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.

Latest pairwise rankings

J.D. said:
This is my final answer. Minimal changes needed by the committee and I don't see a glaring attendance issue anywhere. You could tweak it for attendance but based on what we have seen recently I think they are content with what they will get attendance wise.
Click to expand...

If it's a prediction, I go with JD. If it's personal preference I would go with the other bracket proposed here.
 
Numbers said:
If it's a prediction, I go with JD. If it's personal preference I would go with the other bracket proposed here.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If they took a general philosophy of truly trying to maximize attendance while maintaining some common sense in protecting #1 overall etc I would be fine with that. But they just don't seem to do it a lot.
 
J.D. said:
This is my final answer. Minimal changes needed by the committee and I don't see a glaring attendance issue anywhere. You could tweak it for attendance but based on what we have seen recently I think they are content with what they will get attendance wise.
Click to expand...

Based on my understanding of how they set the brackets, your bracket would actually require an extra change.

Step 1: slot 1 seeds into regionals
Step 2: Serpentine
Step 3: modify for hosts
Step 4: modify for intra-conference matchups
Step 5: attendance swaps?
 
In theory you are not protecting #1 Minnesota by placing a higher #2 seed in St. Cloud there and also rewarding Harvard by keeping them East. This after SCSU won their tournament title and Harvard lost it. I just don't see it happening. Didn't you guys agree that Fargo will be packed regardless just with Gopher and UND fans?
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Based on my understanding of how they set the brackets, your bracket would actually require an extra change.

Step 1: slot 1 seeds into regionals
Step 2: Serpentine
Step 3: modify for hosts
Step 4: modify for intra-conference matchups
Step 5: attendance swaps?
Click to expand...

what's the extra change? When it comes to 2 and 3 seeds it makes sense for the highest 2 to play lowest 3 etc
 
When the overall #1 is ahead in the RPI by a huge margin, like this year, then there is a decent argument to be made that the bracket should NOT disfavor them in any way. In this case, that means the #7 plays in their bracket, because of both proximity to campus, and because the #8 is a host school.

That's why there is a line of thought that would place....1-7-11-16 in St Cloud. And, fill the rest from there. In this case...2-6-9-14, 3-8-10-15, 4-5-12-13
 
Last edited:
J.D. said:
what's the extra change? When it comes to 2 and 3 seeds it makes sense for the highest 2 to play lowest 3 etc
Click to expand...

Step 1: slot 1 seeds

1. Minnesota gets placed closest to Fargo.
2. Quinnipiac gets placed closes to Bridgeport.
3. Michigan gets placed into Allentown.
4. Denver gets placed into Manchester.

Step 2: Serpentine

Fargo
1. Minnesota vs. 16. Canisius
8. Penn State vs. 9. Ohio State

Bridgeport
2. Quinnipiac vs. 15. Colgate
7. Harvard vs. 10. Michigan Tech

Allentown
3. Michigan vs. 14. Merrimack
6. St. Cloud State vs. 11. Minnesota State

Manchester
4. Denver vs. 13. Cornell
5. Boston University vs. 12. Western Michigan

Step 3: modify for hosts - Need to swap Penn State vs. Ohio State with SCSU vs. Minnesota State, which gives us:

Fargo
1. Minnesota vs. 16. Canisius
6. St. Cloud State vs. 11. Minnesota State

Bridgeport
2. Quinnipiac vs. 15. Colgate
7. Harvard vs. 10. Michigan Tech

Allentown
3. Michigan vs. 14. Merrimack
8. Penn State vs. 9. Ohio State

Manchester
4. Denver vs. 13. Cornell
5. Boston University vs. 12. Western Michigan

Step 4: modify for intra-conference - Need to swap out Ohio State - easiest way is to flip Tech and Ohio State, which gives us:

Fargo
1. Minnesota vs. 16. Canisius
6. St. Cloud State vs. 11. Minnesota State

Bridgeport
2. Quinnipiac vs. 15. Colgate
7. Harvard vs. 9. Ohio State

Allentown
3. Michigan vs. 14. Merrimack
8. Penn State vs. 10. Michigan Tech

Manchester
4. Denver vs. 13. Cornell
5. Boston University vs. 12. Western Michigan

Step 5: modify for attendance? No need with these brackets.
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Step 1: slot 1 seeds

1. Minnesota gets placed closest to Fargo.
2. Quinnipiac gets placed closes to Bridgeport.
3. Michigan gets placed into Allentown.
4. Denver gets placed into Manchester.

