Regional Rankings

[NUProf]

Re: Regional Rankings

Fitchburg- Nichols: 45 miles
Colby- UNE: 97 miles
Hobart- Geneseo: 49 miles
Augsburg- Marian: 300 miles

I was thinking of the New York - New England distances - for potential match ups, not the ones that were actually used. I seem to recall (but I'm old) that were some cases where a team from New England couldn't go to Western NY because of the 500 mile rule.

 

[Fishman'81]

Re: Regional Rankings

I was thinking of the New York - New England distances - for potential match ups, not the ones that were actually used. I seem to recall (but I'm old) that were some cases where a team from New England couldn't go to Western NY because of the 500 mile rule.

Don't you hate that rule, especially when it *sometimes* appears to have some bearing on the selection process?

 

[GB Puck Fan]

Re: Regional Rankings

Don't you hate that rule, especially when it *sometimes* appears to have some bearing on the selection process?

bearing on the pairing? Definitely happens

bearing on the selection? Don't think that's what was said, and don't think there's any evidence....

 

[Fishman'81]

Re: Regional Rankings

bearing on the pairing? Definitely happens

bearing on the selection? Don't think that's what was said, and don't think there's any evidence....

I'm honestly not alleging that, but I'm guessing that geographical considerations didn't hurt re: Point getting the Pool B. Looked like a dead-heat between UWSP and Utica on paper, even employing only D-3's rather threadbare and obfuscated analysis.

 

[gknight]

Re: Regional Rankings

I covered this below. It didn't look as far fetched as I thought. They protected the #1 seed (Salve Regina) by giving them a bye and a guarantee of one of the lowest seeds left after the first round. It appears they may have switched Colby and Nichols for geography reasons, but that didn't greatly upset bracket integrity. We can argue about the teams they picked (or didn't pick), but the way they matched up the teams that are playing is easily defensible.

Protecting the #1 seed??? That makes no sense. Protect them by giving them a bye and have them play the winner of the 4 vs 5 game in the East maybe, that makes sense. Last year Norwich was a #1 seed with 1 loss all year and they didn't even get a bye, and then they played the winner of the 4 vs 5 game, like in every other bracket known to man. Salve deserves to be set up to play the lowest seed left after the 1st round (1 vs 4) and avoid the other two highest seeds (2 vs 3), but the way this bracket was set up there is no way the top 4 seeds in the east can be the last 4 teams alive in the east. The teams are all within 500 miles so there are no restrictions to blame either, unbelievable.

 

[NUProf]

Re: Regional Rankings

That's why D3 needs to go to the KRACH, or RPI system. I've heard from some on here thats the only way to go.

There is one person who is saying that, and he doesn't understand the fact that all that is being done is applying the very same process as is applied in every DIII sport. Hockey does not get to use its own metrics. Like it or not, unless the DIII assembly passes regulations to introduce different metrics in all sports, which is not going to happen, these metrics are not going to change. As an aside - KRACH is just as flawed as any other metric in which there are so few games and so many teams. The connectivity of the competition graph is not strong enough to support the use of any which purports to be able to compare any two teams in the country. It is a difficult situation to make comparisons in any case. Since some conferences are pretty insular, be it KRACH or RPI (and in reality to get to RPI, all you would have to do is add a component in the NCAA SOS metric to get a version of RPI.

 

[Fishman'81]

Re: Regional Rankings

There is one person who is saying that, and he doesn't understand the fact that all that is being done is applying the very same process as is applied in every DIII sport. Hockey does not get to use its own metrics. Like it or not, unless the DIII assembly passes regulations to introduce different metrics in all sports, which is not going to happen, these metrics are not going to change. As an aside - KRACH is just as flawed as any other metric in which there are so few games and so many teams. The connectivity of the competition graph is not strong enough to support the use of any which purports to be able to compare any two teams in the country. It is a difficult situation to make comparisons in any case. Since some conferences are pretty insular, be it KRACH or RPI (and in reality to get to RPI, all you would have to do is add a component in the NCAA SOS metric to get a version of RPI.

Yes, there isn't a lot of comparative data, which is why it makes complete sense to employ every single shred of data that exists.

Explain why that's a bad idea, or why the NCAA would object to D-3 hockey doing whatever it takes to change the process for the better... As if the NCAA, as an institution, gives two sh*ts about D-3 hockey in the first place... You compare dollars to doughnuts, as if there's a real distinction to be made there.

