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!
Notice I said "or", not "and". The second team in each league could finish outside of the top six in at large rankings. So Harvard, Dartmouth, et al could conceivably be out if Cornell, BU, and UMD took auto bids. Similarly, say Northeastern has a tough time with Maine and BC takes the HEA tourney while someone like Dartmouth gets the ECAC. Given these rankings aren't very static, it wouldn't take a lot to change the picture as we know it.
So, last season there was a question as to Dartmouth deserving to be in the tournament. Many saw UND as the superior club. And they may have been. But I think MOST eventually felt Dartmouth earned their selection.
I wonder if that 43% is higher than normal, because I don't remember it happening much. Of course, when it does happen, the team often moves into the Top 8 in the process, so the event becomes much less memorable.
Harvard beat Brown to earn the auto bid, and if I'm remembering right, the Bears were a little farther down and a win by them would have raised more eyebrows. RPI in 2009 is another one I remember where a team that was on the road the whole way came close.
16-13-1 @ .5500 wining %, RPI rank 12th in a class of 12 @ .5474, TUC record 4-9-1 for TUC % of .3214
That's the way I see it. Wouldn't count them out before they lose in the WCHA tournament...if they lose.
Maybe they're better than some teams ranked above them in the PWR. I don't necessarily buy into that based on the WCHA / strength argument...or buy that it can be assumed they're better than the HE or ECAC teams ranked above them. With the current system / criteria I don't think you could justify their participation without the auto bid. On the home ice...I'd never count them out 'til the final buzzer. Sans an auto bid I can't say they've proven their case.
I'd say that it is a bit of a stretch to equate Maine/QU/PC with BSU and OSU. Maybe I'm biased by having seen the latter two live, and the eastern teams only on webcasts, but BSU was 3-0-1 H2H with that group. Maybe the better record by BC evens the difference out -- two games over .500 versus level. I don't feel that there is much separation between UMD, BSU, and OSU, and I don't see BC as far ahead of that group as RPI does.
It may be two orders of magnitude: BC is a host team, while UMD doesn't even make the field.
Right, I was not intending to equate the groups. Both rankings agree that BSU & OSU are better -- though KRACH thinks BSU & OSU are much better.
Yes, that's precisely the argument I was making. You could also through Princeton into that group instead of the lower-tier group and make BC look a little better, but probably the tie with UNH makes it all a wash.
I'm saying this as a human having watched the teams, not as one looking at the results and trying to analyze them. I realized that by any measure, UMD has had better results. BSU is coming off a road trip where they went to Minneapolis and lost a one-goal game and tied, went to Madison and lost two one-goal games, went to Grand Forks and didn't play the best, but by then I think they were getting worn down, then came home and held UMD to one goal on the weekend. I don't think there are a lot of teams in the country that could do that. So I see UMD as better, but not by very much. I realize we don't design ranking system to mirror human perceptions. Humans aren't bound by fairness doctrines, at least as far as I can tell from reading this particular message board.
BSU actually lost twice to MSU, both by 2-1 scores, once in OT, once when the Mavericks scored twice in 20 seconds. The Beavers don't score much, so they can be very vulnerable over the long haul. MSU is a screwy team. I can't figure out why the Mavs don't have better results, other than they share a league with six teams that are better than them, and a seventh that probably gets up to play them because it is their best chance to win. However, BSU also has some notable advantages in results. It did have a better record than UMD versus Minnesota. Also, BSU didn't lose in non-conference play. Given the performance of the teams, I think going 5-0-1 against PC, Maine, and RMU is more impressive than going 3-1 against BC and UConn. Rankings systems won't agree, but then they rate BC higher than I do. So IMO, UMD is better than BSU, just not by much. As for OSU and UMD, the team that gets better goaltending on that particular day is the better team. Usually, but not always, that is UMD. Both are vulnerable on D, both have some great forwards, just not enough of them.
I admit that I'm biased towards the WCHA; I see about a dozen games played by WCHA teams for every one game I see played by the rest of the country. That does warp my perception.