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.

2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Watson Rink said:
Can somebody explain about this? What happened?
Click to expand...

Because they have to somehow explain why there is a turd in pool…then this is then followed up with them getting 2 votes in the latest USCHO poll when in every other ranking they don’t even make the top 20. The Auto Bid is ridicules and is clearly unnecessary in this league.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

pokechecker said:
come back and complain when you have to face the same team 6 times

the current setup makes no sense
when the men play a conference tournament, it is an opportunity to make more money
when the women play, it just costs more money

and with so few teams, what is the point?
the top 4 seeds did not change at all despite #1 & 2 getting beat
in fact there was no change in the final 8, except the CHA team
Click to expand...

No thanks, I think four is plenty to kick and scream about.

Until and if the NCAA goes to 12 or 16 teams, this is what we will have to deal with every year. The emphasis on reducing travel and distance will influence seedings as much as Pairwise, RPI, KRACH and whatever other metric is used to create these pairings. The men have neutral site games (or as neutral as one can get in the four regions) and a larger selection of teams and conferences and yes, more money for the schools. Gender equality is not served here and won't be until the women get a similar deal.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

joecct said:
Assuming CCT/BC takes 2 hrs, is it possible to get to Bright is less than an hour?
Click to expand...

5 miles, 15 minutes according to mapquest.com (which gives you some idea of Boston traffic) but that assumes the parking lot gates at Conte are functioning

(after the '07 bazillion-overtime Beanpot the gates were frozen for awhile, no doubt to enforce compulsory celebrating on any spectators who wanted to slip away into the midnight gloom....)
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Watson Rink said:
And here's an opportunity to use that great Latin rhetorical device, praeteritio: "I pass over in silence, and make no comment whatsoever upon, the curious juxtaposition of BU with academics...."
Click to expand...

More Latin rhetorical devices! Just realized I used chiasmus in a recent post: "would eventually end up individually. As a group, the first-years naturally look beyond...." Everybody dust off your dog-eared Ciceros! (I was once in a drafting session where two wise-*sses from New York would say things like "that sentence is pretty pleonastic" and the other would reply "but not hysteron proteron, not quite.")
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

I'll go with:

RIT at Minny .... They lost to Beavers, can they beat TIGERS, uhhh yes but it will be closer than you think .... 4-1 Gophers

Clarkson at BC ..... All I will say is, the score will be 3-2, be afraid, be very afraid TTT ;)

Quinnipiac at Harvard ..... Harvard was lucky the ECAC semifinal went to OT, this time the game will not be as close, Harvard 4-1

BU at Wisconsin ..... Poulins last stand, unlike Custer she lives to fight another day, BU 4-2
 
Last edited:
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

frozenfeet said:
Because they have to somehow explain why there is a turd in pool…then this is then followed up with them getting 2 votes in the latest USCHO poll when in every other ranking they don’t even make the top 20. The Auto Bid is ridicules and is clearly unnecessary in this league.
Click to expand...

They got 3 votes in the USA Hockey poll too. Good enough for top 12 there :D

http://www.usahockey.com/college
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Watson Rink said:
More Latin rhetorical devices! Just realized I used chiasmus in a recent post: "would eventually end up individually. As a group, the first-years naturally look beyond...." Everybody dust off your dog-eared Ciceros! (I was once in a drafting session where two wise-*sses from New York would say things like "that sentence is pretty pleonastic" and the other would reply "but not hysteron proteron, not quite.")
Click to expand...

you sound like that guy in the bar in Good Will Hunting... Do you like apples?
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

frozenfeet said:
Because they have to somehow explain why there is a turd in pool…then this is then followed up with them getting 2 votes in the latest USCHO poll when in every other ranking they don’t even make the top 20. The Auto Bid is ridicules and is clearly unnecessary in this league.
Click to expand...

By this logic, autobids are unnecessary in any sport. What is it about women's hockey that changes your opinion?


