The PWR may have its faults, but in the end, it's still objective. All 58 teams are placed against the same process, and I'd say with at least 90% probability, thanks to the work of those that came up with the PWR method and how successful it has been in predicting the teams, that each team knows (with calculations) what they must do in order to make the tournament. This year, we happened to work the system in our favor. I'm sure there may be other years in which we are the first ones out.
I don't know if all the articles were placed up on here, but it looks like Ed Weaver was REALLY busy last night. I'm just going to put http://www.troyrecord.com/sports because there are several articles. Chase, Tyler, Greg, CJ, John, etc.
If the definition of a TUC had remained Top 25 RPI, then the Engineers would have been out because Qpac and Bemidji State (and RIT) would not have been TUCs anymore, flipping the Rensselaer-UNO comparison (since UNO went 1-7-1 against those three teams).
Being that I don't look much at the Record in the off season, does anyone know what Ed Weaver writes about the rest of the year?
There are many things I do not understand about the PWR. My credentials as a PWR ignoramus are well-established.
However, I would have thought that "flipping a comparison" would only hurt if the comparison were between RPI and a lower-ranked team.
Unless I'm terribly mistaken, UNO, even with their 1-7-1 record against the three teams mentioned, made the tournament and was seeded higher than RPI. How could flipping the RPI-UNO comparison have resulted in the Engineers being out of the tournament?
Exactly which is why I don't feel so bad about it. I don't feel bad about BU not making it for the same reason.Thanks for the replies. For all the "faults" of the PWR, it's hard to argue about the two regular season losses to RPI.
Monty name being bandied about for Michigan Tech head coach job
http://miningjournal.net/page/conte...ichigan-Tech-needs-new-approach.html?nav=5010
waiting for RB to tell me to take it to alumni thread
Monty name being bandied about for Michigan Tech head coach job
http://miningjournal.net/page/conte...ichigan-Tech-needs-new-approach.html?nav=5010
waiting for RB to tell me to take it to alumni thread
The last time RPI has been to the national tourney, I had just turned 14. I've just turned 30. That's a long stretch.
EHF-Yes ND has 8 losses-but when did they occur? They have been pretty consistent lately.(13 without a loss)
My apologies for the brevity of my original statement. RPI would have lost the UNO comparison and Dartmouth would have flipped their comparisons with Colorado College and St. Cloud State in their favor. So, the Engineers would have gone from two comparisons ahead of the Big Green to one comparison behind (still tied with CC, actually).There are many things I do not understand about the PWR. My credentials as a PWR ignoramus are well-established.
However, I would have thought that "flipping a comparison" would only hurt if the comparison were between RPI and a lower-ranked team.
Unless I'm terribly mistaken, UNO, even with their 1-7-1 record against the three teams mentioned, made the tournament and was seeded higher than RPI. How could flipping the RPI-UNO comparison have resulted in the Engineers being out of the tournament?
I don't know and can't form my words properly to provide an adequate response.question about PWR - what is the rationale for removing the head to head results from the record vs TUC results, beyond not counting games twice?
Yes.Games are counted twice if they are part of both Record vs TUC and Record vs COP, correct?
This is still the biggest issue with the PWR. Late in the season, it becomes semi-advantageous to lose early, before you can do more grievous damage to your PWR position down the road by losing to better teams.
Last 13 games
70 goals for
19 goal against
32% pp
88% pk (3 shg)