2024 Pairwise Predictor

[Timothy A]

Does he not know they don't have travel as a consideration anymore?

He sited something that happened in 2022 with UMD. I had thought that travel was a dead duck.

 

[Timothy A]

Travel is one factor of this equation. The 2nd factor is the fact tOSU will have played Duluth 5 times this year. Depending on this weekend it could be back to back for the 6th time. Instead of a different opponent, lets fly Duluth all the way down to tOSU and potentially play a 6th time. The number 1 team in the country has earned the right to play against some fresher competition. Colgate will play Cornell only for the 3rd time this weekend. So playing them in their 1st round would be the 4th time for the year. WI would play Duluth for the 5th time. tOSU has a case to be made to the committee. When you are the number 1 team in the country you've earned that voice. tOSU has earned the right to play a different team. Why bust your a## all season to just play your own league in the NCAAs ... The Hockey East champion can beat Duluth. Im just saying that the number 1 team in the county should not have to see their own league in their first game till the frozen 4. What's the motivation to be #1 ?

If UMD knocks you off and UW beats UM, UW would be playing UMD for the 6th time as well. I believe the committee does not take this variable into consideration, it's purely by the numbers.

There's no motivation in being number 1 during the season, it does not matter if you are 1 or 8 at the end of Sunday, you just need to get into the tourney and see Watts happens.

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

There's no motivation in being number 1 during the season, it does not matter if you are 1 or 8 at the end of Sunday, you just need to get into the tourney and see Watts happens.

Sierra is right, there should be certain perks and rewards for not only being #1 but #1 for 90% of the season. It matters quite a bit also in who you get on your home ice in the NCAA first round and in the FF. It's a lot more than just who's bench you get.

 

[Sierra]

Exactly, Hockeybuckeye! If WI had the #1 ranking I would make the same argument.

 

[BowWowWow]

Checking over the 2022 and 2023 Pairwise Predictors, it is true that a pair of the regional first-round games seem to have been switched in 2022 in a way they weren't last year.

In 2022, Quinnipiac (7 PWR) played Syracuse (11 seed/19 PWR) in the Ohio State (1) regional, while Minn Duluth (8 PWR) played Harvard (9 PWR) in the Minnesota (2) regional.

In 2023, Quinnipiac (8 PWR) played Penn State (10 PWR) in the Ohio State (1) regional - so, the 8 seed was at the regional of the 1 seed. The games in Minnesota, the 2 seed again, involved the 7 seed that year, as it seems like is supposed to happen, so to speak.

Was the 2022 switch between 8 and 7 seeds caused by travel then?

 

[vicb]

Travel is one factor of this equation. The 2nd factor is the fact tOSU will have played Duluth 5 times this year. Depending on this weekend it could be back to back for the 6th time. Instead of a different opponent, lets fly Duluth all the way down to tOSU and potentially play a 6th time. The number 1 team in the country has earned the right to play against some fresher competition. Colgate will play Cornell only for the 3rd time this weekend. So playing them in their 1st round would be the 4th time for the year. WI would play Duluth for the 5th time. tOSU has a case to be made to the committee. When you are the number 1 team in the country you've earned that voice. tOSU has earned the right to play a different team. Why bust your a## all season to just play your own league in the NCAAs ... The Hockey East champion can beat Duluth. Im just saying that the number 1 team in the county should not have to see their own league in their first game till the frozen 4. What's the motivation to be #1 ?

SLU vs Clarkson this weekend will be the 5th time they play this season and I have not tried but I think you could probably come up with a scenario that they could play for the 6th time in the NC$$ Tourney.

 

[BadgerPete]

Honestly, if you want purely bracket fun I think the logistical result is to have Clarkson win the ECAC, Minnesota upset Wisconsin but lose to OSU, and flip St. Lawrence and UMD. Then you basically have a balanced WCHA/ECAC showdown for the title. (This calls Clarkson ECAC 1, Colgate ECAC 2, Cornell ECAC 3 and St. Lawrence ECAC 4 because of the Pairwise even though that's not where they finished in the actual ECAC standings)

St. Lawrence (ECAC 4) at Ohio State (WCHA 1)
Minnesota (WCHA 3) at Colgate (ECAC 2)
Cornell (ECAC 3) at Wisconsin (WCHA 2)
UMD (WCHA 4) at Clarkson (ECAC 1)

Can't have a much more pure "alright conferences, YOU sort it out" bracket than that.

 

[BowWowWow]

Today, Todd Milewski tweeted that the PodKaz will have an interview with Merrimack AD Jeremy Gibson, the NCAA D1 women's hockey committee chair - and to send along questions to Nicole Haase or him for the interview this evening.

