NCAA D3 Rankings

[123kidd]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

If UWS gets the auto bid, and GAC and CM meet in the MIAC game, those could be the three right there. CM over UWRF as a possible 3rd western team.
So If UWS and CM get AQ - they would have look at GAC before UWRF.
I don't think anyone will win the MIAC except GAC though.
I'm going with GAC, UWRF from the west as AQ's and next in line would be CM if they win this Thursday at home.

 

[OneTimer]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

This is the year of upsets in the East and more to follow next weekend. RIT in particular is the most nervous of them all in the East.

 

[Plugger]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

This is the year of upsets in the East and more to follow next weekend. RIT in particular is the most nervous of them all in the East.

I would agree, and they have to ride on the back of Chamberlin. As she plays, so goes their success. She can steal games. If she plays well, they will go a long way, but if not, they are very beatable. Pressure is on her.

 

[PrezdeJohnson09]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

There is nothing in the NCAA Championship Manual that says to avoid intraconference match-ups, if possible. .

I haven't read this year's manual but I know this is false in past year's. It was in the manual and I've even asked committee members about it before and yes there is creedence given toward it when its possible to avoid intra-conference matchups without compromising bracket integrity.

Heck, I think the girl that did the selection show last year said it was part of the process in the introduction.

 

[Matt Rennell]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

I haven't read this year's manual but I know this is false in past year's. It was in the manual and I've even asked committee members about it before and yes there is creedence given toward it when its possible to avoid intra-conference matchups without compromising bracket integrity.

Heck, I think the girl that did the selection show last year said it was part of the process in the introduction.

In reviewing the 2009, 2010, and 2011 Championship Manuals, it doesn't state it in those. I am unable to find any Manuals online prior to 2009 but I would venture to say it wasn't in those either since quite a few of those years featured Intraconference match ups in the Quarters.

 

[LtPowers]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

This is the year of upsets in the East and more to follow next weekend. RIT in particular is the most nervous of them all in the East.

I don't see why they'd be any more nervous than anyone else. Can Potsdam steal a game? Of course, but so can Oswego. And in a Platty vs RIT matchup at the Ritter, clearly either team could win.


Powers &8^]

 

[gojackets]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

In reviewing the 2009, 2010, and 2011 Championship Manuals, it doesn't state it in those. I am unable to find any Manuals online prior to 2009 but I would venture to say it wasn't in those either since quite a few of those years featured Intraconference match ups in the Quarters.

Well I figured I would go through and look...There have been 5 occurences when teams from the same conference met in the NCAA's. In 05-06 UWS & UWSP played in the quarterfinals, Gustavus got the bye. Platty and Elmira played in the quarters most likely because of the bye to the western team.


Other than that you have to go way back...in 02-03 Bowdoin played Middlebury in a quarterfinal...however three NESCAC teams made the playoffs, so they had no choice but to pair two of them together.

In 01-02--St Marys played Gustavus in the "NCAA First Round" as did Middlebury and Bowdoin. Elmira and Manhattanville got byes into the Frozen Four.


It appears that every other time it has been avoided. Other than the one's listed above there have been 6 years where two NESCAC teams have made it in and have not played eachother in a QF. There have been 7 years that two ECAC-W teams made the NCAA's and they have not met in the QF's.


It appears it is avoided unless there is no possible way. You look back to 01-02 and 02-03...they had no choice but to put those teams together. In the 05-06 season Gustavus was the clear favorite in the west, so they got the bye. Plattsburgh/Elmira would have been a clear 1/4 seed and it would have been truly unfair to pit Platty against Midd or Mville that year just because the bye went out West.

 

[Matt Rennell]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

Well I figured I would go through and look...There have been 5 occurences when teams from the same conference met in the NCAA's. In 05-06 UWS & UWSP played in the quarterfinals, Gustavus got the bye. Platty and Elmira played in the quarters most likely because of the bye to the western team.


Other than that you have to go way back...in 02-03 Bowdoin played Middlebury in a quarterfinal...however three NESCAC teams made the playoffs, so they had no choice but to pair two of them together.

In 01-02--St Marys played Gustavus in the "NCAA First Round" as did Middlebury and Bowdoin. Elmira and Manhattanville got byes into the Frozen Four.


It appears that every other time it has been avoided. Other than the one's listed above there have been 6 years where two NESCAC teams have made it in and have not played eachother in a QF. There have been 7 years that two ECAC-W teams made the NCAA's and they have not met in the QF's.


