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.

2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

Fishman'81 said:
The W has gotten very few bids in the past 10 years.
Click to expand...

Once again, don't let FACTS get in the way of a good argument.

Very few bids you say? In the past 10 years? The FACTS show the exact opposite!

Counting this year, a 10 year period would be 2004-2013. Let's add the numbers up.

The following is the count of the number of bids each conference got in that 10-year window (it was a quick count, so hopefully I didn't make any mistakes):

ECAC West -- 17
NCHA -- 17
SUNYAC -- 14
MIAC -- 14
NESCAC -- 13
ECAC East -- 12
ECAC NE -- 11
MCHA -- 4
MASCAC -- 2

(Of course, the latter two conferences were not around the whole 10 years.)

So, as you can see, the FACTS show that your vaunted ECAC West received more bids than any other conference in the country (along with the NCHA). Also, never in that 10-year time period has any conference placed three teams in the playoffs in the same year except the ECAC West, and they did it more than once.

And yet, in that time period, the ECAC West has won just one national championshp. In fact, for the entire existence of the Division III national championship, ECAC West teams have won just twice (RIT in 1985, and I think they were more of an NYCHA team at the time, but I'll count them as an ECAC West team).

Perhaps, the opposite is true -- that the ECAC West does not derserve the number of bids they get, and people should stop crying a river when they don't get more than one bid. Because, quite frankly, compared to other conferences, they have one of the worst ratio of bids to national championships.

It is very obvious that your credibility is zilch on these boards because you constantly spew inane arguments without any facts backing you up.

(Note -- the idea that the ECAC West teams are pitted against each other in the national playoffs does hold some merit at times. However, in the years the ECAC West has gotten three bids with only 11 teams in the tournament, you have no choice but to match them up sometimes. And, it's no worse than the number of times MIAC teams are pitted against each other or NCHA teams are pitted against each other, especially in the years when the brackets are set up to only allow one Western team to get to the semifinals.)
 
Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

petrietodonovan said:
Well that solves the first round upset problem but does nothing for the who gets in dilemma (if it is one).

Anyone over here know the dimensions of the ice at the Utica Aud? I read the ice surface is sketchy and the rink humid, but no one has mentioned the size of the pond.
Click to expand...

I believe the Aud is 185 x 85....so a bit smaller than the Sid (which is like 90 x 200?)
 
Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

llama said:
I believe the Aud is 185 x 85....so a bit smaller than the Sid (which is like 90 x 200?)
Click to expand...

According to the Aud's page it's 200x85. Unusual for a rink that old to have a big sheet unless it was rehabbed for one of these minor league teams they've had. I did find Watson coming in at 200 x 90.
 
Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

NUProf said:
I did like the old method of having a two game series in the quarterfinals. The probability that the "better" team wins is certainly higher if you have more than one game.
Click to expand...

How can you get higher than 100%? :D
 
Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

Russell Jaslow said:
And yet, in that time period, the ECAC West has won just one national championshp. In fact, for the entire existence of the Division III national championship, ECAC West teams have won just twice (RIT in 1985, and I think they were more of an NYCHA team at the time, but I'll count them as an ECAC West team).

It is very obvious that your credibility is zilch on these boards because you constantly spew inane arguments without any facts backing you up.
Click to expand...

ditto, kettle black, peni$ issue?
 
Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

polarbearfan said:
How can you get higher than 100%? :D
Click to expand...

There's a difference between being the better team and playing a better game.

By definition, the team that played the better game is the the team that scores the most goals. And the laws of probability tell us that the probability that the better team plays a better game on a given night is not 1. :p
 
Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

And now for something completely different.

The following comes directly from the official NCAA championship record book. Can you spot the bonehead mistake made by the NCAA?

2012 First Round: Wentworth Inst. 3, Plymouth St. 1; St.
Norbert 3, St. Thomas (MN) 1; Gust. Adolphus 3, Milwaukee
Engr. 1. Quarterfinals: Norwich 3, Wentworth Inst. 0; St.
Norbert 4, Gust. Adolphus 1; Oswego St. 5, Elmira 0; Amherst
3, Plattsburgh St. 1. Semifinals: St. Norbert 4, Norwich 1;
Oswego St. 2, Amherst 1 (ot). Championship: St. Norbert
4, Amherst 1.
 
Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

Just for fun, I took a look at what would have happened this year if the WIAC's split from the NCHA and the subsequent absorption of the remaining NCHA teams by the MCHA had taken place this year. I am making the assumption that St. Norbert would have won the "new" MCHA title

We would have had the following:

Pool A

MIAC: St. John's
MCHA: St. Norbert
SUNYAC: Oswego
ECAC E: Babson
NESCAC: Bowdoin
ECAC NE: Wentworth
MASCAC: UMass Dartmouth

Pool B

The Pool B candidates are the WIAC teams and the ECAC West teams

For purposes of this illustration, we will assume that Utica would be selected as the Pool B team.
Since both Utica and Eau Claire were selected for Pool A and the criteria for Pool B are identical for that of Pool C, but the field of competitors is smaller, one of the two would have been chosen. My guess is that Utica would be selected ahead of Eau Claire

Pool C

The field of Pool C candidates would have been the same as it was for this season except for the addition of Adrian (who we assumed did not win the MCHA), and the deletion of Utica (who already would have the Pool B bid).

