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

Eeyore said:
It should be noted that minimizing flights and travel distance are concerns in all NCAA tournaments other than D1 football.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you're talking about the new FBS playoff, not the D-I FCS championship.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

My goodness, autobids are a fact of life throughout every NCAA sport. There are obviously good reasons to have them. Why are they suddenly a problem now?


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

Eeyore said:
I honestly have no idea if they try to minimize the flights for FCS.
Click to expand...

After replying to you, I went ahead and looked at the brackets from the past few years, and it seems that there is some work to minimize total geographic distances. It makes sense, considering the sheer number of people who have to get from one campus to another.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

LtPowers said:
My goodness, autobids are a fact of life throughout every NCAA sport. There are obviously good reasons to have them. Why are they suddenly a problem now?


Powers &8^]
Click to expand...
I don't expect RIT to get blown out, but if they are, they won't be the only team that has ever had that happen. Teams that have qualified as at-large teams in the past have been out of the game early, such as Harvard in the 2010 or Minnesota in 2011. RIT has no apology to make to anyone, and I expect there will be few shots taken at the Tigers after Saturday's game.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

This is the first year in quite some time a CHA team hasn't earned an at large bid into the Tournament. Mercyhurst even made the Frozen Four last year and yet RIT won the CHA Tourney last year as well, not Mercyhurst.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Guess I'll make some predictions:

Minnesota I guess (But how great would an all East Frozen Four be? Just to shut up all these Western Supremacists and all those hating on RIT for getting in via autobid)
Clarkson over BC (I think Defense will prevail... I also think if Clarkson comes out on top in this game they will go all the way to the Championship Game and get a chance to defend their Title)
Harvard over Quinnipiac (Not as close as the rest of their games have been, but definitely not a blowout)
BU over Wisconsin (Go East! And I'll jump on that Poulin bandwagon)
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Bhikukhu said:
This is the first year in quite some time a CHA team hasn't earned an at large bid into the Tournament. Mercyhurst even made the Frozen Four last year and yet RIT won the CHA Tourney last year as well, not Mercyhurst.
Click to expand...

That is a most interesting footnote about RIT. Won CHA two years in a row. Some people seem to forget that RIT tends to rise to the occasion when it counts, and hence dismiss them quickly. Now my betting money is on Minny to win but it will be a lot closer than most prognosticators on here have you believe it will be.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Bhikukhu said:
I agree with OnMAA on this, I would not call Clarkson a "Cinderella" team last year. The Second Ranked Team beating the First Ranked team isn't exactly an upset. And I think a lot of the people in the Forums had them Number 1.

If they managed to win it again this year you might be able to call them a "Cinderella" team. But even though I doubt they will win it again, I wouldn't be surprised if they did. It's one and done, anything can happen in a one game series and they have always been a team that plays far better against good teams than they do against lesser teams.
Click to expand...

Okay - replace "Cinderella" with whatever name conjures up the image of a team with much less National Tournament experience, never mind success, and who had to battle hard just to get to the FF, and as mentioned went into the weekend with a significant loss to injury, but stayed true to their mission, and beat Goliath;)
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

DC78-82 said:
Okay - replace "Cinderella" with whatever name conjures up the image of a team with much less National Tournament experience, never mind success, and who had to battle hard just to get to the FF, and as mentioned went into the weekend with a significant loss to injury, but stayed true to their mission, and beat Goliath;)
Click to expand...

David? :)
 
Last edited:
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

DC78-82 said:
Okay - replace "Cinderella" with whatever name conjures up the image of a team with much less National Tournament experience, never mind success, and who had to battle hard just to get to the FF, and as mentioned went into the weekend with a significant loss to injury, but stayed true to their mission, and beat Goliath;)
Click to expand...
The analogy starts to break down when considering the semifinals, where the supposed underdog team cruised rather easily after the first period while the favored team had to scratch out a close win with a third-period comeback. Early in the 2013-14 season, the three teams that stood out were Minnesota, Clarkson, and BC. The Golden Knights had a rough month early, but they looked like a contender otherwise. I don't know that they had to battle to get to the FF more than Minnesota did over BU. Clarkson took a 3-0 lead over BC very early in the third; the Gopher entered the third leading BU just 2-1.

Clarkson was Cinderella last year only to the extent that Wisconsin was in 2006, when people were focused on UNH's record. Both Wisconsin and Clarkson brought excellent teams to the Frozen Four in those years.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Eeyore said:
It should be noted that minimizing flights and travel distance are concerns in all NCAA tournaments other than D1 football. That's even true of the men's basketball tournament, though it isn't as strictly enforced there. The difference is that, in women's ice hockey, there are so few conferences and teams that prioritizing proximity ends up meaning that teams from the same conference need to play each other.

The field for the softball regional here in Minneapolis last year was Minnesota, Auburn, North Dakota State, and Wisconsin-Green Bay. That's one team that they need to put on a plane. The other regionals had similar makeups. There are just so many conferences whose champion made the tournament that they could fill out the bottom half with local non-conference teams.

The problem isn't that the NCAA has instituted a system for women's hockey that stifles things. It's that they haven't made an exception for women's hockey from the system they have in place for everything else. I doubt that this sport is going to be important enough in their eyes to justify creating an exception.
Click to expand...

I fully disagree with your assessment.

