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.

Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

Not that this means all that much but wasn't Harvard unranked to start the year? Or am I totally making that up?
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

OnMAA said:
Me thinks if UND does well down the stretch and gets to the WCHA final, they will be in. Having said that they have not done as well as I would have expected, but the intangibles suggest, to not count them out yet. Off course they would have to leap frog OHIO into third to have a reasonable chance to get to the WCHA final. If they get stuck in the four slot, they won't make it, as I can't see anyone besting Minny in the WCHA tourney. Either way, looking at the WCHA standings, the 2-5 placings are still a wide open horse race, and the two teams that finish in the 2-3 slot will both have a good chance to get to the tourney.
Click to expand...
UND's TUC is the key that prevents them from gaining pairwise comparisons with most of the teams above them. They could gain on both Ohio State and Wisc if they win all their H2H meetings with both of these teams (including games in WCHA playoffs) - tough go I think, since likely need to flip comparisons with both Ohio State and Wisc. And then would also need no suprises in Playoff champs in other leagues.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

How many AQ have come from teams ranked below #8 in pairwise over the last 4-5 years? In other words - how often has an 8 pairwise been bumped from tourney?
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

I'd have to be not at work to look this up, but I think the first time it happened was at most two years ago.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

TonyTheTiger20 said:
The NCAA wouldn't pair two 5-8 teams regardless of flights because they seed the top 4 teams.
Click to expand...
Except that you're dodging the question I meant to ask. What I'm getting at is: Will the NCAA disregard any and all other criteria if the payoff is saving two flights with one tweak? (I should have mentioned the seeds in my original question; that's on me.)

As for OSU making it to #8, I think you would likely see the committee send OSU out east and Mercyhurst to Minnesota.

UNLESS Cornell makes the top 4. If Cornell is top four I think the committee would send Mercyhurst to New York which should not be a flight
Click to expand...
Agreed, these are much more likely scenarios, particularly with Cornell in the mix. If only one flight is saved, the temptation is greatly reduced.

And either way, it supports the idea that some scenarios are extreme enough, and some rules are sacred enough, that the desire to minimize flights isn't everything. It's not absolutely dispositive; it's just given too much weight.

OnMAA said:
Intra-Conference match-ups are not that uncommon, specially in the most recent two years, with Intra Conference more in vogue then previous years.
Note that as recently as 2009 and 2010 there were three Flight games.

2012 1 Intra Conf game: UND at Minny; 1 flight game - MC at Wisco
2011 2 Intra Conf games: UMD at Wisco and Darty at Cornell; 2 flight games - Minny at BC and MC at BU
2010 1 Intra Conf game: Harvard at Cornell; 3 flight games - BU at MC, UNH at UMD and Clarkson at Minny
2009 0 Intra Conf games: 3 flight games - Darty at Wisco, UMD at UNH, BC at Minny
Click to expand...
Agree completely that the Intra-Conference match-ups "are not that uncommon." To me that's a significant problem, and it's the policy of minimizing flights that's almost entirely to blame. Intra-conference match-ups should only be used as a last resort, not as a common fix.

I do appreciate the list you assembled. Your info indicates that problem is less long-term, and perhaps less pervasive, than I remembered.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

There isn't any precedent for swapping the #4 and #5 teams to make travel easier. It is possible that if those two teams were close enough, some sort of "magic happens" scenario could produce a bracket where the team that we think really is #4 doesn't wind up hosting. If that were the case, the committee could have done something sneaky in 2011 when BC, Minnesota, and Mercyhurst were all very close and a flight could have been saved by having either the Lakers or Gophers host the other and send BC to BU. So it isn't likely that there is some huge conspiracy where the only goal is to save money by whatever possible black magic. I do expect that UND will always be matched with either UMD or UM if conceivable to do so w/o violating the "top four teams are seeded" rule.

I don't think that it is likely that both UW and UND get into the tournament unless one wins the automatic bid. There are enough losses that will have to go somewhere, and Mercyhurst currently sits above both and isn't likely to lose more than four more games as a worst-case for the Lakers.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

From what I understand, the "top 4 teams are seeded" rule is an actual rule, while the minimizing flights is merely a goal.

Changing the "top 4 teams are seeded" rule just to minimize flights would be akin to them randomly deciding to make the tournament 16 teams the day of the selection just because it happened to work out that there were no intraconference matchups.