(And, FWIW, only "one person" commented on the Emperor being naked as well, but he/she had eyes.)

 

[ColdInRomney]

Re: Regional Rankings

"The blame for this lies squarely at the feet of the East Regional Advisory Committee for concluding in its final rankings that Utica's SOS not only wasn't a hindrance compared to Oswego and Trinity but also that it wouldn't prove a hindrance on the national call when it came to at-large bid selections. The decision to treat SOS differently than decades of precedent suggests it gets treated proved a grave mistake that cost either Oswego or Trinity dearly.

If that doesn't make sense, how about wording it this way: the decision to move Utica above both Oswego and Trinity (a spot it had not been in the prior three weeks) kept both the Lakers and Bantams from even getting a chance to get into a comparison with Marian -- and it's a comparison both would have won.

Fans of Oswego and Trinity have every right to be upset, and even though one would have been left out anyway as there was only one Pool C spot remaining, the fact both were put in positions that kept them out of the discussion entirely is inexcusable if not a fine display of gross incompetence and deriliction of duty.

Often fans are upset and frustrated with tournament selections for reasons that have nothing or little to do with the process, but in this case the outrage is justified as this has everything to do with the process and never should have had happened. But it did, and it did for one reason and one reason alone: the decisions of the East Regional Advisory Committee relative to the final East Region rankings." -D3 Bracketology

http://www.d3hockey.com/ncaa-tournament/2018/men/ncaa-tournament-selections-explained

 

[GB Puck Fan]

Re: Regional Rankings

Matt's walkthrough makes sense... the east shot itself in the foot...

 

[OZFEST]

Re: Regional Rankings

"The blame for this lies squarely at the feet of the East Regional Advisory Committee for concluding in its final rankings that Utica's SOS not only wasn't a hindrance compared to Oswego and Trinity but also that it wouldn't prove a hindrance on the national call when it came to at-large bid selections. The decision to treat SOS differently than decades of precedent suggests it gets treated proved a grave mistake that cost either Oswego or Trinity dearly.

If that doesn't make sense, how about wording it this way: the decision to move Utica above both Oswego and Trinity (a spot it had not been in the prior three weeks) kept both the Lakers and Bantams from even getting a chance to get into a comparison with Marian -- and it's a comparison both would have won.

Fans of Oswego and Trinity have every right to be upset, and even though one would have been left out anyway as there was only one Pool C spot remaining, the fact both were put in positions that kept them out of the discussion entirely is inexcusable if not a fine display of gross incompetence and deriliction of duty.

Often fans are upset and frustrated with tournament selections for reasons that have nothing or little to do with the process, but in this case the outrage is justified as this has everything to do with the process and never should have had happened. But it did, and it did for one reason and one reason alone: the decisions of the East Regional Advisory Committee relative to the final East Region rankings." -D3 Bracketology

http://www.d3hockey.com/ncaa-tournament/2018/men/ncaa-tournament-selections-explained

So now we can begin saying its "Utica's Fault.." (the RIT's fault is getting tired anyway)

 

[NEHockey92]

Protecting the #1 seed??? That makes no sense. Protect them by giving them a bye and have them play the winner of the 4 vs 5 game in the East maybe, that makes sense. Last year Norwich was a #1 seed with 1 loss all year and they didn't even get a bye, and then they played the winner of the 4 vs 5 game, like in every other bracket known to man. Salve deserves to be set up to play the lowest seed left after the 1st round (1 vs 4) and avoid the other two highest seeds (2 vs 3), but the way this bracket was set up there is no way the top 4 seeds in the east can be the last 4 teams alive in the east. The teams are all within 500 miles so there are no restrictions to blame either, unbelievable.

I honesty believe that the committee may have spun the bracket into a way in which closer proximity teams will have a first round matchup. Is it for attendance purposes? in which most schools are on Spring break anyways or maybe save costs for travel and overnight stay. The Hobart and Geneseo matchup is a little fishy but 2 NY schools playing each other may look better than a team from ME or MA traveling in the eyes of the NCAA. Attendance should be high for first round matchups I agree. UNE Colby game will be packed, Nichols Fitchburg should have a decent crowd, the Cooler although very cold should possibly have a decent attendance. Only logical way I can see why they did these matchups.