First, the NCAA has a two-tier system based on whether each individual championship is profitable or not. The ones that are profitable are fully-seeded and the ones that aren't are seeded 25%. Some championships like women's hockey get an exception to have 50% of the bracket seeded. Saying that travel limitation for men's basketball is simply "not enforced" is inaccurate.

From what I remember, the tournaments that are fully seeded are men's basketball, women's basketball, and men's hockey. I forgot if baseball also meets the standard. (The football bowl subdivision postseason is not directly governed by the NCAA, I believe).

So women's hockey IS IN A UNIQUE POSITION in that its championship is not fully seeded and the corresponding men's version is fully seeded, based on profitability. In my mind, this is immoral to discriminate within the same division of the same sport on this basis. Saying that profitability is some kind of fair gender-neutral standard completely rings hollow when one gender went through decades of discrimination. I believe there's a strong case for the NCAA to fully fund the women's bracket -- especially since it will cost practically nothing.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

dave1381 said:
I fully disagree with your assessment.

First, the NCAA has a two-tier system based on whether each individual championship is profitable or not. The ones that are profitable are fully-seeded and the ones that aren't are seeded 25%. Some championships like women's hockey get an exception to have 50% of the bracket seeded. Saying that travel limitation for men's basketball is simply "not enforced" is inaccurate.

From what I remember, the tournaments that are fully seeded are men's basketball, women's basketball, and men's hockey. I forgot if baseball also meets the standard. (The football bowl subdivision postseason is not directly governed by the NCAA, I believe).

So women's hockey IS IN A UNIQUE POSITION in that its championship is not fully seeded and the corresponding men's version is fully seeded, based on profitability. In my mind, this is immoral to discriminate within the same division of the same sport on this basis. Saying that profitability is some kind of fair gender-neutral standard completely rings hollow when one gender went through decades of discrimination. I believe there's a strong case for the NCAA to fully fund the women's bracket -- especially since it will cost practically nothing.
Click to expand...

I read recently that Title IX does not apply to the organization called the NCAA. Makes sense, I suppose, since that organization probably does not receive any Federal funds. The article was about how the NCAA was funding player family attendance at major title events -football title game and basketball final four - directly (going thru the schools would make the payments subject to Title IX rules).
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

OldDave said:
I read recently that Title IX does not apply to the organization called the NCAA. Makes sense, I suppose, since that organization probably does not receive any Federal funds. The article was about how the NCAA was funding player family attendance at major title events -football title game and basketball final four - directly (going thru the schools would make the payments subject to Title IX rules).
Click to expand...

NCAA Mission Statement:

The Association - through its member institutions, conferences and national office staff - shares a belief in and commitment to:

•The collegiate model of athletics in which students participate as an avocation, balancing their academic, social and athletics experiences.
•The pursuit of excellence in both academics and athletics.
•The supporting role that intercollegiate athletics plays in the higher education mission and in enhancing the sense of community and strengthening the identity of member institutions.
•Bla, bla, bla

As a result, the education side of title ix does apply to the NCAA. Funny how an uneducated poster knows more than your author. :)
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

5mn_Major said:
NCAA Mission Statement:

The Association - through its member institutions, conferences and national office staff - shares a belief in and commitment to:

•The collegiate model of athletics in which students participate as an avocation, balancing their academic, social and athletics experiences.
•The pursuit of excellence in both academics and athletics.
•The supporting role that intercollegiate athletics plays in the higher education mission and in enhancing the sense of community and strengthening the identity of member institutions.
•Bla, bla, bla

As a result, the education side of title ix does apply to the NCAA. Funny how an uneducated poster knows more than your author. :)
Click to expand...

I don't see the "as a result" part necessarily following from the bullet points you posted, but I'm glad the NCAA wants to abide by the spirit of the law.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

5mn_Major said:
NCAA Mission Statement:

The Association - through its member institutions, conferences and national office staff - shares a belief in and commitment to:

•The collegiate model of athletics in which students participate as an avocation, balancing their academic, social and athletics experiences.
•The pursuit of excellence in both academics and athletics.
•The supporting role that intercollegiate athletics plays in the higher education mission and in enhancing the sense of community and strengthening the identity of member institutions.
•Bla, bla, bla

As a result, the education side of title ix does apply to the NCAA. Funny how an uneducated poster knows more than your author. :)
Click to expand...

That's nice, but if the NCAA doesn't receive federal dollars, then Title IX does not apply to it no matter how it defines its mission. Further, the NCAA doesn't meet the definition of an "educational institution" as provided in the law:

(c)"Educational institution" defined

For purposes of this chapter an educational institution means any public or private preschool, elementary, or secondary school, or any institution of vocational, professional, or higher education, except that in the case of an educational institution composed of more than one school, college, or department which are administratively separate units, such term means each such school, college, or department.
Click to expand...

As usual, I'll just refer people 34 CFR 106 to check out the actual regulations, which spell the above out in more detail.
 
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Even if Title IX did apply to the NCAA, Title IX wouldn't be enforced on a sport-by-sport basis, just as any school with men's hockey isn't required to have women's hockey. And certainly Title IX isn't enforced down to the level of spending on something as specific as championship travel funding. I don't expect the law to ever be any help here. I just have to hope the NCAA eventually recognizes this is the right thing to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top