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.
- Status
MavHockey14
New member
Saves mookie money buying tickets and going
If we get in it's 9.5 or 11 hours driving and it's gonna be spendy either way.
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
Wouldn't matter. We lose when we should win, and we've won when I thought there was no chance.
Wouldn't matter. We lose when we should win, and we've won when I thought there was no chance.
Western bias.
Fighting Sioux 23
New member
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
Nothing has been announced to my knowledge. I wouldn't be surprised if they tweaked a couple of the rules, but I wouldn't expect any big changes.
Nothing has been announced to my knowledge. I wouldn't be surprised if they tweaked a couple of the rules, but I wouldn't expect any big changes.
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
I know one change I would like to see, and it came to mind after reading an article (here? CHN?) about Mercyhurst and the fact nearly every game they have played so far has been on the road. As long as the NCAA is going to use the RPI as the main criteria, tweak it so road game wins score more than home wins, and home losses hurt more than road ones. With the coming of the new conferences and many teams playing a much shorter conference schedule, many teams will be playing a lot more non-conference games. If the power teams end up playing 90% of those at home (as is the case for most of college basketball) it makes a sometimes unfair measuring stick even more unfair. I for one will be extremely disappointed if Notre Dame splits up their expected 14 annual non-conference game sites with 8 home-4 road-2 neutral site games. Making the RPI reward road wins more would either stop that, or make it less attractive for PWR points.
I know one change I would like to see, and it came to mind after reading an article (here? CHN?) about Mercyhurst and the fact nearly every game they have played so far has been on the road. As long as the NCAA is going to use the RPI as the main criteria, tweak it so road game wins score more than home wins, and home losses hurt more than road ones. With the coming of the new conferences and many teams playing a much shorter conference schedule, many teams will be playing a lot more non-conference games. If the power teams end up playing 90% of those at home (as is the case for most of college basketball) it makes a sometimes unfair measuring stick even more unfair. I for one will be extremely disappointed if Notre Dame splits up their expected 14 annual non-conference game sites with 8 home-4 road-2 neutral site games. Making the RPI reward road wins more would either stop that, or make it less attractive for PWR points.
Fighting Sioux 23
New member
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
So perhaps a revival of the bonus structure? I believe it was a 0.005 bonus for beating a top 15 team at home, 0.010 for beating a top 15 team on neutral ice, and a 0.015 for beating a top 15 team on the road. I could be off a zero there.
So perhaps a revival of the bonus structure? I believe it was a 0.005 bonus for beating a top 15 team at home, 0.010 for beating a top 15 team on neutral ice, and a 0.015 for beating a top 15 team on the road. I could be off a zero there.
WeAreNDHockey
\../ \../
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
Something along those lines, but the "bonus" would be for every road win, and none at all for anything at home. I'm not sure of the exact %, but I believe the NCAA calculates basketball home wins as 0.6 wins and road wins as 1.4 wins, with the reverse for losses. Neutral site games still count 1 for 1.
I am really fearful of what the schedules for some teams are going to look like in the coming years, especially teams playing as few as 20 conference games. We see what they look like in basketball; load up on home games from lower tier leagues, pile up the wins.
The RPI protects against this a little with a strength of opponent component, but I don't think it will be enough protection if some teams begin routinely playing 10 or 12 non-conference games at home. And if $$$ gets tight for some of the nWCHA teams or AH teams, we may see some programs going the route of the buy-game scenario frequently.
Hopefully all coaches take the stance that Walt Kyle has done at NMU. He says he won't be giving anyone a game if they won't recipricate NMU on an equal basis. Jeff Jackson has alluded to wanting to keep playing good road games as well. But for the larger (or more well off financially) schools, making money becomes too big a focus and who knows what will happen.
Something along those lines, but the "bonus" would be for every road win, and none at all for anything at home. I'm not sure of the exact %, but I believe the NCAA calculates basketball home wins as 0.6 wins and road wins as 1.4 wins, with the reverse for losses. Neutral site games still count 1 for 1.
I am really fearful of what the schedules for some teams are going to look like in the coming years, especially teams playing as few as 20 conference games. We see what they look like in basketball; load up on home games from lower tier leagues, pile up the wins.
The RPI protects against this a little with a strength of opponent component, but I don't think it will be enough protection if some teams begin routinely playing 10 or 12 non-conference games at home. And if $$$ gets tight for some of the nWCHA teams or AH teams, we may see some programs going the route of the buy-game scenario frequently.
Hopefully all coaches take the stance that Walt Kyle has done at NMU. He says he won't be giving anyone a game if they won't recipricate NMU on an equal basis. Jeff Jackson has alluded to wanting to keep playing good road games as well. But for the larger (or more well off financially) schools, making money becomes too big a focus and who knows what will happen.
