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.

NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

H

HumRsky

Hussies & Bullfrogs
This is a ranking I put together of every current D1 hockey team based only on what they have accomplished; winning %, NCAA win % and other metrics were not considered. This is not intended to be better than FS23's in any way. This represents about 4-5 hours of research and math, not years and I do believe that the metrics FS23 used are very valid for comparing programs, this is just another way of ranking the teams.

The scoring system I used is as follows:
National Title (NT) - 10pts
Championship Game Appearance (ChG) - 5pts
Frozen Four Appearance (FF) - 4pts
Major Conference Regular Season title (RS) - 4pts
Major Conference Playoff Title (Pl) - 4pts
NCAA Appearances (App) - 2 pts
Minor Conference Regular Season title (RS) - 2pts
Minor Conference Playoff Title (Pl) - 2pts
NCAA Wins (Wins) - 1 pt

Further explanation:
Minor Conference Titles are designated with a lowercase "m," so if a team has one minor conference title it would be designated 1m in that column. Similarly, for the seasons in which there were two WCHA playoff "winners" I gave those teams half credit, or 2 points and those titles are designated with a lowercase "h," so if a team was a playoff co-winner 7 times, it will be designated 7h in that column. I gave full credit to all regular season champions, even co-Champions, because I didn't feel like going back and sorting through all that.
The Tri-State League and the Ivy League are considered major conference champions from 1948-49 until the formation of the ECAC in 1961-62. This gave teams in those league perhaps an unfair advantage, Harvard and St. Lawrence were helped particularly by this inclusion and people will probably bemoan how high they are ranked. The champions of those leagues after the formation of the ECAC were not included. I considered the first season of the Midwest Collegiate Hockey League in 1951-52 as the first season of the WCHA. I considered all CCHA championships as major although a strong argument could be made that it was not a major conference until the late '70s. The minor conference I used are MAAC/Atlantic Hockey, College Hockey America, and the Great West.

Note that points are cumulative. For example, another way of looking at the points is that a National Title is worth 25 points (1 NCAA Appearance, 4 NCAA wins, 1 Frozen Four Appearance, 1 Championship game appearance, 1 National Title) and a runner up is worth 14 points (1 NCAA Appearance, 3 NCAA wins, 1 Frozen Four Appearance, 1 Championship game appearance) and so on... People will probably also gripe that, particularly in the minor conferences, the playoff title should be worth more because of the auto-bid, but don't forget the auto-bid means an NCAA appearance and an automatic 2 additional points that are not guaranteed to the Regular Season Champion.

I will list all of the numbers and total points, so if you really don't like my point system, come up with your own and plug it into the numbers given.
The rankings will be in the next post...discuss.
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

Minnesota's ranked too high... Or do I have to wait until the rankings are posted?
 
Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

579021_10101901393189740_13966976_76945111_1152170546_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

SCSU Euro said:
Minnesota's ranked too high... Or do I have to wait until the rankings are posted?
Click to expand...
You do.

And here I thought the Gophers were the greatest team in the history of sport.
 
Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

How on earth do you rank teams without taking into consideration percentage of in-state athletes that are on said team?
 
Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

Since you gave teams half credit for shared league tourney championships, perhaps teams should also have received half credit for NCAA ties, e.g. RPI and Lake State tied a game in 1985.
 
Ralph Baer said:
Since you gave teams half credit for shared league tourney championships, perhaps teams should also have received half credit for NCAA ties, e.g. RPI and Lake State tied a game in 1985.
Click to expand...

I thought of that, but only a handful of teams have ties and only Wisconsin has two. Also, since those were part of the old two-game total goals round, the teams with ties either won or lost the other game, which ended up being the game that mattered for moving on in the tournament.
 
Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

Teams that "envy Minnesota" should automatically earn an extra point.
 
Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

JDUBBS1280 said:
Why?
Click to expand...

Because you would actually have to look at other programs besides Minnesota.

Good job HumRsky. I obviously had different weightings and looked at different things, but in just looking at team accomplishments this is a pretty good formula. These are always fun to do and look at how the results come out. Anyway, kudos, well done.
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Because you would actually have to look at other programs besides Minnesota.

Good job HumRsky. I obviously had different weightings and looked at different things, but in just looking at team accomplishments this is a pretty good formula. These are always fun to do and look at how the results come out. Anyway, kudos, well done.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Since you think about these things a lot harder than any of the rest of us, I was curious about your reaction. I appreciate the positive response. :)
 
Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

HumRsky said:
Thanks! Since you think about these things a lot harder than any of the rest of us, I was curious about your reaction. I appreciate the positive response. :)
Click to expand...

You're welcome. Really, my only criticisms would be nit-picky type stuff (i.e. a championships won in 1948 was worth less (23 points) than a championship won in 2008 (25 points)). That and there are a few numbers that differ from what I have, but as for the formula, I think it works well especially from a relationship standpoint. Like I said before, I would have weighted things a tad differently, but that's just our differences of opinion. Again, I like the formula, and good job.
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
You're welcome. Really, my only criticisms would be nit-picky type stuff (i.e. a championships won in 1948 was worth less (23 points) than a championship won in 2008 (25 points)). That and there are a few numbers that differ from what I have, but as for the formula, I think it works well especially from a relationship standpoint. Like I said before, I would have weighted things a tad differently, but that's just our differences of opinion. Again, I like the formula, and good job.
Click to expand...
I forgot to mention in my first post that I got my NCAA tournament numbers from the NCAA record book, and therefore did not include vacated years. I got my conference numbers from the College Hockey Historical Archive. My decision to include Ivy League and Tri-State Champioships from 1948-1961 may have given me some different numbers than you. I felt that teams in those conferences were very relevant at that time and that was the only conference those teams were in.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top