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.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
Another F4 for bc with that bracket
Another F4 for bc with that bracket
bigblue_dl
Armed
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
It looks like it is shaping up so I should root for Tech to be in the 3-6 range, and avoid 7-10. For the best chance at missing MSU and UND in regionals.
It looks like it is shaping up so I should root for Tech to be in the 3-6 range, and avoid 7-10. For the best chance at missing MSU and UND in regionals.
Per the KRACH-based Monte Carlo that lugnut92 does for the ECAC predictions thread, Q has a 31.8% chance of winning, so the field is actually up at 68.2%. Of course, a couple of those in the field could make it to the top 12 by winning, so those scenarios would not "count" so your 40% is probably not a terrible guess.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
Pretty much my thinking exactly! I had BC and Providence switched but I went with this version because while the tickets are sold in South Bend that doesn't mean fannies in the seats. I calculate that people in South Bend are more likely to go to cheer AGAINST Michigan and BC since they're used to it. Providence doesn't have that cache. I also figure this will be a good test of whether the Friars can carry a region fan-wise because there will be no excuse for their fans not to show up. The NCAA needs to find a viable fan base in the east with the loss of both the Maine and New Hampshire bases that could be counted on to carry their regions. If the committee is that concerned about PC's ability to sell tickets (and deem that a mitigating factor) they may very well flip BC and PC since tickets in South Bend are already sold whether people show up or not.
Pretty much my thinking exactly! I had BC and Providence switched but I went with this version because while the tickets are sold in South Bend that doesn't mean fannies in the seats. I calculate that people in South Bend are more likely to go to cheer AGAINST Michigan and BC since they're used to it. Providence doesn't have that cache. I also figure this will be a good test of whether the Friars can carry a region fan-wise because there will be no excuse for their fans not to show up. The NCAA needs to find a viable fan base in the east with the loss of both the Maine and New Hampshire bases that could be counted on to carry their regions. If the committee is that concerned about PC's ability to sell tickets (and deem that a mitigating factor) they may very well flip BC and PC since tickets in South Bend are already sold whether people show up or not.
FiveHole12
Registered User
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
I have no worries. Go Terriers... make it happen.
Here's to hoping BU regains a #1. Doesn't get better than a BC/BU match up in the Regional.
I have no worries. Go Terriers... make it happen.
Nick Papagiorgio
Holding court
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
I don't get the sense that the ND "hockey fans" would be ones to attend a game or games where their team isn't playing. Based on my trips out there, they also don't seem to be bitter people that would show up to root against other rival schools. Let's face it, the majority of the folks already inhabiting their arena during their season don't know what icing is and want Lou Holtz to take over for Jeff Jackson.
I don't get the sense that the ND "hockey fans" would be ones to attend a game or games where their team isn't playing. Based on my trips out there, they also don't seem to be bitter people that would show up to root against other rival schools. Let's face it, the majority of the folks already inhabiting their arena during their season don't know what icing is and want Lou Holtz to take over for Jeff Jackson.
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
Priceless,
Can you elaborate on the loss on UNH and Maine fan-bases. I am assuming you mean since they are not in this year's tourney (at least pending HEA upset). But then I thought perhaps you meant something had changed generally, and, going forward, it is not going to possible to count on them any more. Has something changed with UNH and Maine fans generally?
Thanks
Priceless,
Can you elaborate on the loss on UNH and Maine fan-bases. I am assuming you mean since they are not in this year's tourney (at least pending HEA upset). But then I thought perhaps you meant something had changed generally, and, going forward, it is not going to possible to count on them any more. Has something changed with UNH and Maine fans generally?
Thanks
Nick Papagiorgio
Holding court
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
The teams they follow no longer win and cheat, respectively, enough from October through March to be counted on to attend regionals.
The teams they follow no longer win and cheat, respectively, enough from October through March to be counted on to attend regionals.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
Neither team is projected to make the field and their fans cannot be relied upon to purchase the majority of tickets at regionals. The NCAA needs another fan base because frankly BC and BU don't cut it. Lowell has a chance to help attendance, if they are good enough to make the tournament. We'll see if Providence can step up and fill the seats. One would hope with their repeated appearances, Quinnipiac and Yale might develop a following as well.
