2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

[northhockey]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

If UND wins the WCHA and BC wins Hockey East, then they'd probably just replace the bottom team in the bracket and end up at Minnesota again. Ironic that Minnesota's reward as #1 seed would be playing the only team to beat them twice in that scenario, but such is the bad system.

The only way UND wouldn't be the lowest rank team is if BC fails to win Hockey East. UND would clearly be better than the Hockey East champ in the PWR. In that scenario, I'd hope Minnesota would get the Hockey East champ, then UND vs. Wisconsin, and then some combo of BC and the three ECAC teams playing each other. But the committee could see UND vs. Minnesota, Hockey East champ at ECAC champ, ECAC #3 at Wisconsin, ECAC #2 vs. BC as the way to minimize travel.

UND was 1-4 against Minnesota* but thats relatively good. To get in the NCAA's, UND would most like have to beat UW than UM, so does that in itself give them any way to move up to 7th?

 

[ARM]

Ironic that Minnesota's reward as #1 seed would be playing the only team to beat them twice in that scenario, but such is the bad system.

I don't have a problem with Minnesota having to play a team that just defeated the Gophers when they are at the bottom of the list. What I don't like is the situation like last year where the reward for going 5-0 versus an opponent is to play it again a week later for all the marbles.

UND was 1-4 against Minnesota* but thats relatively good. To get in the NCAA's, UND would most like have to beat UW than UM, so does that in itself give them any way to move up to 7th?

I don't think it matters. The first objective will be to save the flight, so if you win the WCHA, see you in Minneapolis. It's too bad, because I believe it is much better for the sport to create rare match ups like the Gophers hosting Mercyhurst or RMU, but what can you do?

 

[dave1381]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

I don't think it matters. The first objective will be to save the flight, so if you win the WCHA, see you in Minneapolis. It's too bad, because I believe it is much better for the sport to create rare match ups like the Gophers hosting Mercyhurst or RMU, but what can you do?

I don't know if I've made this point before, but my understanding of the history is that in 2007, there was a strong negative reaction from coaches to the No. 6 Harvard @ No. 1 Wisconsin matchup, and the NCAA got the message that it was okay for them not to worry so much about avoiding intraconference quarterfinals and it should worry more about bracket integrity instead. This was a terrible, short-sighted reaction from the coaches, not recognizing how the NCAA would then abuse this message. The NCAA has then taken this view to an extreme such that year-after-year of intra-WCHA quarterfinals are just fine, and it's terrible for the tournament.

The women's hockey tournament should somehow find a way to get more money. The NCAA uniform standard for fully-seeded tournaments is a tournament's profitability, but the D-I hockey is the only sport where there's a fully seeded tournament for men and mediocrity for the women. Women's hockey has a strong case to deserve more equitable treatment. We are worst-case scenario talking about 2 or 3 flights instead 1. I don't think it'd be worth the hassle for the NCAA to fight this if there were enough pressure.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

The women's hockey tournament should somehow find a way to get more money.

When they find some see if they can send some of it my way.

Women's hockey has a strong case to deserve more equitable treatment. We are worst-case scenario talking about 2 or 3 flights instead 1. I don't think it'd be worth the hassle for the NCAA to fight this if there were enough pressure.

Really good point.

 

[brookyone]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

I don't know if I've made this point before, but my understanding of the history is that in 2007, there was a strong negative reaction from coaches to the No. 6 Harvard @ No. 1 Wisconsin matchup, and the NCAA got the message that it was okay for them not to worry so much about avoiding intraconference quarterfinals and it should worry more about bracket integrity instead. This was a terrible, short-sighted reaction from the coaches, not recognizing how the NCAA would then abuse this message. The NCAA has then taken this view to an extreme such that year-after-year of intra-WCHA quarterfinals are just fine, and it's terrible for the tournament.

The women's hockey tournament should somehow find a way to get more money. The NCAA uniform standard for fully-seeded tournaments is a tournament's profitability, but the D-I hockey is the only sport where there's a fully seeded tournament for men and mediocrity for the women. Women's hockey has a strong case to deserve more equitable treatment. We are worst-case scenario talking about 2 or 3 flights instead 1. I don't think it'd be worth the hassle for the NCAA to fight this if there were enough pressure.

Well I just had to say THIS!

