NCAA Rankings?

[CARDS_rule_the_Burgh]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

How do you have the numbers between Plattsburgh and Oswego?

Plattsburgh vs Oswego
WIN: 0.705 < .864 = OSW, by a lot
SOS: 0.502 > 0.494 = PLT, barely
RNK: 3-4-0 > 2-3-0 = PLT, barely
H2H: 1-0-0 > 0-1-0 = PLT
COP: 10-2-1 < 13-0-0 OSW, by a lot

Only common opponents were the other SUNYAC teams, so it's their respective conference records minus the one game in December...

So Plattsburgh wins 3 of the comparisons, but by narrow margins (except H2H, of course). Oswego wins the other two by a longshot. There's certainly an argument for Plattsburgh, but logic would say the Lakers take it.

I was certainly not advocating to drop Oswego out of the top 10. There's an argument for Hobart, Bowdoin, AND Babson, but 6th behind those 3 is about as far as I would go. Even if it looks like they might hve given too much weight to WIN in the Lakers' case, you can't discount the stat totally.

 

[admiral0417]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

I'm not discounting Win Pct., but it's a long ways from #3 to #14 if you want to use the criteria. Would a Plattsburgh win vs. Oswego Saturday change much? Probably not. Take a look at #7 Williams vs. Plattsburgh as well??? I certainly am not advocating for Oswego to be lowered, they are arguably one of the top 3......but I have a problem with the way the criteria is applied for some teams....the weighting if you will.

 

[Ed Trefzger]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

The USCHO "pairwise comparison" table is a listing of the raw data that the NCAA committee uses. USCHO does not call it "pairwise rankings," because they don't rank the teams using them. The committee is free to use those data with whatever weights they would like to use. The modified Bradley-Terry is not used in any way determining the rankings.

NUProf is right. USCHO stopped doing a PWR when it became apparent that the committee had stopped weighting the criteria consistently and when an athletic director lied on the television broadcast during the national championship games in Superior by saying that they did follow it consistently and that the data we used was incorrect. When the former NCAA coordinator left, the process switched from transparent to political.

 

[PSUChamps2001]

I'm not discounting Win Pct., but it's a long ways from #3 to #14 if you want to use the criteria. Would a Plattsburgh win vs. Oswego Saturday change much? Probably not. Take a look at #7 Williams vs. Plattsburgh as well??? I certainly am not advocating for Oswego to be lowered, they are arguably one of the top 3......but I have a problem with the way the criteria is applied for some teams....the weighting if you will.

But if Williams ranks ahead of the teams between Plattsburgh and them they are where they should be. We've proven before that unranked teams actually had a better criteria ranking over top 10 teams but were unranked...

 

[polarbearfan]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

The one major takeaway I have from these rankings, especially as a Bowdoin fan, outside of UWEC/SNC, the conference favorites are going to be sweating if they don't win their auto bids.

 

[bakdraft21]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

it seems as the ranking havnt settled everything, does it matter when you will or lose your games,i.e. at the start of the season or later in the season,perhaps some coaches vote for the teams with the hot hand at the end of the season????

 

[peddler]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

For those who believe (as Prof does) that it ain't close to "settled" :

Ranked Teams - Remaining Games vs Ranked Teams 2-14-2013

Friday Saturday
EAST
1 Utica - Manhattanville Manhattanville
2 Norwich - Babson UMass-Boston
3 Oswego State - Plattsburgh State
4 Hobart - None
5 Bowdoin - Trinity? - Previously Postponed
6 Babson - Norwich
7 Williams - Amherst
8 Amherst - Williams Middlebury
9 Neumann - None
10 UMass-Boston - Norwich
11 Trinity - Bowdoin? - Previously Postponed
12 Castleton - None
13 Manhattanville - Utica Utica
14 Plattsburgh - Oswego State
15 Middlebury - Amherst
16 Plymouth State - None

Haven't seen any word on whether Trinity-Bowdoin will be rescheduled as of Wed.

WEST - None

 

[peddler]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

For those who believe (as Prof does) that it ain't close to "settled" :

Ranked Teams - Remaining Games vs Ranked Teams 2-14-2013

Friday Saturday
EAST
1 Utica - Manhattanville Manhattanville
2 Norwich - Babson UMass-Boston
3 Oswego State - Plattsburgh State
4 Hobart - None
5 Bowdoin - Trinity (Monday)
6 Babson - Norwich
7 Williams - Amherst
8 Amherst - Williams Middlebury
9 Neumann - None
10 UMass-Boston - Norwich
11 Trinity - Bowdoin (Monday)
12 Castleton - None
13 Manhattanville - Utica Utica
14 Plattsburgh - Oswego State
15 Middlebury - Amherst
16 Plymouth State - None

WEST - None

This covers the final games of the regular season. In addition, the NCHA Tournament begins Friday.

 

[altazo]

The one major takeaway I have from these rankings, especially as a Bowdoin fan, outside of UWEC/SNC, the conference favorites are going to be sweating if they don't win their auto bids.

The best plan for every team listed in either of the rankings is simply to win out.

Who says it's a given that either SNC or UWEC will win the NCHA autobid? Both Point and CSS have been playing their best hockey of the season lately and may have something to say about it. If one of those teams takes the Peters Cup then odds are either SNC or UWEC will be staying home.

I really dislike angling for a Pool C berth (unless you play in the ECAC W) - it comes across as a backup plan in the event of failure. Win your conference and move on. That simple.

