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

J.D. said:
Aren't Sioux fans notorious for flocking to the Final Five/Frozen Four? Why would this be any different? Grand Forks is far closer to St. Paul than Ann Arbor is.
Click to expand...

I would imagine that because the Gophers are the host, they have been buying up most of the tickets knowing that if they make the tourney that is where they will be playing. North Dakota fans on the other hand have to wait until the Sunday before the Tournament to know where they will be playing to buy tickets. It makes logical sense that Gopher fans will outnumber Sioux fans.

The Final Five is a known event/location every year. North Dakota fans can buy tickets to this event months prior knowing that if the Sioux make the Tournament, that they will be playing there. It is extremely different than a regional where fans won't know if the team will be playing there until 5 or 6 days before the event.

As for the Frozen Four, many Sioux fans buy tickets to that regardless if the team makes it or not. That was especially the case last year when many thought the Sioux would make the Frozen Four (and did). Again, the Frozen Four is in one location, and if you make the Frozen Four, you know immediately where you will be playing.

As for distance, North Dakota would have to drive to St Paul, which takes approximately 5 hours by bus. I do not know how long it takes to fly from Ann Arbor to St. Paul, but I would imagine that it takes significantly less than 5 hours. Factor in the time associated with flying, and I would imagine that it is fairly close to 5 hours.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Siouxfaninseattle said:
The forecast has North Dakota as a 3 seed - I think the computer is more optomistic than most of the fans!
Click to expand...

:p:D:D I had UND as a #3 seed on my ballot. A few people had them as high as #2 seeds. If the Sioux can split with Denver, sweep Minnesota State, win their first round series, and perhaps win a game or two at the Final Five, I think they finish somewhere around 10-12...which would be a 3 seed. If they were to win out, they likely get a #2 seed, and I think there is even a small chance of getting a #1...that situation is extremely unlikely though.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

fs23,

How does CHW do its prediction? I see little value in compiling a few guesses and the tabulating them. Also, those 'guesses' seem to leave eastern teams in the east and western teams in the west.

It seems to me that a full up prediction would force all of you voters to put in your predictions of the final pairwise, then tabulate that to make a full 'top-16' which would include some one from AHA, and then someone has to take those top 16 and do a bracketology.

Does CHW actually do that?
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Numbers, it doesn't always work out this way, but if you were to come up with a bracket today...I think you're right in that all four Hockey East entrants would be in the East and Green Bay/St. Paul could be entirely all western teams.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Also, for what it's worth, my current bracketology would go, simply by the book:

1 BC to Worcester, 2 Michigan to Green Bay (this is what the book says to do), 3 UML to Bridgeport, 4 Ferris to St Paul
8 Minnesota to St Paul, 5 UMD with UML to Bridgeport, 6 BU with Michigan to Green Bay, 7 Union with BC to Worcester
9 Maine vs Minnesota, 10 Mich State vs Union, 11 Miami vs BU, 12 Denver vs UMD (whoops, swap Miami and DU)
13 OSU vs Ferris, 14 NoDak vs UML, 15 Cornell vs Michigan, 16 AHA vs BC (whoops, OSU has to play UML, then NoDak v Ferris), and you get:

Worcester: 1) BC vs 16) AHA; 7) Union vs 10) Mich State
Green Bay: 2) Michigan vs 15) Cornell; 6) BU vs 12) Denver
Bridgeport: 3) Lowell vs 13) Ohio State; 5)UMD vs 11) Miami
St Paul: 4) Ferris vs 14) NoDak; 8) Minnesota vs 9) Maine

The Book says to stop right there. There is no need to change anything else, so I don't think the committee would. The only attendance swap that would make sense would be the BU/DU game for the UMD/Miami game to help Bridgeport. It would also help Green Bay, so I would be tempted to do that if it were up to me. Also, the bracket integrity looks better with the Michigan game in St Paul, but the RPI numbers are so close among teams 2 -5 that I don't think that is such a big deal.

I am sure there are contrary opinions. This is just the simplest way... No justifying changes, just 'the rules say it's like this.'
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Book shmook. Attendance and bracket integrity are always taken into consideration. There is no way that would be the bracket.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Numbers said:
fs23,

How does CHW do its prediction? I see little value in compiling a few guesses and the tabulating them. Also, those 'guesses' seem to leave eastern teams in the east and western teams in the west.

It seems to me that a full up prediction would force all of you voters to put in your predictions of the final pairwise, then tabulate that to make a full 'top-16' which would include some one from AHA, and then someone has to take those top 16 and do a bracketology.

