I’ve definitely heard the phrase player experience as it relates to the national tournament. Can’t remember the exact context but it was something they talked about when expanding.
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 Predictor
- Thread starter TonyTheTiger20
- Start date
I’ve definitely heard the phrase player experience as it relates to the national tournament. Can’t remember the exact context but it was something they talked about when expanding.
top cheese
New member
What teams get the auto bids?
I'm not sure "fairest" way possible is anywhere in the criteria. "Fairest" would seem to include #12 Princeton instead of #30 Stonehill. I get the AQs and are not arguing against them, just saying the NCAA never claims to be "fair". They have criteria to get teams in and bracketed and they don't apologize for the final bracket. You want to be National Champion, win the 13-team tournament, no matter whose put in front of you. (See the Div III tourney for "fair".... #1 played #4 in the QF round for the umpteeth time in a row for money reasons.)
robertearle
Well-known member
Conference tournament winners: Penn State, Stonehill, UConn, Colgate, and Wisconsin.
robertearle
Well-known member
Straight up Pairwise bracket.
Timothy A
Let's go RED!
Exactly how it should have been.
Yup. Why even have a committee? All they need is one sentence for the NCAA rules. Top 11 make it. 2024 NCAA womens hockey tournament is the ecac tournament and the wcha tournament do over. With the number 30th ranked team and a number 13 oh so exciting. WI should play their club team in that one. OSU gets UMD for the 6th time and trust me just cause they won 5-0 that won't happen again hopefully UCONN makes it but unlikely so Muzerall has an interesting job of trying to motivate that group. The only fun game to watch is Minn vs Clark. Wow what a NCAA tournament. I know I've been a bit harsh ...but seeing how the men are treated by the NCAA/iniversities and the women is two different sides of the coin. Yet, they want to preach equality...yeah right. I would love to see some female reporters actually do some cool hard hitting writing on this issue. I would love to know what the committee even talked about all year...hey do you have Netflix and Hulu?? No I have Amazon prime? These ADs are a joke. All they care about is doing nothing and more of nothing while getting a pay check. The system has been broken since the 90s when I was a college D1 athlete at a power 5 school. I've been watching and experiencing this crap for 25 years. Talk, talk, talk and no action. They lie to your face with a smile as the athlete sacrifices their body and mind on a daily basis. They say "the education that you get is worth everything" you can get a better education watching YouTube videos these days. WI fans can't even donate to the program of their choosing without FB stealing it. Men win, Women lose, that's the message the University's are sending. I'm done with college athletics. They won't get other min of my sacrifice or my children's. Good luck to all the women that will be competing in this year's 2024 NCAA's and to the schools you didn't do a dam thing the women did everything. All you did was get in their way.
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
I... genuinely don't know what you're mad about lol
robertearle
Well-known member
Thanks once more for the work on the Predictor.
The goal of the committee is the athlete experience and the growth of womens hockey. They had all the tools to make that happen. Do you think this tournament accomplished that?
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Thanks! I enjoy it.
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
I think we've spent a lot of years dealing with the rule to minimize flights which has made for an objectively less compelling tournament with first round repeat matchups year after year, and we finally got the committee to scrap it so we get new and interesting matchups in the first round games and teams travelling across the country in a sport where cross-country matchups are severely lacking. I think this sort of bracket is what pretty much everyone's been screaming for since the beginning. I would say this bracket is quite a good one with some really fun games on the horizon.
Are there specific changes would you have liked to have seen made to this field? I think it's pretty clear that there wouldn't have been any wiggle room on changing any of the 11 teams chosen (though maybe you'd have changed something there too), but I'm not sure there are any real compelling reasons to swap games around. But I'd be interested in hearing what you'd have liked to see.
Hockeybuckeye
Well-known member
Hard to say, I don't have a problem with UConn coming to Columbus but Stonehill should be here too. Other than that my second choice was we should have had St.Lawrence & Penn State. I'm not speaking from rankings, just my personal opinion on what I'd like to see in our barn.
robertearle
Well-known member
What justification would there have been in matching up UConn and Stonehill? Even in the "band 1/2/3" (or whatever the term used was) construct the NCAA people described, there was no hint of being able to match up 9-11 seeds against one another (at the 'expense' or consequence of then having to match up seed 6-8 for a first round game).
Did you mean Cornell and not UConn?
Hockeybuckeye
Well-known member
Thank you Tony!
It certainly invokes conversation and speculation.
It certainly invokes conversation and speculation.
She's spoken to this.
Unfortunately the conversation is spread across multiple threads. But the essence of her position is that she didn't want another WCHA team sent to our Regional. She did offer alternatives. The forum is a little chaotic these days, as people jump around from thread to thread looking for conversation.
Yes, I think that the bracket is great from that perspective. The first-round matchups should be interesting, and #6 Cornell has also earned the right to play the lowest seed Stonehill. They have teams flying a ways to the tournament, like St. Lawrence to Wisconsin, with no restrictions on travel. There is potential for some teams from the same conference to see each other in the quarterfinals. Those would be UMD and Ohio State, along with Cornell and Colgate. Those are beyond the first round, though, and shouldn't be taken for granted as matchups (I agree with QuasiCosmos' comment on that). And only the 3 first-round games, so Thursday games, are considered for avoiding intraconference.
The auto-bids help accomplish the growth of women's hockey by giving those teams a crack at the tournament too.
Hockeybuckeye
Well-known member
It's not a justification issue, I said it's just my personal preference on what matchups I'd like to see here outside of pairwise or NPI.
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Ah gotcha thanks -- yeah okay, fair. It would be hard to avoid all instances of round 2 intraconference games (esp with 4 ECAC and 4 WCHA) but I get the frustration.
robertearle
Well-known member
The idea was - assuming no first round upsets - to get a bracket with all four Saturday games matching up ECAC vs WCHA. There were two ways to get there: send Cornell/Stonehill to play at Ohio State, and Duluth/UConn to Colgate; or rotate all three pairs, St Lawrence/Penn State to Ohio, Cornell/Stonehill to Wisconsin, and Duluth/UConn to Colgate.