 

[polarbear2]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

Haven't seen any word on whether Trinity-Bowdoin will be rescheduled as of Wed.

Trinity-Bowdoin at The Brooks School in North Andover on Monday 7 pm.

 

[peddler]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

Trinity-Bowdoin at The Brooks School in North Andover on Monday 7 pm.

Thanks. Where did you find the info?

 

[polarbearfan]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

The best plan for every team listed in either of the rankings is simply to win out.

Who says it's a given that either SNC or UWEC will win the NCHA autobid? Both Point and CSS have been playing their best hockey of the season lately and may have something to say about it. If one of those teams takes the Peters Cup then odds are either SNC or UWEC will be staying home.

I really dislike angling for a Pool C berth (unless you play in the ECAC W) - it comes across as a backup plan in the event of failure. Win your conference and move on. That simple.

Great point on the NCHA. The rest of it is what I was getting at. Controlling your own destiny is the way to go.

Bowdoin and Trinity are playing on Monday at a neutral location about half way between the schools.

 

[NUProf]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

The best plan for every team listed in either of the rankings is simply to win out.


I really dislike angling for a Pool C berth (unless you play in the ECAC W) - it comes across as a backup plan in the event of failure. Win your conference and move on. That simple.

+1000 Bingo!

The Pool C bids are consolation prizes for not winning your league championship. Part of me says that if you can't demonstrate you are the champion of your league, how can you claim to be a national champion? I understand the concern that one bad game can take a really good team out (see the time Norwich lost to the number 8 seed in the ECAC East), but a true champion doesn't lose games like that. In the end, each game answers the question "can you be the national champion?" If you win, the answer is "maybe." If you lose, the answer is a definitive "no."

 

[Fishman'81]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

Depends on who you lose to, doesn't it..?

Some conferences (arguably) contain 3-4 teams better than the best team in others... Enjoying success in any arbitrary sub-set clearly does not, by itself, translate itself into a measure of excellence in any universal sense.

In that vein, and just for fun, I created my own Eastern metric. The results follow, and with the lower numbers in parentheses translating to a higher ranking.

1. Utica (6)
2. Hobart (11)
3. Neumann (17)
4. Norwich (18)
5. Oswego (19)
6. Amherst (28)
7. Plattsburgh, Babson, Bowdoin and Williams (32)
11. M'ville (33)
12. Trinity (39)
13. Middlebury (41)
14. UM-Boston (44)
15. Castleton (46)

While I fully expect to be mocked, my metric doesn't look any more speculative than the others I've seen lately/all year long, and I wouldn't be surprised to see an updated version of it pan-out on March 3... (Still, it's impossible to accurately compare a group of teams that play one another so infrequently.)

 

[polarbear2]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

Depends on who you lose to, doesn't it..? Some conferences (arguably) contain 3-4 teams better than the best team in others.

Just for fun, I made-up my own metric. The results follow, with the lower numbers in parentheses translating to a higher ranking, and including only Eastern teams.

1. Utica (6)
2. Hobart (11)
3. Neumann (17)
4. Norwich (18)
5. Oswego (19)
6. Amherst (28)
7. Plattsburgh, Babson, Bowdoin and Williams (32)
11. M'ville (33)
12. Trinity (39)
13. Middlebury (41)
14. UM-Boston (44)
15. Castleton (46)

While I fully expect to be mocked, my metric doesn't look any more speculative than the others I've seen lately/all year long, and I wouldn't be surprised to see an updated version of it pan-out on March 3... (Still, it's impossible to accurately compare a group of teams that play one another so infrequently.)

You're desperately in need of something more important to obsess over...

 

[Fishman'81]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

Buddy, if you're thinking that I'm "obsessing" about this trivial matter, you're dead wrong... This venue is no more than a mere distraction to me, as fun as it (sometimes) can be.

And, for the 100th time, GO POLAR BEARS! (At least three of my cousin-alumni in Maine will have something to crow about to the lone Colby-guy, when summer rolls around.)

 

[LakerFan99]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

The best plan for every team listed in either of the rankings is simply to win out.

+1001. If Oswego doesn't win the Pool A (or Platty for that matter), they aren't getting in. The SOS and RNK aren't good enough to beat other teams, unless both Hobart and Utica have epic collapses, which is unlikely.

Win or go home.

 

[spwood]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

I really dislike angling for a Pool C berth (unless you play in the ECAC W) - it comes across as a backup plan in the event of failure. Win your conference and move on. That simple.

That said, take the RIT team of 2001...undefeated in the regular season. If they had lost in the ECAC West tournament 2-1 in a game they outshot the opponent 45-20, weren't they worthy of an NCAA bid? The NCAA states that they don't weigh post-season games any differently than the regular season. Clearly a 27-1 team deserves to play for the National Championship. One last thing, the NCAA assigns the auto-bid to the conference. It's the conference that decides whether to send the regular season champion (Ivy, and in the olden days, Big-10 (when it had 10 teams) and the PAC-10 (when it had 10 teams)) or the tournament champion. It's the conferences that have placed all of the emphasis on the post-season tournament.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

It's the conferences that have placed all of the emphasis on the post-season tournament.

Because it makes money. In some cases, LOTS of money.

 

[Ozz]

Re: NCAA Rankings?

Because it makes money. In some cases, LOTS of money.

And let's be honest, how boring would 75% of the games in the second half of conference play be if the Regular Season winner won the Pool A bid? Most teams would be out of it and would be more interested in preparing for next year.