Neither team is projected to make the field and their fans cannot be relied upon to purchase the majority of tickets at regionals. The NCAA needs another fan base because frankly BC and BU don't cut it. Lowell has a chance to help attendance, if they are good enough to make the tournament. We'll see if Providence can step up and fill the seats. One would hope with their repeated appearances, Quinnipiac and Yale might develop a following as well.
Shirtless Guy
Old Dirty Basterd
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
Question for everyone else, I was wondering what you think about removing the TUC comparison and transitioning that to QWB that is built into RPI? I feel like the QWB adjusted RPI should be a comparison, not the final RPI used to initially sort for PWR.
This would allow for flipping comparisons based on quality wins but would also require winning the common opponents comparison and being at least .500 head to head.
Here is analysis of the top 21 by QWB adjusted RPI vs RPI:
1 1 North Dakota
2 2 Minnesota State
4 3 Minnesota-Duluth
6 4 Miami
7 5 Nebraska-Omaha
5 6 Boston University
3 7 Michigan Tech
8 8 Denver
10 9 Providence
9 10 Boston College
11 11 Quinnipiac
13 12 Minnesota
12 13 Yale
14 14 Bowling Green
15 15 Michigan
16 16 Massachusetts-Lowell
19 17 St. Cloud State
17 18 Vermont
18 19 Colgate
21 20 Northeastern
Then if we take that one step further and remove QWB adjusted RPI as the initial sort/tiebreaker and add it as a comparison and restore RPI as the initial sort/tiebreaker, here is what we get for PWR:
1 1 North Dakota
2 2 Minnesota State
3 3 Minnesota-Duluth
4 6 Boston University
5 7 Michigan Tech
6 4 Miami
7 5 Nebraska-Omaha
8 8 Denver
9 9 Providence
10 10 Boston College
11 12 Quinnipiac
12 13 Yale
13 11 Minnesota
14 14 Bowling Green
15 15 Michigan
16 16 Massachusetts-Lowell
17 19 Vermont
18 18 Colgate
19 17 St. Cloud State
20 22 Harvard
21 20 Northeastern
22 21 St. Lawrence
(1st column RPI based PWR, 2nd column QWB adjusted RPI based PWR)
Not a lot changes but I feel like putting QWB adjusted RPI in as the tiebreaking comparison gives way too much of an edge to the NCHC for what amounts to 10% of the games.
Question for everyone else, I was wondering what you think about removing the TUC comparison and transitioning that to QWB that is built into RPI? I feel like the QWB adjusted RPI should be a comparison, not the final RPI used to initially sort for PWR.
This would allow for flipping comparisons based on quality wins but would also require winning the common opponents comparison and being at least .500 head to head.
Here is analysis of the top 21 by QWB adjusted RPI vs RPI:
1 1 North Dakota
2 2 Minnesota State
4 3 Minnesota-Duluth
6 4 Miami
7 5 Nebraska-Omaha
5 6 Boston University
3 7 Michigan Tech
8 8 Denver
10 9 Providence
9 10 Boston College
11 11 Quinnipiac
13 12 Minnesota
12 13 Yale
14 14 Bowling Green
15 15 Michigan
16 16 Massachusetts-Lowell
19 17 St. Cloud State
17 18 Vermont
18 19 Colgate
21 20 Northeastern
Then if we take that one step further and remove QWB adjusted RPI as the initial sort/tiebreaker and add it as a comparison and restore RPI as the initial sort/tiebreaker, here is what we get for PWR:
1 1 North Dakota
2 2 Minnesota State
3 3 Minnesota-Duluth
4 6 Boston University
5 7 Michigan Tech
6 4 Miami
7 5 Nebraska-Omaha
8 8 Denver
9 9 Providence
10 10 Boston College
11 12 Quinnipiac
12 13 Yale
13 11 Minnesota
14 14 Bowling Green
15 15 Michigan
16 16 Massachusetts-Lowell
17 19 Vermont
18 18 Colgate
19 17 St. Cloud State
20 22 Harvard
21 20 Northeastern
22 21 St. Lawrence
(1st column RPI based PWR, 2nd column QWB adjusted RPI based PWR)
Not a lot changes but I feel like putting QWB adjusted RPI in as the tiebreaking comparison gives way too much of an edge to the NCHC for what amounts to 10% of the games.