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
Sweet lord, have we hit the navel gazing time of the year?
Sweet lord, have we hit the navel gazing time of the year?
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
Updated through games of 1/11
1 Boston*Coll*(HE) 27 0.6024
2 Quinnipiac*(EC) 26 0.5858
3 Minnesota*(WC) 25 0.5799
4 New*Hampshire*(HE) 24 0.5894
5 Notre*Dame*(CC) 23 0.5791
6 Boston*Univ*(HE) 22 0.5684
7 Denver*U*(WC) 21 0.5593
8 Miami*(CC) 20 0.5504
9 North*Dakota*(WC) 19 0.5567
10 Yale*(EC) 18 0.5497
11 Dartmouth*(EC) 16 0.5481
12 Western*Mich*(CC) 16 0.5399
13 Mass-Lowell*(HE) 14 0.5380
14 MSU-Mankato*(WC) 13 0.5385
15 NE-Omaha*(WC) 12 0.5321
-- Niagara
The TUC line
Updated through games of 1/11
1 Boston*Coll*(HE) 27 0.6024
2 Quinnipiac*(EC) 26 0.5858
3 Minnesota*(WC) 25 0.5799
4 New*Hampshire*(HE) 24 0.5894
5 Notre*Dame*(CC) 23 0.5791
6 Boston*Univ*(HE) 22 0.5684
7 Denver*U*(WC) 21 0.5593
8 Miami*(CC) 20 0.5504
9 North*Dakota*(WC) 19 0.5567
10 Yale*(EC) 18 0.5497
11 Dartmouth*(EC) 16 0.5481
12 Western*Mich*(CC) 16 0.5399
13 Mass-Lowell*(HE) 14 0.5380
14 MSU-Mankato*(WC) 13 0.5385
15 NE-Omaha*(WC) 12 0.5321
-- Niagara
Code:
[B]Manchester (UNH)Providence (Brown) Toledo (BGSU) Grand Rapids (Michigan)[/B]
New Hamp Boston C Quinnipiac Minnesota
Notre Dame Denver Miami Boston U
Dartmouth Yale North Dakota W Michigan
Mankato Niagara UNO LowellThe TUC line
Code:
27 Wisconsin 0.5044
28 CO*College 0.5035
---
29 Ferris*State 0.4983
30 AK-Fairbanks 0.4981
31 Providence 0.4960Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
Nice how that comes out, isn't it, Priceless? Western Mich and Dartmouth have to change for intra-conference matchup, and it helps attendance at both places. Trade Miami to Toledo for attendance, and then you get Yale at Providence also to help some more there.
Too bad it will never happen so fortuntealy for the committee....
Nice how that comes out, isn't it, Priceless? Western Mich and Dartmouth have to change for intra-conference matchup, and it helps attendance at both places. Trade Miami to Toledo for attendance, and then you get Yale at Providence also to help some more there.
Too bad it will never happen so fortuntealy for the committee....
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
Just waiting to see who wins this Denver-UNO tilt...been a heck of a game
Just waiting to see who wins this Denver-UNO tilt...been a heck of a game
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
A 3-way tie for the top spot this week. UNH is #1 and Boston College #2 by .0022 RPI points. We also have a bit of a conundrum because UNO is now out of the top 16, but tied for the lead in the WCHA. However, based on win % they do not get the autobid. Therefore they are out and Colgate is in the tournament.
1 New*Hampshire*(HE) 26 0.5940
2 Boston*Coll*(HE) 26 0.5903
3 Quinnipiac*(EC) 26 0.5881
4 Minnesota*(WC) 24 0.5827
5 Notre*Dame*(CC) 23 0.5699
6 Boston*Univ*(HE) 21 0.5671
7 North*Dakota*(WC) 21 0.5597
8 Denver*U*(WC) 20 0.5567
9 Yale*(EC) 19 0.5517
10 Dartmouth*(EC) 17 0.5512
11 Miami*(CC) 16 0.5510
12 Mass-Lowell*(HE) 16 0.5442
13 Western*Mich*(CC) 16 0.5435
14 Niagara*(AH) 13 0.5346
15 MSU-Mankato*(WC) 12 0.5304
16 Colgate*(EC) 12 0.5230
The brackets work out almost perfectly. We just switch Yale and Dartmouth for attendance purposes.
The all-important TUC line:
Whelan's site
A 3-way tie for the top spot this week. UNH is #1 and Boston College #2 by .0022 RPI points. We also have a bit of a conundrum because UNO is now out of the top 16, but tied for the lead in the WCHA. However, based on win % they do not get the autobid. Therefore they are out and Colgate is in the tournament.