Does CHW actually do that?
Click to expand...

Not quite as complicated as that, but pretty close. There are 8 of us, and we each have a ballot. We vote for #1, #2, #3, and #4 seeds. For example, if BU gets four #1 seed votes and four #2 seed votes, they would accumulate 28 points (4 points x 4 #1 votes, 3 points x 4 #2 votes). We then rank teams #1-16 based on how many points they received during the ballot process. We make sure that 1 team from each conference is in our top 16, and then we do a bracketology from there, where the top 4 point-getters are #1 seeds, next 4 #2 and so on. Different people have different strategies I suppose, but I always vote for how I think the final pairwise will wind up.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Numbers said:
Also, for what it's worth, my current bracketology would go, simply by the book:

1 BC to Worcester, 2 Michigan to Green Bay (this is what the book says to do), 3 UML to Bridgeport, 4 Ferris to St Paul
8 Minnesota to St Paul, 5 UMD with UML to Bridgeport, 6 BU with Michigan to Green Bay, 7 Union with BC to Worcester
9 Maine vs Minnesota, 10 Mich State vs Union, 11 Miami vs BU, 12 Denver vs UMD (whoops, swap Miami and DU)
13 OSU vs Ferris, 14 NoDak vs UML, 15 Cornell vs Michigan, 16 AHA vs BC (whoops, OSU has to play UML, then NoDak v Ferris), and you get:

Worcester: 1) BC vs 16) AHA; 7) Union vs 10) Mich State
Green Bay: 2) Michigan vs 15) Cornell; 6) BU vs 12) Denver
Bridgeport: 3) Lowell vs 13) Ohio State; 5)UMD vs 11) Miami
St Paul: 4) Ferris vs 14) NoDak; 8) Minnesota vs 9) Maine

The Book says to stop right there. There is no need to change anything else, so I don't think the committee would. The only attendance swap that would make sense would be the BU/DU game for the UMD/Miami game to help Bridgeport. It would also help Green Bay, so I would be tempted to do that if it were up to me. Also, the bracket integrity looks better with the Michigan game in St Paul, but the RPI numbers are so close among teams 2 -5 that I don't think that is such a big deal.

I am sure there are contrary opinions. This is just the simplest way... No justifying changes, just 'the rules say it's like this.'
Click to expand...

The book would go out the window early in the process because the #2 overall seed is flying anyway, so the "close to home" rule need not apply. Michigan can go to any region except Worcester because that's where #1 Boston College goes. If Michigan is the #1 seed, it can go anywhere.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

With that being said, I think it's obvious Michigan would be in either Green Bay or St. Paul. Priceless, I agree with you that the committee would go against having the "worst" #1 seed in Ferris State being paired with the worst #2 seed in Minnesota.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Book shmook. Attendance and bracket integrity are always taken into consideration. There is no way that would be the bracket.

I agree. It's almost impossible to create a tournament that has both bracket integrity and decent attendance at all sites. The chances of the 16 teams being ranked at the end of the season in such a way that both issues would be satisfied are remote at best. There will always be one or more teams that will be affected negatively in terms of it's travel or it's regional opponents. From the NCAA's point of view - you can't please everybody. I think it's only the fans and supporters that get would up over this - I'll bet that the players on the 16 teams that make the tournament wouldn't care where they start their path to the Frozen Four.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
It would definitely not be another road game. I would imagine that travel time would be relatively close for each of the two schools. North Dakota would probably have more fans there, but I think you are overestimating how many Sioux fans would actually be there compared with how many Gopher fans would be there rooting against the Sioux.
Click to expand...

I think you underestimate how much we dislike the both of you. :D
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Priceless said:
The book would go out the window early in the process because the #2 overall seed is flying anyway, so the "close to home" rule need not apply. Michigan can go to any region except Worcester because that's where #1 Boston College goes. If Michigan is the #1 seed, it can go anywhere.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Priceless. In my mind I was thinking Grand Rapids, not Green Bay. So, I have 2 more questions. First, who are the committee members? I mean, I could look that up, but the issue is not 'who' specifically, but whether it is the same as last year. Then, second, who is hosting at Green Bay?

