2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

[Trillium]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

I've always found it ridiculous that the Memorial Cup, Canada's amateur hockey championship, allows one team an automatic bye into the final four just because it's the host, and then that team plays an entire pointless season with a guaranteed spot in the championship tournament awaiting them at the end of the year. It really cheapens the whole thing to me.

Couldn't agree more. However, they are the 5th team in the RR, not the 4th.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

The CIS system in Canada only takes the conference play-off winners, a host and a second team from the conference that won the year before. (at least in Women's hockey that is how it works). And as you can expect, there is a lot of lamenting about that as well, specially allowing a host team in.

If you're going to revamp the system that drastically, then I'd rather go with the state HS approach and get rid of the conference tournaments altogether and let everybody into the national tournament. But don't have teams come out of conferences so that a six-team league advances two teams and so does a 12-team league. Go with regions right from the start. However, then the argument shifts to how teams are seeded in the regions, so there will always be a debate about something.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

If you're going to revamp the system that drastically, then I'd rather go with the state HS approach and get rid of the conference tournaments altogether and let everybody into the national tournament.

Oh man, how cool would a 32 team single elimination tournament be in women's hockey? Seed by KRACH and let 'em go. That'd be fun.

I'm not saying that should do that -- just that it would be damn fun.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

Although having players out in February clearly hurt UND down the stretch, don't forget that Quinnipiac had Sweden's Uden Johannson out not only for the Olympics, but who chose to take the whole season off to train. It seems likely to me, given her previous impact at Quinnipiac, that if they had her in the lineup even for as long at UND had its Olympians, that she would have made enough difference in the team's performance that they would now be in the tournament instead of Mercyhurst.

Tough break for Quinny, especially so since they are hosting.

Not a fair comparison. Johannson missing for the year is the same as the likes of Jenner, Kessell, Carpenter etc taking the whole year off. None of those players, including Johannson were part of their team at ANY part of the season. They do not burn a year of eligibility either (There is an Olympic Year exemption rule, pretty sure it only applies if you take the whole year off) The Finish/Swedish players for UND, or Staenz from Yale for example were part of their team and their record for a good part of the season, but were missing during a key part of the season.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

Oh man, how cool would a 32 team single elimination tournament be in women's hockey? Seed by KRACH and let 'em go. That'd be fun.

I'm not saying that should do that -- just that it would be damn fun.

So you start off 1 vs 32. Not sure that would make for good hockey in round one.\

As a hockey purist would not mind just going top 8, but have each round be a best 2 of 3. You'd be done in three weekends.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

So you start off 1 vs 32. Not sure that would make for good hockey in round one.

Heck yeah it would, who DOESN'T want to see UConn get pasted by a couple of touchdowns?

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

The relative strength or weakness of BC compared to Clarkson is irrelevant to this discussion. We have very incomplete information to determine whether BC is better than Clarkson or whether either team can compete with Minnesota or Wisconsin. We have 30+ games of hockey in both league and tournament formats demonstrably showing that North Dakota is not. And even with that body of work, they still would have made the tournament if they won a couple of more games down the stretch rather than going 1-6-1.

And likewise we don't have enough head to head match ups to determine that BC is a better team than UND. If they are significantly better than UND as is being claimed, Clarkson, Cornell, and UW or MN should be doable. UND showed they could beat all those teams...now BC has a chance to show they can.

 

[FireKnight]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

This is pretty much exactly how I would do it. Maybe if you win both the league and playoff title for your league you get a bye.

Whoa, a reemergence of the old "Clarkson rule" from the 12 team NC$$ tourney in the day. I'm just waiting to hear the words "Eastern Bias".

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

If [BC] is significantly better than UND as is being claimed

I haven't seen anyone make this claim.

UND showed they could beat all those teams...now BC has a chance to show they can.

This argument goes both ways. North Dakota gets to play Minnesota 5 times, beats them once, and somehow that's proof that they're deserving of getting into the tournament.

On the other hand, we don't know if you gave BC 5 cracks at Minnesota if they'd win 0, 1, or 5 times. Which is why we have the tournament.

 

[Beantown Puckfan]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

Heck yeah it would, who DOESN'T want to see UConn get pasted by a couple of touchdowns?

I know it will NOT be BC doing the pasting!

 

[joegrav]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

And likewise we don't have enough head to head match ups to determine that BC is a better team than UND. If they are significantly better than UND as is being claimed, Clarkson, Cornell, and UW or MN should be doable.

I know Grant already covered this, but I want to reiterate that 0 people that I'm aware of are proclaiming that BC is a better team than UND, let alone "significantly better."

 

[ARM]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

… BC is a better team than UND ...

Now you've gone and done it!

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

I know it will NOT be BC doing the pasting!

That game never happened.

 

[joegrav]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

Now you've gone and done it!

Ok, that was pretty funny.

 

[Watson Rink]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

Oh man, how cool would a 32 team single elimination tournament be in women's hockey? Seed by KRACH and let 'em go. That'd be fun.