Spartanforlife4
Generic Catchy Message
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
I think ESPN2 a couple times. Other than that pretty sure it's just been on ESPNU or News.
I think ESPN2 a couple times. Other than that pretty sure it's just been on ESPNU or News.
Nick Papagiorgio
Holding court
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
That sounds about right.
That sounds about right.
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
PWR at the end of 3/6/15 (after the Neverending Story that was UMass/Notre Dame)
1. North Dakota
2. Minnesota State
3. Minnesota Duluth
4. Denver
5. BU
6. Michigan Tech
7. Miami
8. Nebraska-Omaha
9. Providence
10. BC
11. Minnesota
12. Quinnipiac
13. Yale
14. Bowling Green
15. Lowell
-------------
25. Robert Morris
Which gives us..
Fargo
1. North Dakota
4. Robert Morris
2. Nebraska-Omaha
3. Providence
South Bend
1. Minnesota State
4. Lowell
2. Miami
3. BC
Manchester
1. Minnesota - Duluth
4. Bowling Green
2. Michigan Tech
3. Minnesota
Providence
1. Denver
4. Yale
2. BU
3. Quinnipiac
No intraconference matchups, but Manchester is going to be a ghost town. We can swap Lowell/Bowling Green and BC/Minnesota
Fargo
1. North Dakota
4. Robert Morris
2. Nebraska-Omaha
3. Providence
South Bend
1. Minnesota State
4. Bowling Green
2. Miami
3. Minnesota
Manchester
1. Minnesota - Duluth
4. Lowell
2. Michigan Tech
3. BC
Providence
1. Denver
4. Yale
2. BU
3. Quinnipiac
The changes help attendance, and they move teams that sit next to each other on the PWR, so it's not a huge integrity swing. It also doesn't put Minnesota in Fargo, so we don't have to listen to that noise for another year.
It's late, I might have done this incorrectly. And it's sure to change by the end of Saturday, but I think that's where it sits right now.
PWR at the end of 3/6/15 (after the Neverending Story that was UMass/Notre Dame)
1. North Dakota
2. Minnesota State
3. Minnesota Duluth
4. Denver
5. BU
6. Michigan Tech
7. Miami
8. Nebraska-Omaha
9. Providence
10. BC
11. Minnesota
12. Quinnipiac
13. Yale
14. Bowling Green
15. Lowell
-------------
25. Robert Morris
Which gives us..
Fargo
1. North Dakota
4. Robert Morris
2. Nebraska-Omaha
3. Providence
South Bend
1. Minnesota State
4. Lowell
2. Miami
3. BC
Manchester
1. Minnesota - Duluth
4. Bowling Green
2. Michigan Tech
3. Minnesota
Providence
1. Denver
4. Yale
2. BU
3. Quinnipiac
No intraconference matchups, but Manchester is going to be a ghost town. We can swap Lowell/Bowling Green and BC/Minnesota
Fargo
1. North Dakota
4. Robert Morris
2. Nebraska-Omaha
3. Providence
South Bend
1. Minnesota State
4. Bowling Green
2. Miami
3. Minnesota
Manchester
1. Minnesota - Duluth
4. Lowell
2. Michigan Tech
3. BC
Providence
1. Denver
4. Yale
2. BU
3. Quinnipiac
The changes help attendance, and they move teams that sit next to each other on the PWR, so it's not a huge integrity swing. It also doesn't put Minnesota in Fargo, so we don't have to listen to that noise for another year.
It's late, I might have done this incorrectly. And it's sure to change by the end of Saturday, but I think that's where it sits right now.
Last edited:
The Zlax45
Registered User
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
BC and BU are going to draw more than PC and either BC/BU, regardless of who plays in Manchester and who plays in Providence. With Yale, BU and the Q in Providence there won't be an attendance problem.
BC and BU are going to draw more than PC and either BC/BU, regardless of who plays in Manchester and who plays in Providence. With Yale, BU and the Q in Providence there won't be an attendance problem.
Fighting Sioux 23
New member
Minnesota State and Bowling Green are in the same conference. They won't be matched up in the first round.
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread
So who moves--Yale or Lowell?
So who moves--Yale or Lowell?
Fighting Sioux 23
New member
Another option would be to swap Duluth and Mankato.