expand...
They played poorly on Friday but decently on Saturday and deserved better than 0 points on the weekend.

Basing their NCAA hopes on a bad weekend in Denver is a bit much in my view.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Priceless, only difference I have is MSU in Green Bay and Miami in Bridgeport.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top