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

[Fishman'81]

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.

My advice is not to concern yourself about "rep", unless you miss being in middle-school... It's a pretty silly concept for adults.

 

[norm1909]

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

My advice is not to concern yourself about "rep", unless you miss being in middle-school... It's a pretty silly concept for adults.

Hawk is that you?

 

[NUProf]

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

My advice is not to concern yourself about "rep", unless you miss being in middle-school... It's a pretty silly concept for adults.

He wanted to know what it was - I don't think he was doing anything else. It is pretty cryptic if you don't know how it works. It took me several years to understand what those symbols were all about, so I thought I'd inform him.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

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

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".

But three years is way too short for any statistical analysis. It's hardly enough time to form a trend.

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.

I agree with that last statement. Which is why success in the national tournament is a good indicator, and the ECAC West has failed to show they deserved all those bids in the past.

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.

It's all up to the conferences to decide how to dole out their AQ. Take your beef up with them, not the NCAA. And God is a bit busy right now...

The national playoffs start with the conference playoffs. I don't know why people can never understand that concept.

 

[daveo211]

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.

Amherst lost the day before should be Oswego St.

 

[jerrynu26]

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

Amherst lost the day before should be Oswego St.

Umm, look at it in a mirror image..

 

[daveo211]

Umm, look at it in a mirror image..

What?

 

[jerrynu26]

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

What?

You have it correct. I forgot smillies.

 

[NUProf]

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

The national playoffs start with the conference playoffs. I don't know why people can never understand that concept.

As a follower of a team that was fortunate enough to get a Pool C bid, I actually agree with you. The Pool C bids are a nice second chance opportunity for a few teams (and this year the only chance for the ECAC W), but rarely do they actually lead to a National Championship (Oswego being the only exception that I can think of in recent years). Next year Pool B returns which means that the ECAC West can have at least a more restricted list of teams to fight for a bid with.

I've said that for years. Once round one of the league playoffs start, your road to the championship is clear - just win.

[rant]
I think people's mentality about "deserving a bid" and all that is shaped by that ridiculous DI baskeball tournament, in which practically every program in a BCS conference that has a halfway decent season is allowed to play. The big boys deign to let in the winners of league tournaments from what they call (for inexplicable reasons) "mid majors" (where are the low majors?) play with them. If they were serious about their leagues, they wouldn't have situations where some of them get 5 or 6 entries. Shoot if you finished 6th in your league do you really merit playing for the National title? That's just absurd. [/rant]

It would almost make sense to give priority for Pool C to teams that win their regular season championship but don't win their league tournament. Open it up to more teams only if there aren't enough teams that meet that requirement. (Of course we still would have to deal with the ECAC W and WIAC, but maybe make the Pool B competition a choice between the two league champs.)

 

[Russell Jaslow]

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

It would almost make sense to give priority for Pool C to teams that win their regular season championship but don't win their league tournament. Open it up to more teams only if there aren't enough teams that meet that requirement. (Of course we still would have to deal with the ECAC W and WIAC, but maybe make the Pool B competition a choice between the two league champs.)

This is a brilliant concept!

 

[spwood]

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

[rant] [/rant]

+1....USCHO, can we get a "rant button" please!!!!!!

It would almost make sense to give priority for Pool C to teams that win their regular season championship but don't win their league tournament. Open it up to more teams only if there aren't enough teams that meet that requirement. (Of course we still would have to deal with the ECAC W and WIAC, but maybe make the Pool B competition a choice between the two league champs.)

This made me laugh....imagine the outrage if Utica had been left home for the three teams that did not win their conference tournaments....UW Eau-Claire (no problem), Norwich (no problem), and Plymouth State!

 

[nujack]

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

He wanted to know what it was - I don't think he was doing anything else. It is pretty cryptic if you don't know how it works. It took me several years to understand what those symbols were all about, so I thought I'd inform him.

Spot on - and thank you. I've never seen that before - on other boards that I frequent you can just ignore certain posters - I don't but it is available if someone is really irritating.