Powers &8^]
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Outcomes for this weekend:

RIT at Minnesota. I don't think RIT can pull off what the Holy Cross men did to the Gophers a few years ago. 6-2 MN

Clarkson at BC: The Knights have a better road record than at home and have a goalie who makes it difficult to score no matter where you are shooting from. BC obviously has not lost back to back this season. Could this be the weekend? Clarkson in 2OTs, 3-2.

Quinnipiac at Harvard. The games have been tug of wars between two great squads with top flight goaltending. Quinnipiac has scored first in every game in this series but I think the Crimson will come out firing and prevail 3-1.

BU at Wisconsin. The Terriers have been playing very well lately and obviously are riding momentum from last weekend. Badgers are very tough at home. This one goes to OT and the Badgers win it 4-3.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Predicted to reach the Frozen Four:

Minnesota: the score will be whatever the NCAA's mercy rule provides in the case of TKOs

Bye: very good goaltending (BC) will stalemate very good offense (Cl) and great goaltending (Cl) will deadlock great offense (BC) until the cows come home, the Conte gates will malfunction, preventing the Zamboni from cleaning the ice, and there will be no decision prior to scheduled FF puck drop. Bye's coach will be humble about Bye's advancing to the FF.

Harvard: a fourth consecutive 2-1 score is inescapable; this time Edney will score not by a wayward shot headed for the opposite face-off circle caroming off a QU defender 25 feet from the cage but by a crafty, well-aimed shot over the crossbar bouncing back from the boards, hitting Laden's water bottle, then the back of her helmet, and dropping straight down (perhaps the only other way to beat Laden).

Wisconsin: the Badgers' fourth line will outscore the entire BU team 3-2


Predicted Frozen Four Best Players: Anna and Elsa
 
Last edited:
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

I'll put in my 2 cents.....obviously Minnesota---duh!
As for BC-Clarkson, I think BC will have learned from BU....the defense will tighten up, but it's all desire from the start for them....they've got to want it more, no matter their talent level!
Everyone seems to think that Harvard will beat Quinni 4 times this year.....while I agree the Crimson might have more talent, I've been there and 4 times is too many....Quinnipiac wins.
Probably the best match-up, and while I respect what Arm thinks, after watching BC-BU, I think the goaltending will be a draw....a lot depends on the officiating because the refs for Hockey East let them play....if that's the case, and BU is as physical, with their size, speed and Miss Poulin, I do take BU......but this will be a great game!
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

zoofer said:
...a lot depends on the officiating because the refs for Hockey East let them play...
Click to expand...
It should be a WCHA crew, and at times, they not only let them play, they don't even watch them play. Don't leave a blood trail, and there likely won't be an recriminations.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

LtPowers said:
By this logic, autobids are unnecessary in any sport. What is it about women's hockey that changes your opinion?
Click to expand...

well for one, the other sports have many, many, more teams, consequently winning your conference tournament actually means something, in women's hockey, win one game, get in the NCAA

all autobids accomplish in hockey is taking away opportunity from teams that deserve it and giving it to teams that don't

the other thing that screws it up is the no fly rule which in practical terms means that if a 3rd WCHA team gets in, they play the #1 WCHA team, what a farce

the NCAA is stacked against the WCHA, being the conference in the middle, the other conferences get one more team in than they deserve while the WCHA gets screwed
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

pokechecker said:
well for one, the other sports have many, many, more teams, consequently winning your conference tournament actually means something, in women's hockey, win one game, get in the NCAA

all autobids accomplish in hockey is taking away opportunity from teams that deserve it and giving it to teams that don't

the other thing that screws it up is the no fly rule which in practical terms means that if a 3rd WCHA team gets in, they play the #1 WCHA team, what a farce

the NCAA is stacked against the WCHA, being the conference in the middle, the other conferences get one more team in than they deserve while the WCHA gets screwed
Click to expand...

In RIT's defense (yes, it's my homer attitude talking), RIT did way more then "win one game, get in the NCAA." In the post season, RIT won 2 games against the 3rd team in the conference, 1 against the 1st, and 1 against the 2nd. So, a total of 4 games against the top 3 teams in the conference. They had a rough regular season battling a short bench and injuries, but have won when it matters, and I think they deserve to be where they are.