The top two teams using that scenario are Norwich and Eau Claire.

The final choice would have come down to Adrian and Hobart. This is where things might (or might not) have turned out differently than they actually did. I think that Adrian would have been selected, based on the fact that have a better winning percentage and record against ranked teams.

The end result - we get the same field, but Hobart's fans cry a little louder about being edged out by Adrian.
 
Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

Russell Jaslow said:
And now for something completely different.

The following comes directly from the official NCAA championship record book. Can you spot the bonehead mistake made by the NCAA?

2012 First Round: Wentworth Inst. 3, Plymouth St. 1; St.
Norbert 3, St. Thomas (MN) 1; Gust. Adolphus 3, Milwaukee
Engr. 1. Quarterfinals: Norwich 3, Wentworth Inst. 0; St.
Norbert 4, Gust. Adolphus 1; Oswego St. 5, Elmira 0; Amherst
3, Plattsburgh St. 1. Semifinals: St. Norbert 4, Norwich 1;
Oswego St. 2, Amherst 1 (ot). Championship: St. Norbert
4, Amherst 1.
Click to expand...

Well at least Tom finally let Tim take credit, and Oswego didn't want the loss anyway ;)
 
NUProf said:
Just for fun, I took a look at what would have happened this year if the WIAC's split from the NCHA and the subsequent absorption of the remaining NCHA teams by the MCHA had taken place this year. I am making the assumption that St. Norbert would have won the "new" MCHA title

We would have had the following:

Pool A

MIAC: St. John's
MCHA: St. Norbert
SUNYAC: Oswego
ECAC E: Babson
NESCAC: Bowdoin
ECAC NE: Wentworth
MASCAC: UMass Dartmouth

Pool B

The Pool B candidates are the WIAC teams and the ECAC West teams

For purposes of this illustration, we will assume that Utica would be selected as the Pool B team.
Since both Utica and Eau Claire were selected for Pool A and the criteria for Pool B are identical for that of Pool C, but the field of competitors is smaller, one of the two would have been chosen. My guess is that Utica would be selected ahead of Eau Claire

Pool C

The field of Pool C candidates would have been the same as it was for this season except for the addition of Adrian (who we assumed did not win the MCHA), and the deletion of Utica (who already would have the Pool B bid).

The top two teams using that scenario are Norwich and Eau Claire.

The final choice would have come down to Adrian and Hobart. This is where things might (or might not) have turned out differently than they actually did. I think that Adrian would have been selected, based on the fact that have a better winning percentage and record against ranked teams.

The end result - we get the same field, but Hobart's fans cry a little louder about being edged out by Adrian.
Click to expand...

Only flaw is that you crowned St. Norbert Champion, but you didn't include the 2-4 more losses Adrian will also add to its resume (playing St. Norbert and St. Scholastica) making Adrian a team that is posting instead of hosting. It seems like the magic # is 20 wins to get an at large bid, and I believe with the new MCHA schedule next year they won't get to that 20 wins mark. Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2013 "I was screwed by the NCAA" thread...

Blugold Hockey said:
Only flaw is that you crowned St. Norbert Champion, but you didn't include the 2-4 more losses Adrian will also add to its resume (playing St. Norbert and St. Scholastica) making Adrian a team that is posting instead of hosting. It seems like the magic # is 20 wins to get an at large bid, and I believe with the new MCHA schedule next year they won't get to that 20 wins mark. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

All I had to work with is the data at hand, and I had to pick somebody to win the "new" league. However, Adrian should have their SOS metric get improved quite a bit next year with a boost from the out of conference records that that two new teams are likely to produce. Adrian's weak point this year and in the past has always been the fact that the other teams in the league did not do well in non-conference games (which is a major determining factor in SOS measurement)
 
NUProf said:
All I had to work with is the data at hand, and I had to pick somebody to win the "new" league. However, Adrian should have their SOS metric get improved quite a bit next year with a boost from the out of conference records that that two new teams are likely to produce. Adrian's weak point this year and in the past has always been the fact that the other teams in the league did not do well in non-conference games (which is a major determining factor in SOS measurement)
Click to expand...
:) agreed. SoS is talked about, but didn't seem to help the Blugolds case this year. It's going to be ironic that SOS will be higher in the MCHA next year and Adrian will potentially benefit from it, but if they don't have the 20 wins it won't matter. Insert all the teams with 19 wins and a higher SoS here. (yes I know Adrian won the AQ this year, but the new MCHA will be the SNCHA until someone proves different)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top