I agree that that bracket would be entertaining, BadgerPete! And seems not impossible in terms of the conference tournament results and flipping UMD and St. Lawrence.

 

[Timothy A]

Sierra is right, there should be certain perks and rewards for not only being #1 but #1 for 90% of the season. It matters quite a bit also in who you get on your home ice in the NCAA first round and in the FF. It's a lot more than just who's bench you get.

But what you fail to understand is that the pairwise is simply a mathematical calculation that takes any sort of perk that's not math driven out of it.

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

But what you fail to understand is that the pairwise is simply a mathematical calculation that takes any sort of perk that's not math driven out of it.

We understand about the pairwise. I feel Sierra and I are on the same page that the NCAA can do whatever they want when it comes to assembling the playoff bracket and are not bound by anything in the pairwise. Now the point is it may be inevitable for conference opponent to meet in the FF but all effort should be made to avoid that in the first round if it's possible over the teams pairwise based seeding. Who agrees?

 

[robertearle]

We understand about the pairwise. I feel Sierra and I are on the same page that the NCAA can do whatever they want when it comes to assembling the playoff bracket and are not bound by anything in the pairwise. Now the point is it may be inevitable for conference opponent to meet in the FF but all effort should be made to avoid that in the first round if it's possible over the teams pairwise based seeding. Who agrees?

Just to be clear about terminology: since they went to the 11 team format, "first round" are the Thursday games of the first weekend. The #1 seed does not play a first round game. And it is their stated policy, as best I understand, to avoid intra-conference match-ups in the first round.

Back in the days of the 8 team bracket when "travel considerations" were the prime consideration, the NCAA quite regularly broke "bracket integrity" and had WCHA opponents playing one another in the quarterfinals, with Boston schools playing other Boston schools, etc. In 2011, for example, Duluth came to Madison for the quarterfinal in what I was pretty sure was going to be the de facto national championship.

With four WCHA teams and four ECAC teams as the top eight seeds, if they all make it through Thursday, you're going to get zero, or two, or all games as intra-conference match-ups. I would very much prefer they maintain bracket integrity, as opposed to trying to cook up some outcome. The team at seed #7 beat out team #8; they earned the right to play #2 and not #1. So let 'em.

 

[BowWowWow]

On the PodKaz, Jeremy Gibson - committee chair for the National Collegiate women's hockey championship - explained some more about how they put together the bracket. He said that the 6th to 11th teams that qualify for the tournament are in two "bands" (6-8 and 9-11) and they don't switch teams between the bands: no switch from 8 to 10, for example.

As in the handbook TTT shared, the top 4 teams are "one seeds," 5 (which plays 4) is a "2 seed," 6-8 are also "2 seeds," and 9-11 are "3 seeds." So there are 4 one seeds, 4 two seeds, and 3 three seeds. And they may switch things around within the 6-8 and 9-11 bands, both to avoid intraconference games and for player experience/growth of the game. He said that UMD was sent to the Minnesota regional in 2022 basically because of the experience there - that the teams would draw more fans within their region (than if Quinnipiac and Syracuse played there).

Gibson offered as well that they try to let the 6 team play the lowest-ranked team - although this wasn't the case in 2022, I think because there were 3 ECAC teams and they avoided intraconference games in the first round. In that case, Wisconsin played Clarkson.

 

[robertearle]

Gibson offered as well that they try to let the 6 team play the lowest-ranked team - although this wasn't the case in 2022, I think because there were 3 ECAC teams and they avoided intraconference games in the first round. In that case, Wisconsin played Clarkson.

In 2022, NEWHA had not yet gotten their auto-bid. So the 'gap' between #10 and #11 probably wasn't all that much. For the time being at least, now that #11 is the NEWHA auto-bid, that gap from #10 to #11 figures to be much larger.

 

[Sierra]

The best athlete experience and the committee can do it. They have done it before so they can do it again. This would be the best current senerio for us fans and for the women that have to play.

OSU should get St. Lawrence and HE winner
WI should get Cornell and the NEWHA winner
Clarkson should get Duluth and Penn State.
Colgate gets Minnesota

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

The best athlete experience and the committee can do it. They have done it before so they can do it again. This would be the best current senerio for us fans and for the women that have to play.