Unless someone in the CHA does well enough for an At Large Bid, one conference will get 3 teams in. This year, it's the ECAC. Think Quinnipiac and Harvard are happy about playing each other again?
 
Last edited:
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

pokechecker said:
well for one, the other sports have many, many, more teams, consequently winning your conference tournament actually means something, in women's hockey, win one game, get in the NCAA

all autobids accomplish in hockey is taking away opportunity from teams that deserve it and giving it to teams that don't

the other thing that screws it up is the no fly rule which in practical terms means that if a 3rd WCHA team gets in, they play the #1 WCHA team, what a farce

the NCAA is stacked against the WCHA, being the conference in the middle, the other conferences get one more team in than they deserve while the WCHA gets screwed
Click to expand...
Just on % alone, wcha gets 25% ( 2 out of 8), ecac 25% (3 out of 12), HE 25% (2 out 8) and cha less than 25% ( 1 out of 6). So not sure wat your talking about??
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

LtPowers said:
By this logic, autobids are unnecessary in any sport. What is it about women's hockey that changes your opinion?


Powers &8^]
Click to expand...

My opinion…Women's hockey for however long it's been around is still in its infancy and out of 35 teams they have never had more than a dozen teams performing at a what would be considered a competitive level and no more than half of those teams have ever had a realistic shot at winning the championship. The CHA with their 6 teams w/ more than half being startups should not have an auto with conferences of 8, 8 and 12. What they should have done was made 3 super conferences of 12 (or so) then the auto bid may then have merit. This also could possibly correct the WCHA schedule disadvantage. The system is flawed when a team like ND has not made the field the last two years when in those years beat the top seed and last year both teams in the final game…remember my opinion...and it comes from eating sour grapes, but having a team like UND or Cornell or St. Lawrence or UMD or Bemidji makes more sense than a team ranked 20th who has absolutely NO SHOT…maybe the fore mentioned teams don’t either but they are more deserving and would surely be more competitive.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

clarksoncluck said:
Just on % alone, wcha gets 25% ( 2 out of 8), ecac 25% (3 out of 12), HE 25% (2 out 8) and cha less than 25% ( 1 out of 6). So not sure wat your talking about??
Click to expand...

What he's talking about is that the WCHA has 4 more teams in the top 15 that would have made the tournament in the men's sport (which has been happening each of the last several years). Frankly each of those 4 WCHA teams played a total of 8 games against a top 4 team. Very few teams played one game against a top 4 team...let alone eight. So if one was to back those eight games out (and that would still leave a SOS that would rank in line with schools from other conferences), you'd have UND at 22-4-3 (approximate PWR 3), UMD at 20-4-5 (approximate PWR 4), BSU at 21-13-1 (approximate PWR 7), and OSU at 17-8-3.

The net message is that this is an issue because there are only 4 at large bids. One could make the claim that the 4 conference champions may be the same as the 4 at large bids...true, but they may not. Maybe four at large bids for 36 teams is the norm for Olympic sports, but its still a terrible ratio.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

pokechecker said:
well for one, the other sports have many, many, more teams, consequently winning your conference tournament actually means something, in women's hockey, win one game, get in the NCAA

all autobids accomplish in hockey is taking away opportunity from teams that deserve it and giving it to teams that don't
Click to expand...

It takes MORE than one win to get an Autobid. If you come up from the lower half of the standings to win it, you'd have to win AT LEAST 3 games in a row to win the Autobid.

I'm all for the Autobids....If you win your league playoffs, you should be rewarded for it, as the team that wins the Autobid rose to the occasion when it counted. Is that not what playoffs and championships are all about ?. It is what makes it exciting to follow. Once you get to the playoffs, if you keep winning you have a chance to get to the ultimate championship game...exactly how it should be....If a favorite falters along the way...so be it...if you want to win the championship, you have to win when it counts. JMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top