Where in the handbook does it say 2E automatically gets picked over 3W? When you find that bit of info in the handbook post it here and you'll never hear from me again.
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.
2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
Where in the handbook does it say 2E automatically gets picked over 3W? When you find that bit of info in the handbook post it here and you'll never hear from me again.
That's not what I asked you...I asked you where it says 2E automatically gets selected over 3W. If 3W has better numbers it's in over 2E. You're making it sound like 2E is an automatic selection over 3W no matter what.
NorthernLite
Registered User
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
Champs
2008-2009 Adrian Bulldogs 27-1-1 beat the National Champion..... Neumann 10-1.
NLite
Champs
2008-2009 Adrian Bulldogs 27-1-1 beat the National Champion..... Neumann 10-1.
NLite
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
Who the heck are you arguing with?
Everybody from Plattsburgh has admitted on this thread that they needed to beat Williams or Geneseo to have gotten in. Nobody from Plattsburgh is b*tch*ing that they were left out. You are the only one b*tch*ng.
So again, who are you arguing with?
Who the heck are you arguing with?
Everybody from Plattsburgh has admitted on this thread that they needed to beat Williams or Geneseo to have gotten in. Nobody from Plattsburgh is b*tch*ing that they were left out. You are the only one b*tch*ng.
So again, who are you arguing with?
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
Calm down Remy.
You totally misread snc11's original post. He clearly stated that he once thought that might be a consideration then realized it was an absurd thought.
And for some reason, your ego cannot let go of the fact you wanted to jump all over him for misreading his post for a thought he clearly admitted right away was an incorrect thought.
Stop it!
Calm down Remy.
You totally misread snc11's original post. He clearly stated that he once thought that might be a consideration then realized it was an absurd thought.
And for some reason, your ego cannot let go of the fact you wanted to jump all over him for misreading his post for a thought he clearly admitted right away was an incorrect thought.
Stop it!
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
Williams and Plattsburgh were compared first.
Then Williams, after winning that comparison, was compared to UWSP.
I have my sources.
Williams and Plattsburgh were compared first.
Then Williams, after winning that comparison, was compared to UWSP.
I have my sources.
Why would Williams and Plattsburg(h) be compared first on a national call when that work was already done by the regional committee? I think you need some new sources.
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
No, he CLEARLY stated his thought about being a National Champion should hold merit. THEN went on to say:
It doesn't say they were wrong about the whole "defending champion invitation", to me it says they were wrong about a Non Conference Final team making it in winning the National Title. I don't see anything being said that allowing a defending champion in the dance is an "absurd thought". Had they actually SAID that, I wouldn't have added the "dumbest thing ever". Get your panties out of a bunch. They said they were wrong. Wrong about what? A "defending champion" criteria or a non conference championship finalist making it in to the NCAA or wrong about thinking Trinity didn't deserve to be there? Once again, had they said that their "defending champion" argument was absurd (which is pretty much what I did, sorry your big boy pants can't handle the whole "one of the all time dumbest thing ever") I would have agreed 110% and probably added that it would go against everything people argued about for years of it was more "who" you were then "what you've done" THAT year that we heard all the time. Sorry I guess I need your secret decoder ring to be able to pull the phrase "my thought of a defending champion criteria is and was absurd" out of that context.
Ego? LoL you're one to talk. STOP IT YOU'RE HURTING MY FEELINGS. Better? Again, can I borrow that decoder ring of yours?
No, he CLEARLY stated his thought about being a National Champion should hold merit. THEN went on to say:
It doesn't say they were wrong about the whole "defending champion invitation", to me it says they were wrong about a Non Conference Final team making it in winning the National Title. I don't see anything being said that allowing a defending champion in the dance is an "absurd thought". Had they actually SAID that, I wouldn't have added the "dumbest thing ever". Get your panties out of a bunch. They said they were wrong. Wrong about what? A "defending champion" criteria or a non conference championship finalist making it in to the NCAA or wrong about thinking Trinity didn't deserve to be there? Once again, had they said that their "defending champion" argument was absurd (which is pretty much what I did, sorry your big boy pants can't handle the whole "one of the all time dumbest thing ever") I would have agreed 110% and probably added that it would go against everything people argued about for years of it was more "who" you were then "what you've done" THAT year that we heard all the time. Sorry I guess I need your secret decoder ring to be able to pull the phrase "my thought of a defending champion criteria is and was absurd" out of that context.
Ego? LoL you're one to talk. STOP IT YOU'RE HURTING MY FEELINGS. Better? Again, can I borrow that decoder ring of yours?
