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.

The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

Priceless said:
Doubtful the late game changes this...hello Wolverines...good bye Gophers. And the run is over...Michigan Tech is knocked out.

Fargo
#1 Mankato vs Robert Morris
North Dakota vs Vermont

South Bend
#4 Omaha vs Colgate
Bowling Green vs Providence

Providence
#3 Duluth vs Quinnipiac
Boston U vs Yale

Manchester
#2 Harvard vs Michigan
Miami vs Lowell
Click to expand...
Some very good hockey going on in Providence and Manchester.
I'll be doing the back and forth commute thing if the competition looks like that in the end. :)
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

If it's UMD and UNO at #3 and #4 I think they'll hold to "bracket integrity" and put UMD in South Bend.
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

The Sicatoka said:
If it's UMD and UNO at #3 and #4 I think they'll hold to "bracket integrity" and put UMD in South Bend.
Click to expand...

South Bend is 4 vs 13 5 vs 12
Providence is 3 vs 14 8 vs 11 (because #6 North Dakota is a host and 3 3 seeds are Hockey East)
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

It's been 23 years since I left MSUM (back then they carried just the first M) and I'm happy to see that the steps I set in motion have finally come to fruition exactly as I planned. Don't ask me why I chose 23 years for it to happen nor how I knew they'd eventually go Div I because you just can't explain greatness.
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

To the top. Getting a little dicey for the ECAC teams, we are eating our young.
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

Here is how I would set the brackets up...

Current Pairwise Rankings:
1. Minnesota State (AB)
2. North Dakota
3. Boston University (AB)
4. Nebraska Omaha (AB)
5. Minnesota Duluth
6. Bowling Green
7. Michigan Tech
8. Miami
9. Denver
10. Providence
11. Harvard
12. Boston College
13. Massachusetts Lowell
14. Michigan (AB)
15. Quinnipiac (AB)
24. Robert Morris (AB)

East Regional: Providence (Host - Brown)
(4) Nebraska Omaha vs. (13) Massachusetts Lowell
(5) Minnesota Duluth vs. (10) Providence

Midwest Regional: South Bend (Host - Notre Dame)
(1) Minnesota State vs. (16) Robert Morris
(8) Miami vs. (11) Harvard

Northeast Regional: Manchester (Host - New Hampshire)
(3) Boston University vs. (14) Michigan
(6) Bowling Green vs. (12) Boston College

West Regional: Fargo (Host - North Dakota)
(2) North Dakota vs. (15) Quinnipiac
(7) Michigan Tech vs. (9) Denver

This assumes that Providence will stay in Providence, despite not being the host, and that the committee will stay as true as possible to bracket integrity for the potential regional finals (i.e. 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5).

The Midwest Regional is hurting right now, but I just don't see the committee giving the top seed Michigan at the moment. The East Regional might be a little shaky too, but with Providence and Lowell that should help...although they will get nothing from UNO and UMD. The Northeast and West Regionals should be great.

Obviously a lot can change in the next 6.5 weeks, and I am sure the committee is hoping that more Eastern teams move up into the top 8 (8 of the top 9 in the PWR at the moment are "western" teams). For now though, I see this setup as a likely possibility given the current rankings.
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Here is how I would set the brackets up...

Current Pairwise Rankings:
1. Minnesota State (AB)
2. North Dakota
3. Boston University (AB)
4. Nebraska Omaha (AB)
5. Minnesota Duluth
6. Bowling Green
7. Michigan Tech
8. Miami
9. Denver
10. Providence
11. Harvard
12. Boston College
13. Massachusetts Lowell
14. Michigan (AB)
15. Quinnipiac (AB)
24. Robert Morris (AB)

East Regional: Providence (Host - Brown)
(4) Nebraska Omaha vs. (13) Massachusetts Lowell
(5) Minnesota Duluth vs. (10) Providence

Midwest Regional: South Bend (Host - Notre Dame)
(1) Minnesota State vs. (16) Robert Morris
(8) Miami vs. (11) Harvard

Northeast Regional: Manchester (Host - New Hampshire)
(3) Boston University vs. (14) Michigan
(6) Bowling Green vs. (12) Boston College

West Regional: Fargo (Host - North Dakota)
(2) North Dakota vs. (15) Quinnipiac
(7) Michigan Tech vs. (9) Denver

This assumes that Providence will stay in Providence, despite not being the host, and that the committee will stay as true as possible to bracket integrity for the potential regional finals (i.e. 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5).