It appears it is avoided unless there is no possible way. You look back to 01-02 and 02-03...they had no choice but to put those teams together. In the 05-06 season Gustavus was the clear favorite in the west, so they got the bye. Plattsburgh/Elmira would have been a clear 1/4 seed and it would have been truly unfair to pit Platty against Midd or Mville that year just because the bye went out West.

I think you may be misunderstanding what I am saying. I never said the NCAA actively looks to pit two teams from the same league against each other. What I was saying is they don't actively try to prevent it from happening. There is an extremely large difference between the two. The NCAA guidelines are very clear, as laid out in the Championship Manual. The most important thing is to limit travel, so geography is the #1 thing they go by. Next is keeping bracket integrity. The only thing that takes precedence over seeding is geographic proximity.

You are stating that in some years, two teams from the same conference didn't face each other in the Quarters because the NCAA wanted to avoid Intraconference match ups. This is false, the reason they didn't play each other was because their seeding did not match up.

A few of you have mentioned that the NCAA will avoid two teams playing from the same conference if it doesn't effect bracket integrity. Not only does this not make any sense it is absolutely impossible for it to happen. If you are moving teams around to avoid certain match ups, you are destroying bracket integrity, especially with a field of only 7-8 teams.

 

[PrezdeJohnson09]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

I think you may be misunderstanding what I am saying. I never said the NCAA actively looks to pit two teams from the same league against each other. What I was saying is they don't actively try to prevent it from happening. There is an extremely large difference between the two. The NCAA guidelines are very clear, as laid out in the Championship Manual. The most important thing is to limit travel, so geography is the #1 thing they go by. Next is keeping bracket integrity. The only thing that takes precedence over seeding is geographic proximity.

You are stating that in some years, two teams from the same conference didn't face each other in the Quarters because the NCAA wanted to avoid Intraconference match ups. This is false, the reason they didn't play each other was because their seeding did not match up.

A few of you have mentioned that the NCAA will avoid two teams playing from the same conference if it doesn't effect bracket integrity. Not only does this not make any sense it is absolutely impossible for it to happen. If you are moving teams around to avoid certain match ups, you are destroying bracket integrity, especially with a field of only 7-8 teams.

I just spoke with a committee member and they are under the impression that avoiding intraconference matchups in the first round IS INDEED taken into consideration.

 

[gojackets]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

I think you may be misunderstanding what I am saying. I never said the NCAA actively looks to pit two teams from the same league against each other. What I was saying is they don't actively try to prevent it from happening. There is an extremely large difference between the two. The NCAA guidelines are very clear, as laid out in the Championship Manual. The most important thing is to limit travel, so geography is the #1 thing they go by. Next is keeping bracket integrity. The only thing that takes precedence over seeding is geographic proximity.

.

If that were true wouldn't Middlebury/Plattsburgh (80 miles) meet up in every quarterfinal when they both make it...or Middlebury/Amherst

For Example in 07-08 Elmira played @ Amherst (290 miles) and Manhattanville went to Middlebury (260 miles)


If travel took precedence over everything else wouldn't they have sent Manhattanville to Elmira (230 miles) and Middlebury to Amherst (146miles)

 

[one_to7]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

I just spoke with a committee member and they are under the impression that avoiding intraconference matchups in the first round IS INDEED taken into consideration.

Then they need to do one of two things:

A) Re-read the manual to discover that it does not in fact say so
B) Get it put into the manual if they're going to just follow rules that aren't actually in there

There isn't really a middle ground here.

 

[one_to7]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

If that were true wouldn't Middlebury/Plattsburgh (80 miles) meet up in every quarterfinal when they both make it...or Middlebury/Amherst

For Example in 07-08 Elmira played @ Amherst (290 miles) and Manhattanville went to Middlebury (260 miles)


If travel took precedence over everything else wouldn't they have sent Manhattanville to Elmira (230 miles) and Middlebury to Amherst (146miles)

Travel in the NCAA's eyes means under or over 500 miles. Teams driving 80 miles farther doesn't mean anything; teams needing to fly means a whole heck of a lot.

Bracket integrity means changing seeds to fit things that aren't based on team performance (some examples: a team that should host didn't put in a bid to do so, two teams being farther than 500 miles apart, etc). Otherwise the only thing that should determine seeding should be the performance of the past season. Moving seeds solely to avoid previous matchups defeats bracket integrity. Why should a team that earned their seed have to play a tougher game than a lower seed, simply because it'd be a conference matchup? That kind of defeats the point of earning a seed, doesn't it?

 

[PrezdeJohnson09]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

Travel in the NCAA's eyes means under or over 500 miles. Teams driving 80 miles farther doesn't mean anything; teams needing to fly means a whole heck of a lot.