 

[Timothy A]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

IThe women's hockey tournament should somehow find a way to get more money. The NCAA uniform standard for fully-seeded tournaments is a tournament's profitability...

The profitability issue as defined by the NC$$ is total BS. The money they make off FB and BB can easily pay for every tournament at every level and still allow Mr. Emmerick to be paid a rich salary. I'd love to see the NC$$'s books.

 

[Skate79]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

I don't know if I've made this point before, but my understanding of the history is that in 2007, there was a strong negative reaction from coaches to the No. 6 Harvard @ No. 1 Wisconsin matchup, and the NCAA got the message that it was okay for them not to worry so much about avoiding intraconference quarterfinals and it should worry more about bracket integrity instead. This was a terrible, short-sighted reaction from the coaches, not recognizing how the NCAA would then abuse this message. The NCAA has then taken this view to an extreme such that year-after-year of intra-WCHA quarterfinals are just fine, and it's terrible for the tournament.

Especially when you consider what transpired in that game. I couldn't pull myself away from listening to the broadcast; it was that compelling. How the NCAA fails to see that match ups such as these are good for the game are beyond me. Oh right, it's about the money stupid. :roll eyes:

I would go even further Dave and say that the constant intraconference match ups do more harm than good. I'm tired of seeing Harvard go up against ECAC foes in the NCAA quarters; in fact, I'm not all that thrilled with facing BC or BU because we sometimes see them twice a year during the regular season (I'm including the Beanpot here). Given the choice, I'll take a matchup with HE over the ECAC. For the good of the sport, I agree with you that more money should be allocated to the women and that flights should not be a determining factor. What would really be cool is to have regional sites where you could see two games for the price of one thus negating somewhat the home ice factor for perhaps more attendance?

 

[mnpokecheck]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

The profitability issue as defined by the NC$$ is total BS. The money they make off FB and BB can easily pay for every tournament at every level and still allow Mr. Emmerick to be paid a rich salary. I'd love to see the NC$$'s books.

NCAA: Where does the money go?
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6756472/following-ncaa-money

If the NCAA membership wanted to they could, but it appears they prefer to have the money flows back to its membership.

 

[Numbers]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

Regional sites are going to be a hard pull in the west. Yeah, it's 2 games, not one, but it's still not likely that any one travels incredibly well, unless you have MN v UND at Bemidji.

Totally right about mixing the bracket. In a hypothetical year when UND doesn't have 2 bad weekends right before the WCHA playoffs, best is to send them east to play someone else besides a WCHA foe. However, that isn't this year. Since this year's likely PWR is:
Minn - 1
Wisc - 2 to 4
Clark - 2 to 5
Cornell, Harv, BC - Rounding out 3 to 6
CHA Champion - 7
CHA runnerup or Quinnipiac - 8

Then the whole thing becomes a somewhat moot point. There is a big gap between 6 and 7, so bracket integrity (I don't mean a strict serpentine bracket, but rather some sense of 'fairness') requires either 7 or 8 to fly to Mpls. Then, the committee can stretch the rules to say that there is only more flight (whoever goes to Wisconsin has to fly). And, you have 4 teams who might know each other well: Clarkson, Cornell, Harvard, BC. 2 of these have to play each other, because none are going to Mpls, so get something like this analysis:

A) if UW wins the WCHA, then 7 and 8 are flying west because it makes sense on every level (bracket and $$).
B) if UW does not, and instead ends up as 3 or 4, then you could do straight bracket integrity, and have 2 flights, for example,
RoMo(8) @ Minny(1); Mercyhurst(7) @ Cornell(2); Harvard(6) @ Wisco(3); Clarkson(4) @ BC(5). This is not a bad mix of regions, and would cost only slightly more $$ for busing Mercyhurst to Ithaca.

 

[Skate79]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

Regional sites are going to be a hard pull in the west. Yeah, it's 2 games, not one, but it's still not likely that any one travels incredibly well, unless you have MN v UND at Bemidji.

