NCAA Tournament Selection and Seeding

[Lindsay]

So dont fix it and allow for bias? Granted this is a weird year and pairwise usually solves this but they should have a better system setup. Will everyone be happy - never - but if you had a selection committee of 50 you reduce any bias.

say it out loud “selection committee of 50”. I just don’t think it makes sense.

I’m not suggesting we don’t fix it. Next year we’ll go back to math picking the field. They should keep pushing to get the money to get rid of the minimizing flights thing. This year is done. Don’t know what we can do other than just call it out. The reporting of the text message between Gate coach and Minnesota is another damning thing. A lot of (albeit small) media reported on the ways in which this bracket is flawed and good for them. I’m ready to move on from posting about it, but it doesn’t mean it doesn’t matter. Just means it’s time for me to move on!

 

[Offsides Guy]

This is an overreaction imo. What we need is the two coaches on the committee to take their job seriously. We need coaches on the committee because if it’s a bunch of administrators we could get people who don’t actually care or know about women’s hockey. I have outrage at King not because BC got in, but because it seems like the committee made sure not to fail on her team (who had a reasonable case to be there) but didn’t take due care with getting it right, or at least getting it defensible and logical with the rest. Since King’s team got in in at large no less, she of all people should have cared about making it look fair and reasonable. To have a bubble team on the outside looking in was inevitable, to have a bracket that has been described in the woho media as “lunacy”, “Minnesota getting jobbed”, “Banagrams”, “inconsistent application of chosen criteria” and more was completely avoidable.

The committee was supposed to act as stewards of the game. The coaches on the committee should be held to the highest standard. Somebody failed somewhere.

Very well stated!

 

[Rightnut]

For this year almost 60% of the field would be in a 16 team tournament. No way that makes sense from a competition standpoint let alone the cost factor. With full competition from all the schools in a normal year roughly 44% of the field would be in the tournament. Not good.

Agreed. I think a little expansion is merited. Go to 10 teams with the 7-10 teams playing a play-in game.

 

[robertearle]

Agreed. I think a little expansion is merited. Go to 10 teams with the 7-10 teams playing a play-in game.

Isn't a "play-in game" already the plan for when the NEWHA starts getting their auto bid?

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Isn't a "play-in game" already the plan for when the NEWHA starts getting their auto bid?

Actually, no, as it turns out! According to the notes from this year's summer meetings, the plan is to keep the field at 8, award 5 autobids, but only allow the 4 highest-ranked autobids out of the 5 into the field.

So, if your 5 autobids are ranked as such in the Pairwise:

WCHA Minnesota = 1
WHEA Boston College = 3
ECAC Cornell = 4
NEWHA St. Anselm = 18
CHA Lindenwood = 20

Then Minnesota, BC, Cornell, and St. Anselm would be in, and the CHA would be shut out of the tournament (assuming they don't have a team in the top 8).

 

[D2D]

Actually, no, as it turns out! According to the notes from this year's summer meetings, the plan is to keep the field at 8, award 5 autobids, but only allow the 4 highest-ranked autobids out of the 5 into the field.

Are these just "notes" for consideration or is this the actual plan for 2022?

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

This is an overreaction imo. What we need is the two coaches on the committee to take their job seriously. We need coaches on the committee because if it’s a bunch of administrators we could get people who don’t actually care or know about women’s hockey. I have outrage at King not because BC got in, but because it seems like the committee made sure not to fail on her team (who had a reasonable case to be there) but didn’t take due care with getting it right, or at least getting it defensible and logical with the rest. Since King’s team got in in at large no less, she of all people should have cared about making it look fair and reasonable. To have a bubble team on the outside looking in was inevitable, to have a bracket that has been described in the woho media as “lunacy”, “Minnesota getting jobbed”, “Banagrams”, “inconsistent application of chosen criteria” and more was completely avoidable.

The committee was supposed to act as stewards of the game. The coaches on the committee should be held to the highest standard. Somebody failed somewhere.

Do I assume correctly that because the committee is so small the coaches with a horse in the race don't recuse themselves from the discussions/debates about their teams like the FBS committee members do?

 

[robertearle]

Actually, no, as it turns out! According to the notes from this year's summer meetings, the plan is to keep the field at 8, award 5 autobids, but only allow the 4 highest-ranked autobids out of the 5 into the field.

Seriously?!?

Do these guys stay up late trying to think of ways to make bad situations worse?

