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.

3/2 Regional Rankings

elbojpb

elbojpb

Well-known member
East Region Region Record Overall
1. Norwich 17-1-4 21-1-4
2. Oswego State 23-2-0 24-2-0
3. Middlebury 15-3-4 17-4-4
4. Plattsburgh State 18-4-4 18-4-4
5. Bowdoin 16-5-1 18-5-1
6. Elmira 17-7-1 18-7-1
7. Trinity (Connecticut) 14-7-2 15-8-2
8. Amherst 15-4-4 16-5-4
9. Williams 13-6-3 15-6-3
10. Manhattanville 18-6-1 19-6-1
11. Hamilton 14-7-2 15-8-2
12. Curry 10-5-1 17-8-1
13. Wentworth Institute 17-4-1 20-4-1
14. Babson 10-11-2 10-11-2
15. Neumann 15-9-3 15-9-3

West Region
1. St. Norbert 20-2-3 20-3-3
2. Gustavus Adolphus 19-5-2 1 9-5-2
3. St. Scholastica 16-5-6 17-5-6
4. Hamline 16-6-4 16-6-4
5. Wisconsin-River Falls 18-8-2 18-8-2
6. Augsburg 16-9-1 16-9-1
7. Adrian 22-2-0 22-3-0

** Five count 'em 5 NESCAC teams in the top 9 when the overwhelming majority of the NC schedule is played against the ECAC/E against whom the NESCAC was 64-32!? and another bunch of games against the NE and MASCAC. Even my crude, uneducated analytical skills indicate that those rankings are less than objective. If the NCHA played an interlock with the MCHA, they'd have all 7 Western slots.
 
Last edited:
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

elbojpb said:
** Five count 'em 5 NESCAC teams in the top 9 when the overwhelming majority of the NC schedule is played against the ECAC/E against whom the NESCAC was 64-32!? and another bunch of games against the NE and MASCAC. Even my crude, uneducated analytical skills indicate that those rankings are less than objective. If the NCHA played an interlock with the MCHA, they'd have all 7 Western slots.
Click to expand...

Error! The game against the ECAC E are conference games, which totally balance out in calculating the OWP They may have gotten to play UNE, but they also had to play Norwich. League games balance out when you play every member of the league the same number of times.
 
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

elbojpb said:
East Region Region Record Overall
1. Norwich 17-1-4 21-1-4
2. Oswego State 23-2-0 24-2-0
3. Middlebury 15-3-4 17-4-4
4. Plattsburgh State 18-4-4 18-4-4
5. Bowdoin 16-5-1 18-5-1
6. Elmira 17-7-1 18-7-1
7. Trinity (Connecticut) 14-7-2 15-8-2
8. Amherst 15-4-4 16-5-4
9. Williams 13-6-3 15-6-3
10. Manhattanville 18-6-1 19-6-1
11. Hamilton 14-7-2 15-8-2
12. Curry 10-5-1 17-8-1
13. Wentworth Institute 17-4-1 20-4-1
14. Babson 10-11-2 10-11-2
15. Neumann 15-9-3 15-9-3

West Region
1. St. Norbert 20-2-3 20-3-3
2. Gustavus Adolphus 19-5-2 1 9-5-2
3. St. Scholastica 16-5-6 17-5-6
4. Hamline 16-6-4 16-6-4
5. Wisconsin-River Falls 18-8-2 18-8-2
6. Augsburg 16-9-1 16-9-1
7. Adrian 22-2-0 22-3-0

** Five count 'em 5 NESCAC teams in the top 9 when the overwhelming majority of the NC schedule is played against the ECAC/E against whom the NESCAC was 64-32!? and another bunch of games against the NE and MASCAC. Even my crude, uneducated analytical skills indicate that those rankings are less than objective. If the NCHA played an interlock with the MCHA, they'd have all 7 Western slots.
Click to expand...

An interesting observation, understandable when you first look at the list. Does seem overloaded with NESCAC.

However, two things: first it would be more comparable to look at the NCHA playing an interlock with the MIAC not the MCHA. At least in my opinion the MIAC and ECAC-East are somewhat comparable this year while the MCHA and ECAC-NE are closer to each other.

Secondly if you look at the East Region List, who would you put ahead of the 5 NESCAC teams? I don't see anyone below them that should be moved up, especially if you look at the SOS and OOC schedules of those lower ranked teams.
 
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

oldguard said:
Secondly if you look at the East Region List, who would you put ahead of the 5 NESCAC teams? I don't see anyone below them that should be moved up, especially if you look at the SOS and OOC schedules of those lower ranked teams.
Click to expand...

Bingo. The ECAC-E is having a meh year, but the NE is the NE and the ECAC-W simply hasn't been itself this season. Both of the SUNYAC powers can argue (obviously, in Oswego's case) for a one-rank bump at most, but both of those teams lost two ranked-opponent wins this week after Morrisville took down Fredonia. The NESCAC schools may have collectively benefited in the Win% department from feasting on the same slate of inferior ECAC-E teams, but representatives of other conferences really haven't done much to distinguish their own wins as more impressive.
 
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

jerrynu26 said:
The fact that the MCHA will get an AQ does not mean Adrian has to be regionally ranked.
Click to expand...

Couldn't care less about regional rankings.
Win to keep playing and shake hands, or lose to a better team and shake hands, and go home.

What happens on the ice is far more important to me than the NCAA committee sideshow.I'll watch with great interest again on Selection Sunday, but it'll be much different this year.
 