I'm not saying that should do that -- just that it would be damn fun.

It sure would be fun! But we posters would need to design the tourney, not the perfidious NCAA.

Here's how the NCAA provides a 64 team seeded MarchMadnessesque experience for women's Division II basketball (a non-revenue sport, but one which has between 200 and 300 teams). Just like Division I men's MarchMadness? Not quite.....

First, the seedings aren't done by a KRACH-like objective criterion OR by any objective or subjective #1 through #64 method. Instead, the eight regions are entirely geographic, and seeded only #1 through #8 within each region. No "whoopee, we're going to Omaha, or San Diego, or somewhere new for us" instead we're back on campuses for the first three rounds. A friend teaches at Bentley (in suburban Boston) whose team has a 29-0 record and has been ranked #1 in the country-wide poll every week of the season, this week unanimously. Do they get to go somewhere exotic and play the #64 team or some equally weak sister? Not on your life. They play in their own little gym in a bracket with the next 4 finishers in their own 14-team league and 3 teams from some league a few hours down I-95. No airfare incurred! This essentially mirrors the 8-team league championship tourney they played just last week (winning their three games by an average of 21 points), except the 3 weakest sisters have been replaced by the 3 Mid-Atlantic teams. Not many extra-league confrontations!

After these useless first three rounds, the NCAA does give them an Elite Eight tourney in (this year) Erie Pennsylvania. But what a masquerade to bill it as a parity-for-Div II wonen 64-team MarchMadness.

So we'll just need to be firm with the NCAA when we submit the application for the 32-team KRACH-seeded tourney! (BTW, how's the draft coming?)

If the NCAA followed its Div II women's hoops precedent, they'd probably start with eight geographically selected mini-tournaments (3 Beanpot schools plus Providence, UNH-UM@O-UConn-UVM, half of the WCHA, the other half of the WCHA, one-third of the ECAC schools, etc.). Zowee!

 

[Cali]

did you see the CHA final? Congrats to RIT hanging in there as long as they did but the truth is sending RIT to the final 8 would be like sending a lamb to slaughter.

Yeah that wouldn't be pretty. RIT vs Minnesota?? It's best to cling to the dream that RIT could compete than to actually see it happen. Getting blown out in the quarters would diminish the thrill of their season ending 7 game winning streak. Only one other team has the chance to make a similar claim and that is how it should be remembered.

Although the shots were ridiculous, RIT held a decisive 7-2 advantage in the 2nd OT. Just saw the replay and it wasn't a good goal for Makela to give up. Long shot from the point with no traffic. Binnington just out-lasted them.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

Not a fair comparison. Johannson missing for the year is the same as the likes of Jenner, Kessell, Carpenter etc taking the whole year off. None of those players, including Johannson were part of their team at ANY part of the season. They do not burn a year of eligibility either (There is an Olympic Year exemption rule, pretty sure it only applies if you take the whole year off) The Finish/Swedish players for UND, or Staenz from Yale for example were part of their team and their record for a good part of the season, but were missing during a key part of the season.

I don't see at all why it is not a relevant comparison. The point was made that UND quite likely would have made the tournament if only they had their European Olympic players in Feb. Without those players, they just missed finishing Top 8. The exact same situation is true for Quinnipiac. It's European Olympian not only missed February, but the entire season--not because she was centralized, like the NA players, but of her own choice. I'm guessing, unlike Jenner's et al. absences, this likely was not foreseen by Quinnipiac either. With her as #3 scorer in the lineup (as well as the injured #2 Kosta, who also missed the season), Quinnipiac should really have been a lock for Top 8. Instead, they are celebrating Spring Break somewhere. Maybe that's not so bad? haha

With Quinnipiac hosting the Frozen Four this year, and Babstock in her last year, it's especially unfortunate that Kosta and Uden Johannson weren't available for even part of the season. This should have been the big year for the team to go far with lots of big guns. From the team's perspective, her being able to play another year instead doesn't quite make up for that as the team isn't likely to be nearly as strong next season.

 

[Hux]

That is not exactly how it works for the Memorial Cup, at least when it is hosted by the OHL (Ontario). When the OHL hosts, only a certain set of top teams (I think it is four) are allowed to submit a host bid, at some point in the season. Point is they would not select a host city of a poor team. I believe similar selection mechanism are in place for the WHL and the Q to ensure a quality candidate, but not sure on the details.

Doesn't have anything to do with the "quality" of the team, but of the host arena's seating capacity/ammenities and number of available hotel rooms.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

Doesn't have anything to do with the "quality" of the team, but of the host arena's seating capacity/ammenities and number of available hotel rooms.

Yes having the right facilities is a requirement. Top teams without proper hosting facilities need not apply, but my point was that you can only host if your team is considered of high enough caliber to vie for the league crown.

 

[JF_Gophers]

Re: 2014 Women's D-1 National Tournament

Did UND's coach actually say he was going to schedule easier teams?

Not sure how that will help him, since his team just lost to "easier" teams, and that's the reason they are at home.