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.
2024 Pairwise and Tournament Qualification Thread
- Thread starter Numbers
- Start date
Are you a UMass fan, or do you just want chaos for the committee?
Providence: BC v MTU, Wisc v Quinn
Sioux Falls: Denver v Cornell, Minnesota v Omaha
At Springfield: Maine v Western Michigan
At Maryland Heights: North Dakota v Michigan
If Denver wins: At Springfield: Michigan State v UMass. At Maryland Heights: BU v RIT
If Omaha wins: At Springfield: BU v RIT. At Maryland Heights: Michigan State v CC
All with one exception. If Denver and MSU win, Cornell is 12th, so swap them with WMU in the bracket above
Sioux Falls: Denver v Cornell, Minnesota v Omaha
At Springfield: Maine v Western Michigan
At Maryland Heights: North Dakota v Michigan
If Denver wins: At Springfield: Michigan State v UMass. At Maryland Heights: BU v RIT
If Omaha wins: At Springfield: BU v RIT. At Maryland Heights: Michigan State v CC
All with one exception. If Denver and MSU win, Cornell is 12th, so swap them with WMU in the bracket above
Last edited:
No, he just wants BU to go west.
Boston College
Boston University
Denver
Michigan State
Maine
North Dakota
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Quinnipiac
Michigan
Omaha
Cornell
Western Michigan
Massachusetts
RIT
Michigan Tech
Providence: BC v Michigan Tech, Wisconsin v Quinnipiac
Maryland Heights: BU v RIT, North Dakota v Michigan
Sioux Falls: Denver v Western Michigan, Minnesota v Omaha
Springfield: Michigan State v Massachusetts, Maine v Cornell
Boston University
Denver
Michigan State
Maine
North Dakota
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Quinnipiac
Michigan
Omaha
Cornell
Western Michigan
Massachusetts
RIT
Michigan Tech
Providence: BC v Michigan Tech, Wisconsin v Quinnipiac
Maryland Heights: BU v RIT, North Dakota v Michigan
Sioux Falls: Denver v Western Michigan, Minnesota v Omaha
Springfield: Michigan State v Massachusetts, Maine v Cornell
The hosting rule is so dumb. I really hope it's changed next year. BU having to go to Missouri so a #4 seed UMass gets to play in Springfield breaks my brain
I had the same as you, except swapping WMU and RIT to avoid the conference matchup between WMU and Denver.
Thanks, and you are correct, of course.
redwings8831
Registered User
The NCHC didn't get a 5th team in so Denver/Western Michigan can't play in the first round.
The only question I see with the bracket at this point is Denver and BU. Bracket integrity wise Denver lines up with UMass but you would be sending the Pioneers past two regional sites on their way to Springfield to play UMass in their backyard. It seems more logical to place Denver in one of the "western" sites. And since they are closest to Sioux Falls and BU closer to Missouri I will go with that. The problem is you are screwing over BU at every turn here as the #2 overall seed. But if anyone should play UMass in their backyard it is the 4th overall seed in Michigan State. Of course the committee could shock us all and actually, I don't know, just fucking put BU in Springfield with UMass. But since that doesn't seem likely:
Providence:
1. BC (1)
2. Wisconsin (8)
3. Quinnipiac (9)
4. Michigan Tech (16)
Springfield (UMass host):
1. Michigan State (4)
2. Maine (5)
3. Cornell (12)
4. UMass (14)
Sioux Falls (Omaha host):
1. Denver (3)
2. Minnesota (7)
3. Omaha (11)
4. RIT (15)
Missouri:
1. BU (2)
2. North Dakota (6)
3. Michigan (10)
4. Western Michigan (13)
Or if an emphasis is placed on doing more to protect BU rather than Denver over Michigan State:
Providence:
1. BC (1)
2. Wisconsin (8)
3. Quinnipiac (9)
4. Michigan Tech (16)
Springfield (UMass host):
1. Denver (3)
2. Maine (5)
3. Cornell (12)
4. UMass (14)
Sioux Falls (Omaha host):
1. BU (2)
2. Minnesota (7)
3. Omaha (11)
4. RIT (15)
Missouri:
1. Michigan State (4)
2. North Dakota (6)
3. Michigan (10)
4. Western Michigan (13)
Providence:
1. BC (1)
2. Wisconsin (8)
3. Quinnipiac (9)
4. Michigan Tech (16)
Springfield (UMass host):
1. Michigan State (4)
2. Maine (5)
3. Cornell (12)
4. UMass (14)
Sioux Falls (Omaha host):
1. Denver (3)
2. Minnesota (7)
3. Omaha (11)
4. RIT (15)
Missouri:
1. BU (2)
2. North Dakota (6)
3. Michigan (10)
4. Western Michigan (13)
Or if an emphasis is placed on doing more to protect BU rather than Denver over Michigan State:
Providence:
1. BC (1)
2. Wisconsin (8)
3. Quinnipiac (9)
4. Michigan Tech (16)
Springfield (UMass host):
1. Denver (3)
2. Maine (5)
3. Cornell (12)
4. UMass (14)
Sioux Falls (Omaha host):
1. BU (2)
2. Minnesota (7)
3. Omaha (11)
4. RIT (15)
Missouri:
1. Michigan State (4)
2. North Dakota (6)
3. Michigan (10)
4. Western Michigan (13)
Wodon, McMahon, Connelly all with different brackets. McMahon's is the one that makes little sense to me
https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2024/03/23_McMahon-Alternate-Bracket.php
https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2024/03/23_McMahon-Alternate-Bracket.php
Carmine Scarpaglia
My bad.
