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 Tournament - 12 Teams in 2016-17

Re: NCAA Tournament - 12 Teams in 2016-17

walktheline said:
3 regional tournaments of 4 teams (conference champs and pool C teams). The 3 winners go to Championship weekend and the final entry is, no doubt, a contender.
Click to expand...

Just how the heck are you going to pick the final entry for the frozen four when no one can ever agree who the 12 teams should be in the first place?

And, can you imagine the Fish's head exploding when that choice is made?! We would all be cleaning up goo for weeks...
 
Russell Jaslow said:
Just how the heck are you going to pick the final entry for the frozen four when no one can ever agree who the 12 teams should be in the first place?

And, can you imagine the Fish's head exploding when that choice is made?! We would all be cleaning up goo for weeks...
Click to expand...

Simple: the NC$$ would make it the loser of the highest-attended QF game, possibly using the schools' distance from the Championship Site as a tiebreaker if the numbers are within a certain margin. ;)
 
Re: NCAA Tournament - 12 Teams in 2016-17

CARDS_rule_the_Burgh said:
Simple: the NC$$ would make it the loser of the highest-attended QF game, possibly using the schools' distance from the Championship Site as a tiebreaker if the numbers are within a certain margin. ;)
Click to expand...

Nah, it would just go by the distance from the site. That would help boost attendance, and if the selected team was within 500 miles do the always important job of saving a flight. But they'd first have a committee meeting with leaked extra criteria followed by the decision. The alternative would be to make it a Frozen Three if there is no loser within 500 miles.
 
walktheline said:
Fan the flames of a dead fire much? You said utter. Haha.
Click to expand...

Not at all. But the NCAA, through its bureaucratic majesty, has created all sorts of processes and procedures that are admittedly difficult to understand. Nonetheless, they are all there in writing for anyone who desires to examine them and actually learn something. Focusing on or discussing things that fall well outside the governing processes is a fool's errand, a waste of time, doesn't speak well of those engaging in it who should full well know better, and actually does a disservice to the handful of people actually interested in learning how things truly work.

It was clear no one had much interest in any of that after I posted the links the first time so I reiterated the point. It's quite remarkable sometimes.

By the way, wasn't sure if I wanted to say this publicly, but there's a major push to go with six pods of two and play down to a Subzero Six. Which I presume will be hosted in Utica.
 
XYZ said:
Not at all. But the NCAA, through its bureaucratic majesty, has created all sorts of processes and procedures that are admittedly difficult to understand. Nonetheless, they are all there in writing for anyone who desires to examine them and actually learn something. Focusing on or discussing things that fall well outside the governing processes is a fool's errand, a waste of time, doesn't speak well of those engaging in it who should full well know better, and actually does a disservice to the handful of people actually interested in learning how things truly work.

It was clear no one had much interest in any of that after I posted the links the first time so I reiterated the point. It's quite remarkable sometimes.

By the way, wasn't sure if I wanted to say this publicly, but there's a major push to go with six pods of two and play down to a Subzero Six. Which I presume will be hosted in Utica.
Click to expand...


My apologies as I took your repost quite differently than you had intended.

Most in this thread, I think, have a reasonable understanding of the broad system that DIII hockey championships sets forth. I'm personally not keen on the in-region selection rules, especially the 500 mile stipulation. However, the committee has been known to relax on that rule in previous seasons (I believe 2008, 2011) to make work.

I must also say, the team I root for is Pool B material so any change to the system would likely increase their odds.
 
Re: NCAA Tournament - 12 Teams in 2016-17

XYZ said:
By the way, wasn't sure if I wanted to say this publicly, but there's a major push to go with six pods of two and play down to a Subzero Six. Which I presume will be hosted in Utica.
Click to expand...

You better trademark that name now! :p
 
Re: NCAA Tournament - 12 Teams in 2016-17

NUProf said:
Last year 11 teams, 5 byes. All 4 western teams got byes and one eastern team (Hobart) got a bye. It wasn't possible for all of the byes to go to the midwest if there were only 4 midwest teams. The byes will be determined based in part on travel issues. If exactly 4 West teams make the tournament, it is almost a guarantee that all 4 byes go to the West. That is the way the system works, the right structure theoretically would give the top 4 teams regardless of region byes. and match up 12 vs. 5, 11 vs. 6, 10 vs. 7, and 9 vs. 8. However because of the rule that a 500 mile trip requires a flight, and flights must be minimized in the first two rounds, that scenario will not happen.
Click to expand...

Just finally getting around to see what people are talking about this year. Your post leaves me in the perennial position of thinking "I thought we covered this last year" :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top