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

[Ed Trefzger]

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

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

It would be interesting to see this as a ratio of the number bids to the number of D-III teams in the league.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

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

It would be interesting to see this as a ratio of the number bids to the number of D-III teams in the league.

And I suspect the ECAC West would have the best ratio. But, that is more fodder to the point that the ECAC West very well could be overrated, because for all the success they have in the regular season, when it's crunch time on the national scene, they fold like a house of cards.

 

[llama]

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

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.)

Thanks for pulling the numbers together - interesting summary. NO argument here...I think the ECAC-W has always had a pretty fair shake at the at-large bids (because it has had teams that had the numbers to get in). As a fan of the league, it is frustrating to consistently have 3-5 strong teams but rarely (i.e. practically never) have the "dominant" team that wins it all. Oh well...maybe one of these days we'll have a team that goes on a tear.

 

[llama]

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

And I suspect the ECAC West would have the best ratio. But, that is more fodder to the point that the ECAC West very well could be overrated, because for all the success they have in the regular season, when it's crunch time on the national scene, they fold like a house of cards.

Overrated by who? Is there any rating system for the D3 leagues? So many posters on here seem to get all sorts of fired up anytime "ECAC-W" and "strong league" get used in the same sentence...what gives? Is there some history I am missing?

 

[altazo]

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

4 of the 7 NCHA teams this season have won National Championships in the last 20 years. I believe one current ECAC W team has won it all in that same time. End of any sort of debate...

 

[Russell Jaslow]

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

Overrated by who? Is there any rating system for the D3 leagues? So many posters on here seem to get all sorts of fired up anytime "ECAC-W" and "strong league" get used in the same sentence...what gives? Is there some history I am missing?

You're not missing anything.

There are some, however, and we all know who they are, who shout from the mountain top how great the ECAC West is, going as far as to claim they are the best league in the world, if not the Universe. Just look at all the jabbing people give them about handing the championship to Utica without even bothering to play the games.

I merely provided some numbers to show that their claims fall far short of the data.

However, you do bring up an interesting point -- a dominant team to win it all. The NESCAC has won eight national championships. A great conference many will say. But, all eight were won by one team -- Middlebury. Would Middlebury have reeled off this amazing dynasty if they were in another league? Perhaps. So, should NESCAC be hailed as a great league, or is that claim merely a statistical anomoly?

On the other hand, the NCHA has won 11 titles, but it was done by five different teams (I'm assuming Bemidji was in the NCHA when they won it). A much better distribution and thus perhaps a better claim to being the best conference in history.

 

[altazo]

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

And all of the NCHA teams have made the tournament in that time.

 

[LakerFan99]

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

You're not missing anything.

There are some, however, and we all know who they are, who shout from the mountain top how great the ECAC West is, going as far as to claim they are the best league in the world, if not the Universe. Just look at all the jabbing people give them about handing the championship to Utica without even bothering to play the games.

many of those same people think the idea of an AQ is stupid. Mainly because their team lost in their conference semis.

 

[d3newbie]

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

You're not missing anything.

There are some, however, and we all know who they are, who shout from the mountain top how great the ECAC West is, going as far as to claim they are the best league in the world, if not the Universe. Just look at all the jabbing people give them about handing the championship to Utica without even bothering to play the games.

I merely provided some numbers to show that their claims fall far short of the data.

In your own word..."you constantly spew inane arguments without any facts backing you up". The only premise you made is that the National Championship is the end-all measure to strength of a conference or why the ECAC-West is weak. Admit it, you have a beef against the ECAC-West having a larger peni$.

 

[elbojpb]

ECAC/W cf Buffalo Bills

ECAC/W cf Buffalo Bills

There are some, however, and we all know who they are, who shout from the mountain top how great the ECAC West is, going as far as to claim they are the best league ...

I'm not an ECAC/W apologist, just a fan.

The inter-conference records - I believe - are the better measure of league 'greatness' and the ECAC/W and NCHA have the best aggregate records out of conference.

That being said, historically, there have been 'dynasties' that have eaten up a large share of the National Championships. The ECAC/W has never had one of those teams.

The best analogy is the Buffalo Bills of the last century. Very strong team, in fact one of the best of that era; however, never good enough to win the big one.