Thanks.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Numbers said:
Also, for what it's worth, my current bracketology would go, simply by the book:

1 BC to Worcester, 2 Michigan to Green Bay (this is what the book says to do), 3 UML to Bridgeport, 4 Ferris to St Paul
8 Minnesota to St Paul, 5 UMD with UML to Bridgeport, 6 BU with Michigan to Green Bay, 7 Union with BC to Worcester
9 Maine vs Minnesota, 10 Mich State vs Union, 11 Miami vs BU, 12 Denver vs UMD (whoops, swap Miami and DU)
13 OSU vs Ferris, 14 NoDak vs UML, 15 Cornell vs Michigan, 16 AHA vs BC (whoops, OSU has to play UML, then NoDak v Ferris), and you get:

Worcester: 1) BC vs 16) AHA; 7) Union vs 10) Mich State
Green Bay: 2) Michigan vs 15) Cornell; 6) BU vs 12) Denver
Bridgeport: 3) Lowell vs 13) Ohio State; 5)UMD vs 11) Miami
St Paul: 4) Ferris vs 14) NoDak; 8) Minnesota vs 9) Maine

The Book says to stop right there. There is no need to change anything else, so I don't think the committee would. The only attendance swap that would make sense would be the BU/DU game for the UMD/Miami game to help Bridgeport. It would also help Green Bay, so I would be tempted to do that if it were up to me. Also, the bracket integrity looks better with the Michigan game in St Paul, but the RPI numbers are so close among teams 2 -5 that I don't think that is such a big deal.

I am sure there are contrary opinions. This is just the simplest way... No justifying changes, just 'the rules say it's like this.'
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it make more sense for attendance/fairness if it was this way?

Worcester: 1) BC vs 16) AHA; 7) Union vs 9) Maine
Green Bay: 2) Michigan vs 15) Cornell; 8) Minnesota vs 10) Mich State
Bridgeport: 3) Lowell vs 13) Ohio State; 6) BU vs 12) Denver
St Paul: 4) Ferris vs 14) NoDak; 5) UMD vs 11) Miami

I know Minnesota is hosting St Paul but it doesn't make sense to pair up #2 Michigan with #5 UMD and Green Bay is only 4 hours away — if you're a fan you can make the trip easy.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

ajh258 said:
Wouldn't it make more sense for attendance/fairness if it was this way?

Worcester: 1) BC vs 16) AHA; 7) Union vs 9) Maine
Green Bay: 2) Michigan vs 15) Cornell; 8) Minnesota vs 10) Mich State
Bridgeport: 3) Lowell vs 13) Ohio State; 6) BU vs 12) Denver
St Paul: 4) Ferris vs 14) NoDak; 5) UMD vs 11) Miami

I know Minnesota is hosting St Paul but it doesn't make sense to pair up #2 Michigan with #5 UMD and Green Bay is only 4 hours away — if you're a fan you can make the trip easy.
Click to expand...

This literally can't happen. Swap the Green Bay region for the St Paul region, and you have a likely scenario, too. Although, it is interesting that the Michigan fans would absolutely scream about Michigan being assigned to St Paul. Far more so, than the Michigan fans would scream about Ferris going to St Paul, and Michigan being assigned to GB, with UMD.
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Slap Shot said:
I think you underestimate how much we dislike the both of you. :D
Click to expand...

If it makes you feel any better, the feeling is quite mutual. A Michigan-Minnesota-North Dakota Regional would be a three-way of hate. The other team would feel awkward having to watch. :p:D:D
 
Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Numbers said:
This literally can't happen. Swap the Green Bay region for the St Paul region, and you have a likely scenario, too. Although, it is interesting that the Michigan fans would absolutely scream about Michigan being assigned to St Paul. Far more so, than the Michigan fans would scream about Ferris going to St Paul, and Michigan being assigned to GB, with UMD.
Click to expand...
Of course I can't speak for all Michigan fans, for me this is nothing to 'scream' about. For the last 20, 21 years Michigan is more likely to face off against the WCHA in the NCAA's than any other team in Div 1. Last year we had to run a 4 team WCHA gauntlet to win the NC. We were 3 out of 4, a .750 win percentage vs the WCHA was good, but not good enough. I think our overall record vs the WCHA during those 20 years is a respectable .600. Considering that Union creamed us this season, I don't see anyone in the top 15 that is a gimme. We've played UND at the Ralph and at the Xcel, I prefer the Xcel. We've played UNH at the Verizon in Manchester. We've played BC at the Fleet Center. We've played Minnesota at the Xcel (I don't think we've ever faced the gophers at Mariucci during the NCAA's) I get the feeling that playing in front of other teams home crowds doesn't intimidate Michigan as much as it must other schools.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top