 

[joecct]

So now we can begin saying its "Utica's Fault.." (the RIT's fault is getting tired anyway)

Actually - we could begin an "It's all Norwich's fault." maxim.

Prez - I know you're bound by NDA's and Omerta, but you (pl) blew it.

 

[landing1010]

Re: Regional Rankings

I honesty believe that the committee may have spun the bracket into a way in which closer proximity teams will have a first round matchup. Is it for attendance purposes? in which most schools are on Spring break anyways or maybe save costs for travel and overnight stay. The Hobart and Geneseo matchup is a little fishy but 2 NY schools playing each other may look better than a team from ME or MA traveling in the eyes of the NCAA. Attendance should be high for first round matchups I agree. UNE Colby game will be packed, Nichols Fitchburg should have a decent crowd, the Cooler although very cold should possibly have a decent attendance. Only logical way I can see why they did these matchups.

Salve is going to be playing the winner of the Fitchburg/Nichols game at URI's Boss Arena. The Portsmouth Abbey shuts down their rink after the prep school season is over. Not really a home game and the Salve students start spring break and the Newport St. Paddy's Day parade is that day. Could be 3 people at that game.

 

[sshablak]

Re: Regional Rankings

There used to be a criteria years ago "record in last ten" I haven't seen this now, so prob not used. Utica finished on a roll, Oz lost three and Trinity lost. Maybe this is why Utica jumped over Oz and Trinity putting both "out of consideration".

I'm trying to understand why Utica jumped over Oz and Trinity in the last rankings. I guess SOS didn't count in that comparison. Then why did it count against Marian, there is no consistency.

Can anyone explain to me the discrepancy ? Why did UC jump over both Oz and Trinity ??

 

[GB Puck Fan]

Re: Regional Rankings

There used to be a criteria years ago "record in last ten" I haven't seen this now, so prob not used. Utica finished on a roll, Oz lost three and Trinity lost. Maybe this is why Utica jumped over Oz and Trinity putting both "out of consideration".

I'm trying to understand why Utica jumped over Oz and Trinity in the last rankings. I guess SOS didn't count in that comparison. Then why did it count against Marian, there is no consistency.

Can anyone explain to me the discrepancy ? Why did UC jump over both Oz and Trinity ??

I'm sure I will be corrected if I am wrong, but I believe the short answer is: that's what the east committee decided.

The longer answer as to why they did that, I don't think we know.

 

[spwood]

Re: Regional Rankings

There used to be a criteria years ago "record in last ten" I haven't seen this now, so prob not used. Utica finished on a roll, Oz lost three and Trinity lost. Maybe this is why Utica jumped over Oz and Trinity putting both "out of consideration".

I'm trying to understand why Utica jumped over Oz and Trinity in the last rankings. I guess SOS didn't count in that comparison. Then why did it count against Marian, there is no consistency.

Can anyone explain to me the discrepancy ? Why did UC jump over both Oz and Trinity ??

Each region has a committee that ranks its teams. That's the regional ranking you see. On Selection Sunday the two committees get together to select the tournament teams. In the past, the Eastern Committee has ranked its team with an eye toward that national phone call where the bids are given and has maximized their bids. They played the game smarter than the western committee did. The committee member change and this eastern committee gave the east no chance at a Pool C bid. As was explained on the other site, no team could be found in any sport with an SOS as bad as Utica's to receive an at-large bid. However, since they were the highest ranked (by the Eastern Committee) team left, they were in a one-on-one comparison with the highest ranking Western team left for that last Pool C. Utica's SOS was an albatross made of lead. In d3hockey's opinion, Oswego or Trinity would have taken the bid over Marian, but they never got the chance. Thanks to the Eastern Committee. Either a very vindictive (if it was some sort of grudge) move or a very amateur move. We'll never know the answer to that one...

 

[sshablak]

Re: Regional Rankings

You telling me that it was done on purpose by the eastern committee ???

Vindictive or amateur, I guess amateur, why would you want to screw an eastern team out of the playoffs if you're on the Eastern comm ?

 

[joecct]

You telling me that it was done on purpose by the eastern committee ???

What spwood said was accurate. I believe the East had a massive brain fart rather than the desire to "stick it" to anyone.

 

[sshablak]

Re: Regional Rankings

Unbelievable !

 

[joecct]

Unbelievable !

<img src="https://media1.tenor.com/images/a97de41de876ab89b0da8da84b1a7e55/tenor.gif/src>