Step 2: Serpentine

Fargo
1. Minnesota vs. 16. Canisius
8. Penn State vs. 9. Ohio State

Bridgeport
2. Quinnipiac vs. 15. Colgate
7. Harvard vs. 10. Michigan Tech

Allentown
3. Michigan vs. 14. Merrimack
6. St. Cloud State vs. 11. Minnesota State

Manchester
4. Denver vs. 13. Cornell
5. Boston University vs. 12. Western Michigan

Step 3: modify for hosts - Need to swap Penn State vs. Ohio State with SCSU vs. Minnesota State, which gives us:

Fargo
1. Minnesota vs. 16. Canisius
6. St. Cloud State vs. 11. Minnesota State

Bridgeport
2. Quinnipiac vs. 15. Colgate
7. Harvard vs. 10. Michigan Tech

Allentown
3. Michigan vs. 14. Merrimack
8. Penn State vs. 9. Ohio State

Manchester
4. Denver vs. 13. Cornell
5. Boston University vs. 12. Western Michigan

Step 4: modify for intra-conference - Need to swap out Ohio State - easiest way is to flip Tech and Ohio State, which gives us:

Fargo
1. Minnesota vs. 16. Canisius
6. St. Cloud State vs. 11. Minnesota State

Bridgeport
2. Quinnipiac vs. 15. Colgate
7. Harvard vs. 9. Ohio State

Allentown
3. Michigan vs. 14. Merrimack
8. Penn State vs. 10. Michigan Tech

Manchester
4. Denver vs. 13. Cornell
5. Boston University vs. 12. Western Michigan

Step 5: modify for attendance? No need with these brackets.
Click to expand...

However, you could just as easily say.....
Modify for hosts.....PSU to Allentown, SCSU to Bridgeport, and Harvard to Fargo.

And, I think you would be done. Oh, Merrimack for Colgate.

Each of these is within the committee's parameters. There is no 'one' right way to do it, and we just have to wait until tomorrow to see.
 
Numbers said:
However, you could just as easily say.....
Modify for hosts.....PSU to Allentown, SCSU to Bridgeport, and Harvard to Fargo.

And, I think you would be done. Oh, Merrimack for Colgate.

Each of these is within the committee's parameters. There is no 'one' right way to do it, and we just have to wait until tomorrow to see.
Click to expand...

Again, you're now making extra moves.

I agree there is not one "right" way to do it. I'm just going based on my understanding of how past committees have gone about setting the bracket. We'll see what this committee does tomorrow.
 
And then you're simultaneously penalizing both Minnesota and St. Cloud by placing them together when it doesn't appear to be needed for attendance. I think you're taking a far too rigid approach with how you put it together but we'll see.
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Bridgeport
2. Quinnipiac vs. 15. Colgate
7. Harvard vs. 9. Ohio State

Allentown
3. Michigan vs. 14. Merrimack
8. Penn State vs. 10. Michigan Tech

Manchester
4. Denver vs. 13. Cornell
5. Boston University vs. 12. Western Michigan

Step 5: modify for attendance? No need with these brackets.
Click to expand...

Quinnipiac vs. Colgate is an intra-conference game. Swap with Merrimack?
 
My bad guess.


1's minnesota, quinnipiac, michigan, denver
2's boston university, st cloud, harvard, penn state
3's ohio state, michigan tech, minnesota state, Western Michigan
4's cornell, merrimack, colgate, canisius

Place minnesota into fargo.
fargo
1 minnesota v 16 canisius, 8 penn state v 9 ohio state

manchester
4 denver v 13 cornell, 5 boston university v 12 Western Michigan

bridgeport
3 michigan v 14 merrimack, 6 st cloud state v 11 minnesota state

allentown
2 quinnipiac v 15 colgate, 7 harvard v 10 michigan tech

Move penn state into allentown as host of that region. Also move quinnipiac into bridgeport to also avoid an ecac matchup.

Fargo
1 minnesota v 16 canisius, 8 harvard v 9 ohio state
Manchester
4 denver v 13 cornell, 5 boston university v 12 Western Michigan

Allentown
2 michigan v 15 colgate, 7 penn state v 10 michigan tech
Bridgeport
3 quinnipiac v 14 merrimack, 6 st cloud state v minnesota state
 
J.D. said:
And then you're simultaneously penalizing both Minnesota and St. Cloud by placing them together when it doesn't appear to be needed for attendance. I think you're taking a far too rigid approach with how you put it together but we'll see.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you. I'm just applying the method that past committees have used. We'll see tomorrow what method this committee uses.
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Wodon's bracket from CHN:

Fargo
1. Minnesota vs. 16. Canisius
6. St. Cloud State vs. 11. Minnesota State

Bridgeport
2. Quinnipiac vs. 14. Merrimack
7. Harvard vs. 9. Ohio State

Allentown
3. Michigan vs. 15. Colgate
8. Penn State vs. 10. Michigan Tech

Manchester
4. Denver vs. 13. Cornell
5. Boston University vs. 12. Western Michigan

Bracket ABCs: Final NCAA Tournament Projection : College Hockey News
Click to expand...

I would put SCSU/Minnesota State in Bridgeport, Harvard/Ohio State in Fargo. Everything else here I would not change.
 
Could turn out that way. I just don't get the logic of sticking so strictly to minimizing the number of bracket integrity changes when the end result is punishing two of the top 6 teams in the tournament for the potential QF round game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top