IMHO - Winning the NC detracts slightly from the overall 'greatness' but doesn't completely negate the historical strength of the league. In fact, I'd argue that "crunch time" begins in mid-February, and making the dance is 90% as impressive as winning the dance. (However, my insight is a bit fogged by following EC for four decades)

 

[Russell Jaslow]

In your own word..."you constantly spew inane arguments without any facts backing you up". The only premise you made is that the National Championship is the end-all measure to strength of a conference or why the ECAC-West is weak. Admit it, you have a beef against the ECAC-West having a larger peni$.

You are truly a lost cause with reading comprehension problems. You argue like a woman. If the facts don't support your point, you put words in the other person's mouth to continue to insist you are correct. Next, you will withhold sex from me....

My data was to refute fishman's premise that the ECAC West got hardly any bids in the past 10 years when in fact they got the most bids. Thus, the inane argument by fishman. I backed my point up with facts, something neither you or fishman have ever done. Ergo, you argue like a woman.

If you are incapable of understanding that, then go ahead and withhold sex from me.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

I'm not an ECAC/W apologist, just a fan.

The inter-conference records - I believe - are the better measure of league 'greatness' and the ECAC/W and NCHA have the best aggregate records out of conference.

That being said, historically, there have been 'dynasties' that have eaten up a large share of the National Championships. The ECAC/W has never had one of those teams.

The best analogy is the Buffalo Bills of the last century. Very strong team, in fact one of the best of that era; however, never good enough to win the big one.

IMHO - Winning the NC detracts slightly from the overall 'greatness' but doesn't completely negate the historical strength of the league. In fact, I'd argue that "crunch time" begins in mid-February, and making the dance is 90% as impressive as winning the dance. (However, my insight is a bit fogged by following EC for four decades)

And this my friends is how you properly debate my point. I may not agree with it, but it's a **** fine point.

Take note d3newbie. You could learn something from your fellow ECAC West comrade. Use facts to back up a point you are making. Not assumptions and beliefs.

 

[OZFEST]

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.

I have a new found respect for the NCAA, vacated losses? Yes!

 

[norm1909]

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

NCAA lifts ban on its tournaments in New Jersey

 

[Birdwatcher]

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

In your own word..."you constantly spew inane arguments without any facts backing you up". The only premise you made is that the National Championship is the end-all measure to strength of a conference or why the ECAC-West is weak. Admit it, you have a beef against the ECAC-West having a larger peni$.

Red already!!

 

[UncleRay]

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

With his name choice he obviously wasn't planning on being around for long. I wasn't enamored by his inability to listen and make sense, but when he got "envious" he went red. Sorry, but there is really no place for that.

 

[The Real Georgia Peach]

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

Is he gone???God, I hope not. He was providing a lot of entertainment to me...

 

[nujack]

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

With his name choice he obviously wasn't planning on being around for long. I wasn't enamored by his inability to listen and make sense, but when he got "envious" he went red. Sorry, but there is really no place for that.

Are you talking about the red and green squares below our screen names? I'm fairly new. What's that all about? Particularly red and green? I tried to look it up under FAQ and couldn't find anything.

 

[NUProf]

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

Are you talking about the red and green squares below our screen names? I'm fairly new. What's that all about? Particularly red and green? I tried to look it up under FAQ and couldn't find anything.

When people click on the star icon below your name they can add or subtract from your reputation. If you get too many negative marks, the rectangles below your name turn red.

 

[Fishman'81]

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

And this my friends is how you properly debate my point. I may not agree with it, but it's a **** fine point.

Take note d3newbie. You could learn something from your fellow ECAC West comrade. Use facts to back up a point you are making. Not assumptions and beliefs.

Un-bunch your panties, and run the numbers again without including the past three years... I'd be interested to see that, but not to the extent that I'll waste the time to look it up myself. I should have been more specific about the time-frame, since the committee has certainly done a better job recently, as I have explicitly mentioned here on a number of occasions. My bad, there, but it'll make my statement look less "inane".

Bottom-line for me is that all the AQs are a fact of life in D-3, and probably should be, given that PW comparisons have so little meaning when there's such scant inter-conference data on which to base them.

Ergo, it just makes the NCAA/the conferences/God Himself look a lot less foolish to assign AQ berths predicated on the RS results than on the basis of a gimmick-PS tournament... And that was my original point, which is pretty-much an unassailable argument in any logical sense.