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.

>>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

LtPowers said:
Well, yes, but only by going against their own published selection criteria. (The criteria are known; what is not known 100% are the relative weights of those criteria... but the PWR has never been wrong in predicting the tournament teams (seeding, yes, but not the field).)
Click to expand...

The relative weights of the criteria are applied by the committee exactly as spelled out. The committee follows the rules to the letter, which is why the PWR has never failed to predict the tournament field.
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

LtPowers said:
Well, yes, but only by going against their own published selection criteria. (The criteria are known; what is not known 100% are the relative weights of those criteria... but the PWR has never been wrong in predicting the tournament teams (seeding, yes, but not the field).)


Powers &8^]
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the seedings only vary from the final PWR ranking due to switches made to avoid having teams play inside of their own conference in the first round and for attendance concerns.
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Ed Trefzger said:
This sort of private conversation is never going to be made public. I've been shared things in confidence that I can't share here. It's not so much hot air; it's just not shared with you.
Click to expand...

You're with the CIA, aren't you? I knew it!
 
Ed Trefzger said:
Here's the whole breakdown here:

http://www.uscho.com/faq/pairwise-rankings-explanation/

And here are the PairWise Rankings:

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

TL;DR: After the five autobids are selected, the 11 at-large bids are determined by a process comparing teams in various criteria. The process is not released publicly, but a statistical model developed by USCHO in the 1990s, known as the PairWise Rankings, mimics that process. A team usually needs to be in the top 16 to make it, but any conference champion not in the top 16 reduces that number. The RPI is one of the components, but not the only one.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Ed!

I sort of knew that the top 16 teams usually make the tourney, but I was confused at how you could have 5 auto-bids and still maintain a 16-team field. Now I realize that most of the time the conference winners are in the top 16 (except maybe AHA).
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

jflory81 said:
As I understand it, the seedings only vary from the final PWR ranking due to switches made to avoid having teams play inside of their own conference in the first round and for attendance concerns.
Click to expand...

The seeding number never changes, but yes they do swap teams within bands to avoid conference matchups and attendance.
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Ed Trefzger said:
This sort of private conversation is never going to be made public. I've been shared things in confidence that I can't share here. It's not so much hot air; it's just not shared with you.
Click to expand...

Well that leaves me in a bit of bind, doesn't it? You guys are asking me to believe that the President of RIT was bullied and forced to stand aside ... and in fact, possibly forced into retirement ... because they wanted D-I hockey so very very badly and he just wouldn't agree to it? And even after all that, he managed to conduct press conferences and interviews on the subject without letting on that he was deeply opposed to the entire thing? And continued to support the university even after they bullied him and forced him out?

Can you at least understand why I find this implausible at a minimum?


Powers &8^]
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

blazer777 said:
You're with the CIA, aren't you? I knew it!
Click to expand...

Sshhh. My neighbors think I work for a greeting card company.
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Bing said:
Thanks, Ed!

I sort of knew that the top 16 teams usually make the tourney, but I was confused at how you could have 5 auto-bids and still maintain a 16-team field. Now I realize that most of the time the conference winners are in the top 16 (except maybe AHA).
Click to expand...

Exactly. Teams who are "on the bubble" watch nervously at the conference finals. A team outside the top 16 that wins its conference can send a 14-15-16 seed home.
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

A couple of things:

1. The NCAA has made tweaks to the weighting in the criteria in the past and can again, but it's done between seasons. As Ed said, they have never strayed from the published criteria during selection.

2. Al Simone was a great President and IMHO saved RIT from obscurity and built it into a national institution. If you were around during the tenure of the previous President, you know that it was night and day. Fundraising and investment skyrocketed under Simone, as did the school's reputation. I think he was correct in general about the hypocritical factory that is most D-I athletics, but wrong about how those dangers can be avoided. Hockey was a perfect choice. In other sports you do have conferences like the Patriot League and the Ivy that do things "right" but those teams don't get to a national stage like they can in hockey (and lacrosse).
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Chris Lerch said:
A couple of things:

1. The NCAA has made tweaks to the weighting in the criteria in the past and can again, but it's done between seasons. As Ed said, they have never strayed from the published criteria during selection.
Click to expand...