"...award 5 autobids, but only allow the 4 highest-ranked autobids out of the 5 into the field."

One of these words does not mean what they think it means.

The implicit assumption being that the NEWHA will be the lowest, at least for a while, and by then they'll come up with "something else", I guess.

 

[ARM]

Do these guys stay up late trying to think of ways to make bad situations worse?

I'm guessing that they're so talented that they can dream up nonsense off the top of their heads. "Sure, you can have an autobid. You can't play in the tournament, but we'll let you have one."

 

[Timothy A]

Actually, no, as it turns out! According to the notes from this year's summer meetings, the plan is to keep the field at 8, award 5 autobids, but only allow the 4 highest-ranked autobids out of the 5 into the field.

Then it's not an autobid then because by definition. An autobid team automatically get a spot in the tourney. So if the last place wwcha wins the wwcha tourney, they may get bumped then.

 

[D2D]

Then it's not an autobid then because by definition. An autobid team automatically get a spot in the tourney. So if the last place wwcha wins the wwcha tourney, they may get bumped then.

To simplify the process and make things equitable they could adopt a rotating "non-autobid" plan whereby each of the five conferences take turns. So if your team wins its conference tournament they would be a true autobid provided it wasn't your league's turn to be the "non-autobid". Unless of course your team has the highest Pairwise ranking in which case the committee decides in the smoke-filled room.
(jk but something like this wouldn't be too surprising, coming from this group)

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

An autobid team automatically get a spot in the tourney.

Except when stuff is just made up and it doesn't...

 

[Rightnut]

Then it's not an autobid then because by definition. An autobid team automatically get a spot in the tourney. So if the last place wwcha wins the wwcha tourney, they may get bumped then.

But they do get a participation trophy.

 

[Timothy A]

Except when stuff is just made up and it doesn't...

I am completely dumbfounded that an autobid isn't an autobid. Imagine if this were men's bouncyball, holy crap the sheet would hit the fan. Every D1 women's hockey program should be outraged by this stupidity. What's next, the 5th ranked team in the country not getting invited to the tourney, but 2 teams below them do?

 

[EMPTYNETTER]

I am completely dumbfounded that an autobid isn't an autobid. Imagine if this were men's bouncyball, holy crap the sheet would hit the fan. Every D1 women's hockey program should be outraged by this stupidity. What's next, the 5th ranked team in the country not getting invited to the tourney, but 2 teams below them do?

I'm still waiting for the logic on how that exact thing was just done to MN and PSU. BC gets whooped 5-1 in their QF HE game, and jumps over PSU in the weekly rankings after Crowley has the nerve to vote her team in. "Come On Man"...or "Come on Woman"

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

I'm still waiting for the logic on how that exact thing was just done to MN and PSU. BC gets whooped 5-1 in their QF HE game, and jumps over PSU in the weekly rankings after Crowley has the nerve to vote her team in. "Come On Man"...or "Come on Woman"

Maybe Crowley and Berlo had a mutual back scratching agreement to support each other's team as the 7-2 thumping we gave Duluth Saturday didn't cause Duluth to pass any eye candy test that I could see.

 

[Rightnut]

Maybe Crowley and Berlo had a mutual back scratching agreement to support each other's team as the 7-2 thumping we gave Duluth Saturday didn't cause Duluth to pass any eye candy test that I could see.

What is the scouting report on Duluth? Asking for a friend.

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

Maybe Crowley and Berlo had a mutual back scratching agreement to support each other's team as the 7-2 thumping we gave Duluth Saturday didn't cause Duluth to pass any eye candy test that I could see.

I'm not big on propping up Minnesota as they were pretty disappointing to me but I think Minnesota would have beaten UMD Saturday if they had been matched up in the first game. Although it may have been a situation of whose goalie was worse.

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

What is the scouting report on Duluth? Asking for a friend.

First line is a headache for opponents highlighted by Gabbie Hughes and Anna Klein. Some pretty nice depth at forward. Not the kind of depth that Wisconsin or OSU have.

Good skating defense highlighting by Liz Norton and Ashton Bell, and their goalie can be lights out...Just wasn't in the opening game of the WCHA tournament.

 

[robertearle]

What is the scouting report on Duluth? Asking for a friend.

A first line as good as any in the WCHA, and a goalie that can shut out anybody when she's "on". Colgate will absolutely have their hands full.