Totally right about mixing the bracket. In a hypothetical year when UND doesn't have 2 bad weekends right before the WCHA playoffs, best is to send them east to play someone else besides a WCHA foe. However, that isn't this year. Since this year's likely PWR is:
Minn - 1
Wisc - 2 to 4
Clark - 2 to 5
Cornell, Harv, BC - Rounding out 3 to 6
CHA Champion - 7
CHA runnerup or Quinnipiac - 8

Then the whole thing becomes a somewhat moot point. There is a big gap between 6 and 7, so bracket integrity (I don't mean a strict serpentine bracket, but rather some sense of 'fairness') requires either 7 or 8 to fly to Mpls. Then, the committee can stretch the rules to say that there is only more flight (whoever goes to Wisconsin has to fly). And, you have 4 teams who might know each other well: Clarkson, Cornell, Harvard, BC. 2 of these have to play each other, because none are going to Mpls, so get something like this analysis:

A) if UW wins the WCHA, then 7 and 8 are flying west because it makes sense on every level (bracket and $$).
B) if UW does not, and instead ends up as 3 or 4, then you could do straight bracket integrity, and have 2 flights, for example,
RoMo(8) @ Minny(1); Mercyhurst(7) @ Cornell(2); Harvard(6) @ Wisco(3); Clarkson(4) @ BC(5). This is not a bad mix of regions, and would cost only slightly more $$ for busing Mercyhurst to Ithaca.

I like it with one exception. If Harvard were to win out in the ECAC tourney, they surely would have to be considered for a #4 seed and home ice. They would have beaten Clarkson twice at Cheel and Cornell twice on the road. Hard for the committee to ignore that. What that does to the bracket you set out for us is anyone's guess. Maybe it pushes Wisco to #2, Clarkson to #3 and Harvard #4 with BC #5, Mercyhurst (I know it doesn't make sense for them here but...) #6, Cornell #7 and RoMo #8. You have one long bus trip and two flights.

 

[vicb]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

..........
B) if UW does not, and instead ends up as 3 or 4, then you could do straight bracket integrity, and have 2 flights, for example,
RoMo(8) @ Minny(1); Mercyhurst(7) @ Cornell(2); Harvard(6) @ Wisco(3); BC(5) @ Clarkson (4). This is not a bad mix of regions, and would cost only slightly more $$ for busing Mercyhurst to Ithaca.

Fixed your post .

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

Regional sites are going to be a hard pull in the west. Yeah, it's 2 games, not one, but it's still not likely that any one travels incredibly well, unless you have MN v UND at Bemidji.

Totally right about mixing the bracket. In a hypothetical year when UND doesn't have 2 bad weekends right before the WCHA playoffs, best is to send them east to play someone else besides a WCHA foe. However, that isn't this year. Since this year's likely PWR is:
Minn - 1
Wisc - 2 to 4
Clark - 2 to 5
Cornell, Harv, BC - Rounding out 3 to 6
CHA Champion - 7
CHA runnerup or Quinnipiac - 8

Then the whole thing becomes a somewhat moot point. There is a big gap between 6 and 7, so bracket integrity (I don't mean a strict serpentine bracket, but rather some sense of 'fairness') requires either 7 or 8 to fly to Mpls. Then, the committee can stretch the rules to say that there is only more flight (whoever goes to Wisconsin has to fly). And, you have 4 teams who might know each other well: Clarkson, Cornell, Harvard, BC. 2 of these have to play each other, because none are going to Mpls, so get something like this analysis:

A) if UW wins the WCHA, then 7 and 8 are flying west because it makes sense on every level (bracket and $$).
B) if UW does not, and instead ends up as 3 or 4, then you could do straight bracket integrity, and have 2 flights, for example,
"RoMo/MC/Quinny/HE Champ if not BC/NoDak"(8) @ Minny(1); Mercyhurst(7) @ Cornell(2); Harvard(6) @ Wisco(3); Clarkson(4) @ BC(5). This is not a bad mix of regions, and would cost only slightly more $$ for busing Mercyhurst to Ithaca.

Good analysis. FIxed your potential #8 combo.

I think we could see any of the following teams travel to Minnesota:
RMU, MC, Quinnipiac, NEU, BU, NoDak. (Any of the latter four could end up at Minny if any of them win the autobid). If there are two surprise autobid winners, the CHA could be on the outside looking in.