That hurt...right there ..... *tear*
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
We call that an air-leak or flat tire at work. I do apologize if you intended to say that your thought that a "defending champion" should hold merit in the selection process was an absurd thought. I just have yet to see it or find anything remotely close to it. Cheers.
We call that an air-leak or flat tire at work. I do apologize if you intended to say that your thought that a "defending champion" should hold merit in the selection process was an absurd thought. I just have yet to see it or find anything remotely close to it. Cheers.
elbojpb
Well-known member
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
My statement was no "appreciable improvement." A collective 2-14 score in year [whatever] of this AQ process is quite disappointing.
When this whole thing first started ~15 years ago, I was one of the most supportive of the AQs on these boards hoping that the entire landscape of D3 hockey would be more competitive (having watched some of the "no-class" double-digit blowouts). In my feeble estimation, that hope is now gone. In fact, not only has the overall quality of D3 hockey not improved, I believe that it has declined substantially. Ergo, some of the improvement of the "weaker" leagues can be attributed to the increased level of stink of other teams.
I agree completely that the conferences have statistically become more competitive. However, the D3 Interconference Records, which may be the only way to measure competitiveness, reveals that much of the improvement has been at the expense of the NE-10 teams, and each other.
My statement was no "appreciable improvement." A collective 2-14 score in year [whatever] of this AQ process is quite disappointing.
When this whole thing first started ~15 years ago, I was one of the most supportive of the AQs on these boards hoping that the entire landscape of D3 hockey would be more competitive (having watched some of the "no-class" double-digit blowouts). In my feeble estimation, that hope is now gone. In fact, not only has the overall quality of D3 hockey not improved, I believe that it has declined substantially. Ergo, some of the improvement of the "weaker" leagues can be attributed to the increased level of stink of other teams.
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
Like I said, you clearly misread him.
Now, don't make me say S-T-F-U.
Like I said, you clearly misread him.
Now, don't make me say S-T-F-U.
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
Russell Jaslow
Registered User
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
This is a totally different discussion, but there are many reasons behind perhaps a supposed decline in D3 talent. Many more D1 schools exist for starters, thus drawing away those on the borderline D1 players who used to go to D3 schools but now attend schools like AHA teams. (Trevor Hills of Geneseo by way of St. Lawrence, though obviously not an AHA team, is a perfect example of that.)
I also believe there are far too many AAA youth organizations because everybody has to have an opportunity to play AAA hockey, so instead they get no real competition to drive their talent levels up. Just look at places like Boston and Buffalo. Seemingly every other year, a new AAA organization springs up, diluting the AAA talent level into mediocrity.
However, on the flipside, there are so many more players involved in hockey, that perhaps with higher numbers to choose from, it turns out to be a wash.
This is a totally different discussion, but there are many reasons behind perhaps a supposed decline in D3 talent. Many more D1 schools exist for starters, thus drawing away those on the borderline D1 players who used to go to D3 schools but now attend schools like AHA teams. (Trevor Hills of Geneseo by way of St. Lawrence, though obviously not an AHA team, is a perfect example of that.)
I also believe there are far too many AAA youth organizations because everybody has to have an opportunity to play AAA hockey, so instead they get no real competition to drive their talent levels up. Just look at places like Boston and Buffalo. Seemingly every other year, a new AAA organization springs up, diluting the AAA talent level into mediocrity.
However, on the flipside, there are so many more players involved in hockey, that perhaps with higher numbers to choose from, it turns out to be a wash.
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
And like I said, CLEARLY you have a secret decoder ring to pick that out of his statement...
...is that supposed to scare me?
there...that will make it better....
And like I said, CLEARLY you have a secret decoder ring to pick that out of his statement...
...is that supposed to scare me?
there...that will make it better....Russell Jaslow
Registered User
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
It's called brains. Try engaging yours even if you are from Plattsburgh.
It's called brains. Try engaging yours even if you are from Plattsburgh.
ColdInRomney
Registered User
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
It's actually a Zang since I only lived in Plattsburgh for about 2 years, but anyways....I would respond to him, but I wouldn't want to hurt his feelings.
Zing!
It's actually a Zang since I only lived in Plattsburgh for about 2 years, but anyways....I would respond to him, but I wouldn't want to hurt his feelings.
Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread
Hey, hey, hey..... this was amusing right up to this comment... keep it classy.
Hey, hey, hey..... this was amusing right up to this comment... keep it classy.