McMahon's seems the easiest if you assign the regions to the groupings the right way (or wrong depending on how you look at it lol) and then move UNO into Sioux Falls as host. Almost perfect bracket integrity and you only have to swap UNO with Michigan to solve the host issue and the B1G first round 7/10 matchup.
Additionally, you split up a lot of conference teams. HE gets four teams in four different regions. B1G same with their 4. ECAC is split with their 2. Nacho has their 4 teams in 3 regions, only doubling up DU and North Dakota.
Attendance, BC/Qpac have Providence covered. Gophers in Sioux Falls: decent. UMA in Springfield as host plus two serious fanbases that travel: solid. Maryland Heights: shrug?
Last edited:
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
just save time for everyone and award the title to bc. they ain’t losing a single game.
ticapnews
Never Forget!
Remember that according to the NCAA, once a team gets on a plane it doesn't matter where it lands. All distances become equal. I wish I could get the same deal from my travel agent.
The NCAA has specifically treated Denver this way before, sending the Pios to Providence to play Providence when the Friars weren't even the host.
Here is the way I would think about it.....
Providence: BC v MTU and Wisc v Quinn. This is perfect. No need to change. Near home teams in both semi finals. And, 1, 8, 9, 16
Springfield: UMass is host, and as a 14 seed both CAN'T play BU and shouldn't play the 2 seed anyway. Since WMU is the 13th seed, they can't play Denver, so that means that Denver has to play UMass. Thus......Denver v UMass. This is 3 v 14, so it should go against 6 v 11. But the 2 v 3 games aren't going to be 6 v 11. They are going to be 6 v10 (UND v Mich) and 7 v 11 (Minn v Omaha) as well as 5 v 12. It simply makes so much sense to have Maine v Cornell in Springfield rather than anywhere else. Saves 2 flights, and Maine fans will be happy to be in Springfield (Cornell never travels well). Thus
Springfield is: Denver v UMass and Maine v Cornell.
Sioux Falls: Obviously the 2v3 game is Minnesota v Omaha. Does the BU v RIT game happen here or in Maryland Heights? The other game is Michigan State v Western Michigan. All 4 of these teams will be flying anyway. For bracket purposes, it looks better to have 2 and 7 in the same region, and 4 and 6....rather than 2 and 6 and 4 and 7. So, by a slight margin,
Sioux Falls would be BU v RIT and Minnesota v Omaha.
That leaves Maryland Heights to be Michigan State v Western Michigan and NoDak v Michigan
This is also Connelly's bracket.
To me, the only adjustment even on the table is swapping the Maine/Cornell game with the NoDak/Michigan game, because it improves the integrity of the bracket slightly. But I wouldn't do it, because it will hurt the attendance at the 2v3 game in Springfield, and if there is a concern about the barn in Maryland Heights, NoDak and Michigan will fill it, whereas Maine and Cornell wouldn't.
Again, this is NOT a prediction. It's my thinking.
Providence: BC v MTU and Wisc v Quinn. This is perfect. No need to change. Near home teams in both semi finals. And, 1, 8, 9, 16
Springfield: UMass is host, and as a 14 seed both CAN'T play BU and shouldn't play the 2 seed anyway. Since WMU is the 13th seed, they can't play Denver, so that means that Denver has to play UMass. Thus......Denver v UMass. This is 3 v 14, so it should go against 6 v 11. But the 2 v 3 games aren't going to be 6 v 11. They are going to be 6 v10 (UND v Mich) and 7 v 11 (Minn v Omaha) as well as 5 v 12. It simply makes so much sense to have Maine v Cornell in Springfield rather than anywhere else. Saves 2 flights, and Maine fans will be happy to be in Springfield (Cornell never travels well). Thus
Springfield is: Denver v UMass and Maine v Cornell.
Sioux Falls: Obviously the 2v3 game is Minnesota v Omaha. Does the BU v RIT game happen here or in Maryland Heights? The other game is Michigan State v Western Michigan. All 4 of these teams will be flying anyway. For bracket purposes, it looks better to have 2 and 7 in the same region, and 4 and 6....rather than 2 and 6 and 4 and 7. So, by a slight margin,
Sioux Falls would be BU v RIT and Minnesota v Omaha.
That leaves Maryland Heights to be Michigan State v Western Michigan and NoDak v Michigan
This is also Connelly's bracket.
To me, the only adjustment even on the table is swapping the Maine/Cornell game with the NoDak/Michigan game, because it improves the integrity of the bracket slightly. But I wouldn't do it, because it will hurt the attendance at the 2v3 game in Springfield, and if there is a concern about the barn in Maryland Heights, NoDak and Michigan will fill it, whereas Maine and Cornell wouldn't.
Again, this is NOT a prediction. It's my thinking.