1 New*Hampshire*(HE) 26 0.5940
2 Boston*Coll*(HE) 26 0.5903
3 Quinnipiac*(EC) 26 0.5881
4 Minnesota*(WC) 24 0.5827
5 Notre*Dame*(CC) 23 0.5699
6 Boston*Univ*(HE) 21 0.5671
7 North*Dakota*(WC) 21 0.5597
8 Denver*U*(WC) 20 0.5567
9 Yale*(EC) 19 0.5517
10 Dartmouth*(EC) 17 0.5512
11 Miami*(CC) 16 0.5510
12 Mass-Lowell*(HE) 16 0.5442
13 Western*Mich*(CC) 16 0.5435
14 Niagara*(AH) 13 0.5346
15 MSU-Mankato*(WC) 12 0.5304
16 Colgate*(EC) 12 0.5230
The brackets work out almost perfectly. We just switch Yale and Dartmouth for attendance purposes.
Code:
[B]Manchester (UNH)Providence (Brown) Toledo (BGSU) Grand Rapids (Michigan)[/B]
New Hamp Boston C Quinnipiac Minnesota
Denver North Dakota Boston U Notre Dame
Dartmouth Yale Miami Lowell
Colgate Mankato Niagara W MichiganThe all-important TUC line:
Code:
28 AK-Fairbanks 0.5043
---
29 Minn-Duluth 0.4999
30 Holy*Cross 0.4995
31 CO*College 0.4990
32 Mass-Amherst 0.4943Whelan's site
Last edited:
Fighting Sioux 23
New member
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
I knew Notre Dame was pretty good, but to get two shots at the Frozen Four...that's impressive.
I knew Notre Dame was pretty good, but to get two shots at the Frozen Four...that's impressive.
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
Priceless,
Thanks for the site. I get different results from there if I enter today's results manually.
And, I think you have a problem:
I think you want :
Manchester (UNH): UNH (1), North Dakota (7), Dartmouth (10), Colgate (16) and
Providence (Brown): BC (2), Denver (8), Yale (9), Mankato (15)
That is, if you intended to change the entire first round games (UND/Dart and DU/Yale)
I get, from Whelan's site (is there an error somewhere??)
1 - NH 26 .5935
2 - BC 26 .5899
3 - QU 26 .5881
4 - Mn 24 .5827
5 - Nt 23 .5700
6 - BU 21 .5672
7 - ND 21 .5599
8 - DU 20 .5565
9 - Ya 19 .5519
10 - WM 17 .5440
11 - Mm 17 .5512
12 - Da 16 .5505
13 - ML 15 .5435
14 - Ni 13 .5350
15 - Mk 12 .5302
16 - Cg 12 .5237
Which is a match to USCHO. Except for the 10/11 tiebreak between Miami and Western Michigan.
Priceless,
Thanks for the site. I get different results from there if I enter today's results manually.
And, I think you have a problem:
I think you want :
Manchester (UNH): UNH (1), North Dakota (7), Dartmouth (10), Colgate (16) and
Providence (Brown): BC (2), Denver (8), Yale (9), Mankato (15)
That is, if you intended to change the entire first round games (UND/Dart and DU/Yale)
I get, from Whelan's site (is there an error somewhere??)
1 - NH 26 .5935
2 - BC 26 .5899
3 - QU 26 .5881
4 - Mn 24 .5827
5 - Nt 23 .5700
6 - BU 21 .5672
7 - ND 21 .5599
8 - DU 20 .5565
9 - Ya 19 .5519
10 - WM 17 .5440
11 - Mm 17 .5512
12 - Da 16 .5505
13 - ML 15 .5435
14 - Ni 13 .5350
15 - Mk 12 .5302
16 - Cg 12 .5237
Which is a match to USCHO. Except for the 10/11 tiebreak between Miami and Western Michigan.
Re: Pairwise and Bracketology 2013 Edition
And, from which I would get:
Manchester (UNH Host): UNH (1), ND (7), WM (10), Cg (16)
Providence (Brown Host): BC (2), DU (8), Ya (9), Mk (15)
Toledo (BGSU Host): Qn (3), BU (6), Mm (11), Ni (14)
Grand Rapids (Michigan Host): Mn (4), Nt (5), Da (12), ML (13)
With ND/WM and DU/Ya already swapped. There would be an option to totally turn the 2/3 seed games upside down and get Western Michigan to Grand Rapids also.
And, from which I would get:
Manchester (UNH Host): UNH (1), ND (7), WM (10), Cg (16)
Providence (Brown Host): BC (2), DU (8), Ya (9), Mk (15)
Toledo (BGSU Host): Qn (3), BU (6), Mm (11), Ni (14)
Grand Rapids (Michigan Host): Mn (4), Nt (5), Da (12), ML (13)
With ND/WM and DU/Ya already swapped. There would be an option to totally turn the 2/3 seed games upside down and get Western Michigan to Grand Rapids also.
- Status