 

[MountainMan]

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

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.

I think this is the more interesting point. The last 20 championships have been won by only 9 different schools, which to me shows more about specific teams not specific leagues. Whether those schools play in the "best" league or have the best coach or the best rink/school for recruitment of the best players can all be debated. So few schools actually win "the" big game, to me it can't be said that the nescac is the best or was the best during the good years of Middlebury, just because they had one dominant team.

Just because the ecac west has only one champion during those years doesn't mean the league is overrated. No one has stated that the other teams in the tournament were crap teams (well maybe some have), they are the best of their leagues, playing against the best from other leagues on any given day those games could have gone the either way.

 

[polarbearfan]

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

I think this is the more interesting point. The last 20 championships have been won by only 9 different schools, which to me shows more about specific teams not specific leagues. Whether those schools play in the "best" league or have the best coach or the best rink/school for recruitment of the best players can all be debated. So few schools actually win "the" big game, to me it can't be said that the nescac is the best or was the best during the good years of Middlebury, just because they had one dominant team.

The argument then becomes: What is it meant to be the best league? Who's middle of the league team is the best? Which conference's worst team is better than all the other conferences' worst team? This is reason #438 why its near impossible to decide which conference is the best: not sure what the definition even is.

 

[altazo]

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

My dad told me when I was a kid that the best way to determine the strength of a league to examine it's bottom half of teams. I don't know if this idea carries a ton of weight, but when applied to D3 college hockey it is clear that the NCHA and ECAC-W are the two premier leagues.

Personally, I think all the leagues have their own unique character and strenghts. Maybe they don't always put the toughest teams on the ice, but I really like the MIAC and NESCAC as conferences too. There is a lot of parity in those leagues, and I think it's cool how they often have younger players who are more recently out of High School.

 

[MountainMan]

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

The argument then becomes: What is it meant to be the best league? Who's middle of the league team is the best? Which conference's worst team is better than all the other conferences' worst team? This is reason #438 why its near impossible to decide which conference is the best: not sure what the definition even is.

Exactly, which is why people get up in arms about the west, they have less teams so most years the top 4 teams are usually good with one or two on the bottom, so they can say look we only have one or two crap teams. Then you get the other side of the coin, if they had more teams like the sunyac does you will have more bad teams. The top 4 in the sunyac are going to give the top 4 in the west a battle every game. So really it is impossible to say what league is the best, is the west better because they have one bad team to the sunyac bottom 4? No can't be compared. Everyone would have to play everyone to determine what league is the best.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

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

Exactly, which is why people get up in arms about the west, they have less teams so most years the top 4 teams are usually good with one or two on the bottom, so they can say look we only have one or two crap teams. Then you get the other side of the coin, if they had more teams like the sunyac does you will have more bad teams. The top 4 in the sunyac are going to give the top 4 in the west a battle every game. So really it is impossible to say what league is the best, is the west better because they have one bad team to the sunyac bottom 4? No can't be compared. Everyone would have to play everyone to determine what league is the best.

You are my hero!

I have been arguing this exact point for many, many years in all sports. I'm glad someone else sees it.

 

[NUProf]

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

Spot on - and thank you. I've never seen that before - on other boards that I frequent you can just ignore certain posters - I don't but it is available if someone is really irritating.

On your control panel you do have the option to ignore people if you like.

 

[NUProf]

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

+1....USCHO, can we get a "rant button" please!!!!!!



This made me laugh....imagine the outrage if Utica had been left home for the three teams that did not win their conference tournaments....UW Eau-Claire (no problem), Norwich (no problem), and Plymouth State!

But I'd extend that to include Pool B teams in that boat as well. Probably they would still get in based on those criteria. However, I do know what you mean.

 

[jcase]

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

This made me laugh....imagine the outrage if Utica had been left home for the three teams that did not win their conference tournaments....UW Eau-Claire (no problem), Norwich (no problem), and Plymouth State!

Utica won the regular season championship and would be in the same boat so why would they be left home?