So we could see Quinny at Minny.
(Near where we live there is a great eatery/pub called the "Quinn's Inn", established by none other than Sir John S MacDonald, first premier of Ontario. http://www.timetripper.ca/where-to-eat/quinns-inn/ )

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

I put together a revised bracketology at BCI since the first one I posted here was a completely incorrect flustercuck:

http://www.bcinterruption.com/2014/3/4/5469764/womens-hockey-bracketology-march-4th-2014

It's BC-centric (much like the world I live in) since I wrote it for the blog but yeah.

 

[ARM]

I think we could see any of the following teams travel to Minnesota:
RMU, MC, Quinnipiac, NEU, BU, NoDak. (Any of the latter four could end up at Minny if any of them win the autobid).

No love for Vermont or UMD in your auto-bid scenario?

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

No love for Vermont or UMD in your auto-bid scenario?

Can't see either of those teams pull Two Upsets in a row. They both have to get past the top seeds of BC and Minny first, and those two teams are heavy favorites in their respective semi's. A Quinnipiac win over Clarkson would be less of an upset.

 

[ARM]

Can't see either of those teams pull Two Upsets in a row. They both have to get past the top seeds of BC and Minny first, and those two teams are heavy favorites in their respective semi's.

Vermont would have to pull a big upset to beat BC. If the Catamounts can do that, a second win would be pretty doable. They swept BU already in 2014, should they need to defeat the Terriers. I'd say that the Catamounts have as good odds to advance as BU does, because the Terriers don't seem to match up well with the Eagles right now.

 

[wwhyte]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

Vermont would have to pull a big upset to beat BC. If the Catamounts can do that, a second win would be pretty doable. They swept BU already in 2014, should they need to defeat the Terriers. I'd say that the Catamounts have as good odds to advance as BU does, because the Terriers don't seem to match up well with the Eagles right now.

Mmm, but Vermont might well have to get past Northeastern, who certainly seemed to have their measure in the third-place series they played recently. BU are still I think fundamentally a stronger team.

 

[Numbers]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

I like it with one exception. If Harvard were to win out in the ECAC tourney, they surely would have to be considered for a #4 seed and home ice. They would have beaten Clarkson twice at Cheel and Cornell twice on the road. Hard for the committee to ignore that. What that does to the bracket you set out for us is anyone's guess. Maybe it pushes Wisco to #2, Clarkson to #3 and Harvard #4 with BC #5, Mercyhurst (I know it doesn't make sense for them here but...) #6, Cornell #7 and RoMo #8. You have one long bus trip and two flights.

I would imagine you are right, but it really doesn't change the idea I was pointing out. In the case you mentioned, you get:

1- Minn
2, 3, 4 - BC, Harvard, Wisco (Unless someone beats BC in which case replace them with Clarkson)
5, 6 - Clarkson, Cornell (or, again, swap BC and Clarkson) (I can't see Cornell falling to 7th)
7 - CHA Champion
8 - Likely the CHA runnerup, but possibly QU as well (I think UND would be a HUGE surprise, so I am not worried about that possibility here)

Now, do the bracket:

8 @ Minn
CHA Champ @ ??? Boston is a flight for QU or RMU
Clarkson and Cornell can both bus to Boston, though, so I think you get:
CHA Champ @ Wisconsin
Clarkson and Cornell at BC and Harvard

Although I would prefer to see QU or RMU go east, and Clarkson or Cornell go to Wisconsin, I don't think it would happen. The reason is that in this scenario, Harvard, Wisconsin, BC and Clarkson are going to have RPIs so close as to be hardly distinguishable, so $$ is going to win out. Further, in my mind, this is not a great bracket, because Harvard would have to play right away against a foe they just defeated.

So, to further develop my thought, the best mix of a bracket is going to be if Cornell hosts, because that allows QU or RMU @ Cornell, and one of the Clark, BC, Harvard trio to fly to Madison, WI.

If Cornell does not host, then the only way to avoid 3 flights is for Corn/Clark/Harv/BC to play each other in some way....

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

QU is a typo right?

By the way, random but if Harvard wins the ECAC they will jump BC

 

[dave1381]

Re: 2013-2014 Women's D-I PairWise Contentions and Affirmations

Doesn't seem so random... ECAC has been the tougher conference at the top, Harvard has done relatively well against the best teams compared to middle-of-the pack teams (kind of the opposite of the trend of recent seasons), and Harvard was ahead of BC for a while until these bad results vs. Yale.