This is a great thread by the way.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

mattj711 said:
I'm still not sold on Harvard being the clear favorite in the ECAC. Harvard's schedule to date hasn't been that strong. Harvard has typically done a good job of beating up on teams they should beat, and they have yet to play anyone from the north country. The only two games Harvard has played where one could reasonably expect them to possibly lose were against BU (which they lost) and Cornell (which they won). And to put it quite frankly, I was not overly impressed with Cornell's play in the Harvard game or in the games I watched leading up to or immediately after that game. I will give you that a good team can make another team not look too sharp, but since I wasn't super impressed with Cornell's play generally at that time, I'm not putting a lot of stock in that one game. Cornell has played much better since coming back from break, and I suspect we'll see a better game in February.

**It should be noted that I have little use for Harvard, and my bias against the Crimson could be clouding my judgement.**
Click to expand...

Sorry to burst your bubble, but I've seen Harvard play twice and they looked very impressive both times. By far the best team I've seen live, and I've seen all top ECAC teams at least once. Having said that, admit that my Cornell sample was from an early season game, and they did not look strong to me at the time. Still a good team, but not as good as years past. Just my humble opinion. If anything my bias would be more towards Cornell than Harvard.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

OnMAA said:
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I've seen Harvard play twice and they looked very impressive both times. By far the best team I've seen live, and I've seen all top ECAC teams at least once. Having said that, admit that my Cornell sample was from an early season game, and they did not look strong to me at the time. Still a good team, but not as good as years past. Just my humble opinion. If anything my bias would be more towards Cornell than Harvard.
Click to expand...

Having seen both play NU at Matthews Harvard definitely had a better showing of themselves. I don't want to start the argument from last year's ECAC playoff thread but Harvard seems to be better. Also I really don't see bu hosting, good chance the go but they should be traveling somewhere.
 
NUWH DogHouse said:
Having seen both play NU at Matthews Harvard definitely had a better showing of themselves. I don't want to start the argument from last year's ECAC playoff thread but Harvard seems to be better. Also I really don't see bu hosting, good chance the go but they should be traveling somewhere.
Click to expand...

What was the argument from last season's ECAC playoff thread?
 
OnMAA said:
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I've seen Harvard play twice and they looked very impressive both times. By far the best team I've seen live, and I've seen all top ECAC teams at least once. Having said that, admit that my Cornell sample was from an early season game, and they did not look strong to me at the time. Still a good team, but not as good as years past. Just my humble opinion. If anything my bias would be more towards Cornell than Harvard.
Click to expand...

No bubbles were burst. I may concede to Harvard's superiority at some point. Just not ready to do it yet. :D
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

mattj711 said:
What was the argument from last season's ECAC playoff thread?
Click to expand...

I said St L seemed to be playing better than Harvard, and could beat them in the ECAC playoffs, due to watching them both live last year and I got ripped apart for basing my opinion almost entirely on the times I saw them live.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

TonyTheTiger20 said:
From what I understand, the "top 4 teams are seeded" rule is an actual rule, while the minimizing flights is merely a goal.
Click to expand...
If the rule protecting the top 4 seeds is really rock solid, great. I'm all for it.

Changing the "top 4 teams are seeded" rule just to minimize flights would be akin to them randomly deciding to make the tournament 16 teams the day of the selection just because it happened to work out that there were no intraconference matchups.
Click to expand...
Um, no. Your main point may be accurate, but you need a different analogy. Questionable pairings are commonplace; and even solid rules can be subject to "black magic," as per ARM's post. But I doubt there'll ever be a case when the NCAA doubles the size of a tournament field on an ex post facto basis!

This is a great thread by the way.
Click to expand...
Musing. It's what we do best.:)
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

PWR after this week's action would have the tourney at:

Clarkson @ Minnesota

Cornell @ BC

Mercyhurst @ BU

Wisconsin @ Harvard

This would be a great bracket to follow.

P.S. I'm sure they would change certain things based on flights, etc. but I haven't taken that into account.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

LOL WATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/grid/

oqk9ht.png

That is the single most ridiculous drop I've ever seen because of one loss, EVER.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

If the season ended today Harvard would to go BC. That is the DUMBEST THING EVER.
 
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread

Welcome to the volatility of PWR. Harvard has only played three games against the top 12 in the RPI and lost two of them; of all the teams under consideration, only St. Lawrence has a worse winning percentage. (Not coincidentally, they're the only TUC Harvard has beaten.) Combine that with a poor performance against teams that also played WCHA opponents (0-1 vs. Clarkson; 0-0-1 vs. UNH; 0-1 vs. BU; 1-0 vs. SLU, but they aren't going to win the comparison vs. Minnesota anyway) and you have a recipe for losing the comparison to every WCHA team, which is what happened.

There's a reason a lot of us sneer at the math underlying RPI and PWR. In this case, though, Harvard will either straighten things out or lose the comparisons to BU and BC, too. And, who knows, the NCAA might decide on some new ad hoc method of compensating for the flaws in their selection criteria.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top