The Midwest Regional is hurting right now, but I just don't see the committee giving the top seed Michigan at the moment. The East Regional might be a little shaky too, but with Providence and Lowell that should help...although they will get nothing from UNO and UMD. The Northeast and West Regionals should be great.

Obviously a lot can change in the next 6.5 weeks, and I am sure the committee is hoping that more Eastern teams move up into the top 8 (8 of the top 9 in the PWR at the moment are "western" teams). For now though, I see this setup as a likely possibility given the current rankings.
Click to expand...

Similar to what I got. I moved more around and had BU in Providence instead of Manchester (probably a toss-up). The extra moves I made put Michigan out west, Quinnipiac in Providence, and Lowell in Manchester. Also, I did my figuring before the Beanpot so a few have shifted since then.
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

bigblue_dl said:
Similar to what I got. I moved more around and had BU in Providence instead of Manchester (probably a toss-up). The extra moves I made put Michigan out west, Quinnipiac in Providence, and Lowell in Manchester. Also, I did my figuring before the Beanpot so a few have shifted since then.
Click to expand...

I think the committee would LOVE if they could put Michigan in South Bend. However, that will take 1 of 4 things to happen: Mankato drops from the top overall spot, North Dakota drops from a #1 seed, Michigan moving up to a #2 or #3 seed (or the top overall seed), or Michigan winds up being the lowest ranked team in the field.

As for moving Michigan to Fargo, that is also a possibility. There isn't much of a difference seed wise to swap Michigan and Quinnipiac, plus it would save the NCAA a flight.

The more I think about it, I think I would agree with moving some more teams around and have a bracket that looked like this:

East Regional: Providence
(3) Boston University vs. (15) Quinnipiac
(6) Bowling Green vs. (10) Providence

Midwest Regional: South Bend
(1) Minnesota State vs. (16) Robert Morris
(8) Miami vs. (11) Harvard

Northeast Regional: Manchester
(4) Nebraska Omaha vs. (13) Massachusetts Lowell
(5) Minnesota Duluth vs. (12) Boston College

West Regional: Fargo
(2) North Dakota vs. (14) Michigan
(7) Michigan Tech vs. (9) Denver
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

Fighting Sioux 23 said:
I think the committee would LOVE if they could put Michigan in South Bend. However, that will take 1 of 4 things to happen: Mankato drops from the top overall spot, North Dakota drops from a #1 seed, Michigan moving up to a #2 or #3 seed (or the top overall seed), or Michigan winds up being the lowest ranked team in the field.

As for moving Michigan to Fargo, that is also a possibility. There isn't much of a difference seed wise to swap Michigan and Quinnipiac, plus it would save the NCAA a flight.

The more I think about it, I think I would agree with moving some more teams around and have a bracket that looked like this:

East Regional: Providence
(3) Boston University vs. (15) Quinnipiac
(6) Bowling Green vs. (10) Providence

Midwest Regional: South Bend
(1) Minnesota State vs. (16) Robert Morris
(8) Miami vs. (11) Harvard

Northeast Regional: Manchester
(4) Nebraska Omaha vs. (13) Massachusetts Lowell
(5) Minnesota Duluth vs. (12) Boston College

West Regional: Fargo
(2) North Dakota vs. (14) Michigan
(7) Michigan Tech vs. (9) Denver
Click to expand...

Maybe, but first Ann Arbor is 100 miles closer to Providence than to Fargo. So really the excuse is Quinnipiac in the east for attendance reasons, regardless of bracket integrity?
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

manurespreader said:
Maybe, but first Ann Arbor is 100 miles closer to Providence than to Fargo. So really the excuse is Quinnipiac in the east for attendance reasons, regardless of bracket integrity?
Click to expand...

That was my reasoning. It makes sense to keep QU out east, and UMi is a tossup, barring one of the things FS23 mentioned to get them to South Bend.

FS23, that is the exact bracket I settled on.
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

PWR as of today

1. Minnesota State
2 North Dakota
3 Boston University
4 Nebraska-Omaha
5 Minnesota-Duluth
6 Michigan Tech
7 Miami
8 Bowling Green
9 Denver
10 Providence
11 Boston College
12 Michigan
13t Quinnipiac
13t Minnesota
15 Massachusetts-Lowell
16 Harvard
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

Mark my words, the committee is going to find a way to screw BU over and put BC in the same region... nine years later.
 
Re: The 2015 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread

Terrier520 said:
Mark my words, the committee is going to find a way to screw BU over and put BC in the same region... nine years later.
Click to expand...

good. bu ended the igles season in 2009 and 1978. seems like some years it may be a part of the recipe ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top