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

jerrynu26 said:
The fact that the MCHA will get an AQ does not mean Adrian has to be regionally ranked.
Click to expand...
In fact, with their high likelihood of winning the MCHA AQ it would probably be in the West's best interest not to rank Adrian and get someone else in there who can improve the record of the top few West teams against ranked opponents.
 
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

MW4Bucky&SNC said:
In fact, with their high likelihood of winning the MCHA AQ it would probably be in the West's best interest not to rank Adrian and get someone else in there who can improve the record of the top few West teams against ranked opponents.
Click to expand...

It helps Hamline having them in there :)
 
Ouch

Ouch

NUProf said:
Error! The game against the ECAC E are conference games, which totally balance out in calculating the OWP They may have gotten to play UNE, but they also had to play Norwich. League games balance out when you play every member of the league the same number of times.
Click to expand...
Darn - I've never gotten my hand slapped in red before. Your mother a nun?

I don't dispute your assertion, I simply believe that the probability of 6 of the top 11 teams coming from the same league ~cannot~ be realistic. With the notable exception of NU, the ECAC/E has had a less than stellar season; only one team with a winning conference record.

You can 'splain it anyway you wish, and I understand your defense of the East, but 6 of the best 11 teams coming from any one conference is {in my mind} dubious. And if I were the NESCAC, there's no way in Hades i'd ever vote to disband the interlock.
 
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

NUProf said:
Error! The game against the ECAC E are conference games, which totally balance out in calculating the OWP They may have gotten to play UNE, but they also had to play Norwich. League games balance out when you play every member of the league the same number of times.
Click to expand...

That would be true if they were listed as one conference. However, the NESCAC would be the only conference in the country to have an over .500 conference mark, right? All of the other conferences, by definition, have to be .500, while the ECAC-E is obviously well below .500. That doesn't have any effect on the numbers? I'm not sure that makes sense to me....
 
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

spwood said:
That would be true if they were listed as one conference. However, the NESCAC would be the only conference in the country to have an over .500 conference mark, right? All of the other conferences, by definition, have to be .500, while the ECAC-E is obviously well below .500. That doesn't have any effect on the numbers? I'm not sure that makes sense to me....
Click to expand...

Look at the pool of teams - there are 20 teams, 19 games per team. There are a total of 190 league games spread out in that pool. There are 190 wins that will be awarded if we count a tie as a half a win for each team. If you add up the league wins for all teams in the NESCAC and ECAC East, that's what you get.

Your OWP can be calculated for your league games in the following way - Deduct your own games. You have 19 opponents who have each played 18 games. Each of those games has a winner (in your schedule) and a loser (also in your schedule), or the two teams tied. There are 171 games played, which means that a total of 171 wins. If you add up the win loss record of each team, there are 19 games per team with 18 teams that makes 342. You calculate winning percentage by your opponents total wins divided by total games played. 171/342 = 0.500. If it were not a complete interlock, these numbers would work out differently. This does not account for the NC schedule played by each team. This same calculation (or a variation therof) can be applied for the league portion of every league in which the number of times each team plays each other is the same. In a league with an unbalanced schedule such as the MCHA, this is not a true statement

I'm sure the math razzle-dazzle lost some people - but hey math is what I do :)
 
Last edited:
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

NUProf said:
I'm sure the math razzle-dazzle lost some people - but hey math is what I do :)
Click to expand...

Well, math is what I do too, so I'm with you. I just couldn't get my head around it before. Thank you for clearing it up!
 
Re: 3/2 Regional Rankings

NUProf said:
Look at the pool of teams - there are 20 teams, 19 games per team. There are a total of 190 league games spread out in that pool. There are 190 wins that will be awarded if we count a tie as a half a win for each team. If you add up the league wins for all teams in the NESCAC and ECAC East, that's what you get.

Your OWP can be calculated for your league games in the following way - Deduct your own games. You have 19 opponents who have each played 18 games. Each of those games has a winner (in your schedule) and a loser (also in your schedule), or the two teams tied. There are 171 games played, which means that a total of 171 wins. If you add up the win loss record of each team, there are 19 games per team with 18 teams that makes 342. You calculate winning percentage by your opponents total wins divided by total games played. 171/342 = 0.500. If it were not a complete interlock, these numbers would work out differently. This does not account for the NC schedule played by each team. This same calculation (or a variation therof) can be applied for the league portion of every league in which the number of times each team plays each other is the same. In a league with an unbalanced schedule such as the MCHA, this is not a true statement

I'm sure the math razzle-dazzle lost some people - but hey math is what I do :)
Click to expand...
It will all even out for strength of schedule purposes, but it does allow a lot of teams in the nescac to pile up theier win % based on the ecac-e going under .500 in league. Add in some both the ecac-e and nescac fluffing up their overall win % by beating some not-so-good mascac or ecac-ne teams, and you end up with owp and oop records that at worst hover around .500 and at best get bumped well above. All while maintaining a decent win %.

All it takes is basically going .500 in conference games and 4-0 against the ecac-ne and you will be a ranked team. That isn't exactly the definition I'd pick for 'ranking' a team. Personally I've felt that the top 10 eastern and top 6 western teams would make for more deserving rankings.

All you realistically need for rankings are however many autobids are in your region + however many at large bids there are. Granted that could leave some tough competition out of consideration for being ranked, but ranking 22 overall teams is a bit much, in my opinion.

end of rambling rant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top