OSU should get St. Lawrence and HE winner
WI should get Cornell and the NEWHA winner
Clarkson should get Duluth and Penn State.
Colgate gets Minnesota

Looks logical to me but I've got to say after watching Ohio State's women's basketball game against Iowa last weekend I'm more convinced than ever the NCAA likes to make sure certain teams win. Who's going to be their favorite in women's hockey this year?
​​​

 

[pgb-ohio]

BW2's description of the selection procedures is very good. But maybe it would be helpful to have the actual text from the Handbook in front of us:

SEEDINGS AND PAIRINGS

The following steps are taken during the selection meeting: In setting up the tournament, the committee begins with a list of priorities to ensure a successful tournament on all fronts, including competitive equity, financial success and the likelihood of a playoff-type atmosphere at each regional site. For this model, the following is a basic set of priorities:

1. Once the five automatic qualifiers and six at-large teams are selected, the top four teams are No. 1 seeds and will be placed in the bracket so that if all four teams advance to the Women’s Frozen Four, the No. 1 seed will play the No. 4 seed and the No. 2 seed will play the No. 3 seed in the semifinals.

2. The next four are targeted as No. 2 seeds. The No. 5 overall seed will be designated as the top No. 2 seed since they get a first-round bye and would automatically play the No. 4 overall seed. The committee has determined they would like No. 4 to play No. 5 regardless of if they are from the same conference.

3. The next three teams are the other No. 2 seeds, and the last three teams will be designated as the No. 3 seeds.

4. The next step is to place the home teams. Assuming it meets the committee’s hosting criteria, the highest seeded team will be given the opportunity to host the regional games.

5. Next step is to fill in the bracket so that first-round conference matchups are avoided, unless it corrupts the integrity of the bracket. If four or more teams from one conference are selected to the championship in the final six spots so as to play in the first-round contests, then the integrity of the bracket will be protected (i.e., maintaining the pairing process according to seed will take priority over avoidance of first-round conference matchups).

6. To complete each site, the committee assigns one team from each of the remaining seeded groups so there is a No. 1, No. 2, No. 3 at three of the sites using its priorities, while matching up the No. 4 and No. 5 overall seeds in a second-round matchup.

The NCAA Division I Competition Oversight Committee shall have the authority to modify its working principles related to the championship site assignment on a case-by-case basis.

There's nothing wrong with creating your own bracket, and arguing that it would make for the best possible tournament. And yes, the Committee does have the authority to "modify" on a "case-by-case basis."

Unhappily, the Handbook adds a little more confusion to the mix by speaking of "working principles." I would imagine the listed priorities are a subset of the working principles. But I'm not 100% confident of that reading.


All that said, what if one's goal is to predict what the Committee will do? My guess is that they will stick as closely as possible to the Six Priorities listed above.

 

[pgb-ohio]

Just to be clear about terminology: since they went to the 11 team format, "first round" are the Thursday games of the first weekend. The #1 seed does not play a first round game. And it is their stated policy, as best I understand, to avoid intra-conference match-ups in the first round.

This is a central point. And for those who follow both Men's & Women's D-1 Hockey, a source of confusion.

In the Men's Tournament, 16 Teams are selected, and all 16 have a First Round Game. In the Women's Tournament, 11 Teams are selected. But 5 of these teams get byes. Only 6 of the 11 get First Round Games.

I suppose the implication is that if you're getting a free pass into the Second Round, you shouldn't be complaining about the particulars of your match-up. But this doesn't sit well if your "initial" NCAA game is a rehash of a conference rivalry. There's a risk of being knocked out of the national tournament without ever playing a national game.

The potentially unequal gender result doesn't sit well either. In the Men's tournament, avoiding intra-conference match-ups in the initial game is a majority priority. In the Women's Tournament it's a kinda sorta priority, one that may not apply to almost half the teams in the field.

In fairness to our conference mates, I would ask my Buckeye Siblings to remember the history. Over the years, UofM, UMD, UW & the late UND program have all been hit much, much harder by this problem than we ever have. Back when reducing the number of flights was everything, our Eastern Time Zone location gave us a partial immunity. Example: The first NCAA match-up with BC.

 

[Sierra]

Great job by the USCHO to get this topic on the podcast. He mentioned that a consensus in womens hockey is athlete experience, and a way to do that is to avoid conference match ups. So, the athlete's get to play different teams. For example, Penn State has been to tOSU last year, so why send them back. Let PSU athletes and fans get to have a new experience . Just because the NPI says this team is .32 ahead of another is crazy especially when nobody can clearly explain the NPI. Bracket integrity is a enigma at its best. Who knows this weekend could blow up all thought and logic. Good luck to all!

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

Bracket integrity is a enigma at its best. Who knows this weekend could blow up all thought and logic. Good luck to all!

I can only imagine that some will be watching the selection show with great trepidation to see if their team took heavy damage from the conference tournaments.

 

[Timothy A]

Bracket integrity is a enigma at its best. Who knows this weekend could blow up all thought and logic. Good luck to all!

I disagree. Teams earned the right to be where they are at in the pairwise by winning (and losing games). Bracket integrity to the math is crucial. Touchy feely things do not belong in deciding who plays who. This is not a smokey backroom from 1994.