PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Umm no...
If you take the current USCHO and D3 polls and eliminate all the Conference winners (highest ranked/remaining in each conference) as Pool A's, you are left with the following at-large teams:*
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 polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
Umm no...
If you take the current USCHO and D3 polls and eliminate all the Conference winners (highest ranked/remaining in each conference) as Pool A's, you are left with the following at-large teams:*
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
Plattsburgh = "conference winner", Oswego = "highest ranked/remaining". Am I clear yet?
The SUNYAC conference final is being played in Plattsburgh, therefore they should (for the moment, which is all any of this is good for anyway) be considered the "conference winner".
Plattsburgh = "conference winner", Oswego = "highest ranked/remaining". Am I clear yet?
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
Huh? The "highest ranked/remaining team" from the SUNYAC is Oswego ranked at #3 in USCHO and #4 in D3. Plattsburgh is ranked #7 in both. I was "projecting" the "conference (championship) winner". It was just an exercise. Either way both teams make it in my scenario. Why nitpick?
Huh? The "highest ranked/remaining team" from the SUNYAC is Oswego ranked at #3 in USCHO and #4 in D3. Plattsburgh is ranked #7 in both. I was "projecting" the "conference (championship) winner". It was just an exercise. Either way both teams make it in my scenario. Why nitpick?
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
Just so I make sure I understand you correctly....you were "projecting" the conference championship based upon the current rankings in 2 coaches polls, rather than by who won the regular season and is hosting the championship game Saturday?
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
Yes. That was the nature of my exercise. I personally feel that the two polls are a more accurate reflection of the true rankings than the NCAA "criteria" polls. An example of how frivolous the NCAA rankings are were on display today. Trinity loses to a bad Tufts squad and drops one spot. UMass-Boston loses to a very good Babson team and drops two spots. