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.

Proposed Selection Process Improvement

B

BismarckFan

Registered User
Proposal:

Top sixteen teams are placed (including automatic bids) in their initial order, ie. 1vs16 and 5vs12 in Regional A, 2vs15 and 6vs11 in Regional B, 3vs14 and 7vs10 in Regional C, and 4vs13 and 8vs9 in Regional D. Placement is based on the four top overall seeds going to the nearest Regional. No change yet...

The new rule: No team can be replaced by a team with seed more than one number higher or lower.

This rule would have resulted in only two switches, as follows:

Seed 9 Denver would have switched with Seed 10 Niagara. Seed 10 Niagara would have played Seed 8 North Dakota in the first round of the Midwest Regional (rather than the West Regional) and Seed 9 Denver would have played Seed 7 New Hampshire in the first round of the Northeast Regional.

And Seed 5 Miami would have switched with Seed 6 Boston College. Seed 5 Miami would have played Seed 11 Minnesota State in the first round of the West Regional and Seed 6 Boston College would have played Seed 12 Union in the first round of the East Regional.

Why add this rule? Because when revenues rule over fairness and teams are replaced with teams with seed number more than one over or under, the hard work of each team to secure the highest seed number possible is negated by the politics of greed. And if the new rule resulted in the inability to prevent a first round inter-conference matchup, the rule could be then amended to allow up to two seeds over or under the replaced seed (although this is extremely unlikely).

DOES ANYONE AGREE WITH ME ON ADDING THIS RULE IN THE FUTURE?
 
Re: Proposed Selection Process Improvement

Well.. I'm of the mind that autobids should be for regular season champions ONLY.
 
Re: Proposed Selection Process Improvement

FlagDUDE08 said:
Want to eliminate the conference tournament or something?
Click to expand...

No, but winning a conference tournament should not automatically qualify you. I can see the autobid in basketball since they have 64 slots. Not in hockey, in my opinion.
 
Re: Proposed Selection Process Improvement

fleabags said:
No, but winning a conference tournament should not automatically qualify you. I can see the autobid in basketball since they have 64 slots. Not in hockey, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Then there's no point to have a conference tournament. If you want the regular season to mean something, keep the bottom teams out of the playoffs.
 
Re: Proposed Selection Process Improvement

FlagDUDE08 said:
Then there's no point to have a conference tournament. If you want the regular season to mean something, keep the bottom teams out of the playoffs.
Click to expand...

I'd be fine with eliminating QF rounds. The schools would not, of course.
 
Re: Proposed Selection Process Improvement

Other thoughts:

1. Auto bids for both regular season champ (but not for runnerup in the event one team takes both trophys) AND tournament champ would work with a 32 team format and 8 regionals.

2. Eight teams should be the minimum for a conference to get an autobid.

3. NCAA should dump the political correctness for a minimum of tradition.

Sioux Ya Ya!!!!
 
Last edited:
Re: Proposed Selection Process Improvement

fleabags said:
Well.. I'm of the mind that autobids should be for regular season champions ONLY.
Click to expand...

I like this idea too, but if I recall correctly the NCAA bylaws leave it up to each conference to determine how they will allocate their autobid.

I suggested that conferences give the regular season champion a bye directly into the semi-finals of the conference tournament, and got quite a bit of rep, both favorable and negative, on that proposal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top