I believe if they ever did this, there would be a lot of outcry from the hockey instititution - not that they would care that much.

And I wish the the NCAA basketball tournament selection process was this transparent, but I guess that would make it harder to explain why some conferences get 7 or 8 bids and deserving small conference teams get left out.
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Chris Lerch said:
2. Al Simone was a great President and IMHO saved RIT from obscurity and built it into a national institution. If you were around during the tenure of the previous President, you know that it was night and day. Fundraising and investment skyrocketed under Simone, as did the school's reputation. I think he was correct in general about the hypocritical factory that is most D-I athletics, but wrong about how those dangers can be avoided. Hockey was a perfect choice. In other sports you do have conferences like the Patriot League and the Ivy that do things "right" but those teams don't get to a national stage like they can in hockey (and lacrosse).
Click to expand...

This.


Powers &8^]
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

komey1 said:
I believe if they ever did this, there would be a lot of outcry from the hockey instititution - not that they would care that much.

And I wish the the NCAA basketball tournament selection process was this transparent, but I guess that would make it harder to explain why some conferences get 7 or 8 bids and deserving small conference teams get left out.
Click to expand...
I think there was at least a minor outcry BEFORE they took away the automatic declaration of auto-bid winners as TUC's. All the Big-4 folks were scared at how close the AHA came to putting both Holy Cross and Bentley (IIRC) in the 2006 tournament.
Of course if it happened this year, it would be more "legitimately" earned by Niagara and the auto-bid team if the Eagles were to get upset in the AHA tournament. As opposed to 2006, it would be difficult to come up with a tweak to the criteria that would keep that from happenning again.
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Ed Trefzger said:
News accounts on the move to D-I from 2004. Note Dr. Simone's admittance of his own reluctance until the summer before the move:
Click to expand...

Sure, but also note how he is no longer reluctant, and in fact is touting the AHA as an academic-focused league and promising the team would be competitive. That's not the mien of a guy doing something under protest.


Powers &8^]
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

I read that as: league that doesn't want to spend money on their programs. lol

LtPowers said:
Sure, but also note how he is no longer reluctant, and in fact is touting the AHA as an academic-focused league and promising the team would be competitive. That's not the mien of a guy doing something under protest.


Powers &8^]
Click to expand...
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

LtPowers said:
Sure, but also note how he is no longer reluctant, and in fact is touting the AHA as an academic-focused league and promising the team would be competitive. That's not the mien of a guy doing something under protest.


Powers &8^]
Click to expand...

The AHA is an academic-focused league?
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Well, I wonder which RIT Men's team will show up tonight... the "Friday" version or the preferred "Saturday" version?
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

RITFan67 said:
Well, I wonder which RIT Men's team will show up tonight... the "Friday" version or the preferred "Saturday" version?
Click to expand...

After consulting with my calendar, I predict the Friday version.
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

TigerFan86-87 said:
I think there was at least a minor outcry BEFORE they took away the automatic declaration of auto-bid winners as TUC's. All the Big-4 folks were scared at how close the AHA came to putting both Holy Cross and Bentley (IIRC) in the 2006 tournament.
Of course if it happened this year, it would be more "legitimately" earned by Niagara and the auto-bid team if the Eagles were to get upset in the AHA tournament. As opposed to 2006, it would be difficult to come up with a tweak to the criteria that would keep that from happenning again.
Click to expand...

There used to be a criteria of "Last 10" or something along those lines. That helped Niagara "earn" a higher seed than they would have otherwise. However, if I am not mistaken, the committee reseed the Eagles to be a lower seed - but they then proceeded to win their game anyway.
 
Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

Re: >>>>> RIT TIGERS 2012-13: Clawing our way up the standings in the 2nd half

In the words of Freddy Mercury...

Is this real life?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top