Bracket integrity means changing seeds to fit things that aren't based on team performance (some examples: a team that should host didn't put in a bid to do so, two teams being farther than 500 miles apart, etc). Otherwise the only thing that should determine seeding should be the performance of the past season. Moving seeds solely to avoid previous matchups defeats bracket integrity. Why should a team that earned their seed have to play a tougher game than a lower seed, simply because it'd be a conference matchup? That kind of defeats the point of earning a seed, doesn't it?

Don't try and make sense of the NC$$ process. It will only make your head hurt.

If bracket integrity mattered we wouldnt have to discuss splits every year, 500 mile travel limits, flights etc. Fields and pairings would look much different on the men's side over the years.

 

[Matt Rennell]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

Then they need to do one of two things:

A) Re-read the manual to discover that it does not in fact say so
B) Get it put into the manual if they're going to just follow rules that aren't actually in there

There isn't really a middle ground here.

Not only has it never stated such a thing in the NCAA manual, here is the exact wording for it regarding Non-revenue Championships, (which is what Women's (and Men's) Ice Hockey is):

For team championships that do not generate revenues, pairings shall be based primarily on the teams' geographical proximity to one another, regardless of their region, in order to avoid air travel in preliminary rounds whenever possible. Teams' seeding relative to one another may be taken into consideration when establishing pairings if such a pairing does not result in air travel that otherwise could be avoided. (Revised: 8/4/94)

It has stated this since 1994. Geographic Proximity first (IE: no flying in early rounds) and seeding second (IE: Bracket Integrity).

Edit: And if you are extremely bored, here is a link to the NCAA Division III Manual

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D312.pdf

 

[PrezdeJohnson09]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

1 Rochester Institute of Technology 21-1-1 23-1-1
2 Norwich 18-2-1 23-2-1
3 Amherst 18-4-1 20-4-1
4 Middlebury 18-3-3 19-3-3
5 Elmira 20-5-1 20-5-1
6 Plattsburgh State 17-5-3 17-5-3
7 Manhattanville 12-6-3 14-8-4
8 Bowdoin 11-8-3 12-9-4
9 Trinity (Conn.) 15-9 15-10
WEST
1 Gustavus Adolphus 21-2-2 21-2-2
2 Concordia-Moorhead 13-3-5 14-4-5
3 Wisconsin-River Falls 21-3-2 21-4-2
4 Wisconsin-Superior 17-7-3 17-7-3
5 St. Thomas (Minn.) 14-6-2 15-8-2
6 Adrian 13-7-2 15-9-2
7 Lake Forest 15-9-2 15-9-2

and the plot thickens....Elmira still ranked above Plattsburgh in the latest rankings....

Also Matt,

I've had a second confirmation that avoiding intra-conference matchups is part of the process. So whether its a handbook somewhere that we aren't seeing, or its just part of the process that isn't written down, it does appear it's considered.

 

[Matt Rennell]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

Also Matt,

I've had a second confirmation that avoiding intra-conference matchups is part of the process. So whether its a handbook somewhere that we aren't seeing, or its just part of the process that isn't written down, it does appear it's considered.

I believe your sources are telling you this, but they need to contact their NCAA rep.

This is 100% incorrect.

 

[PrezdeJohnson09]

I believe your sources are telling you this, but they need to contact their NCAA rep.

This is 100% incorrect.

The lady in charge of the women's d3 championship has been there for awhile now. I have to imagine she would have corrected something by now if it wasnt supposed to be that way.

 

[one_to7]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

The lady in charge of the women's d3 championship has been there for awhile now. I have to imagine she would have corrected something by now if it wasnt supposed to be that way.

Try asking her? Shoot her an email explaining that there's discussion and confusion about this and ask if she could clarify it it?

 

[PrezdeJohnson09]

Try asking her? Shoot her an email explaining that there's discussion and confusion about this and ask if she could clarify it it?

I'm not the one adamantly denying it

Two members of the committee are enough for me.

Her name is Jan Gentry. Go ahead and give her a call. I've tried contacting her for two separate occasions multiple times this year through emails and multiple voicemails and have never gotten a direct call back from her or email response.

Good luck!

 

[gojackets]

Re: NCAA D3 Rankings

I'm not the one adamantly denying it

Two members of the committee are enough for me.

Her name is Jan Gentry. Go ahead and give her a call. I've tried contacting her for two separate occasions multiple times this year through emails and multiple voicemails and have never gotten a direct call back from her or email response.

Good luck!

I think its obvious that this is true when you look at the history of the matchups. I think its hilarious watching you and Matt catfight though...so keep it up.



I'm more curious on thoughts as to why Elmira is still above Plattsburgh?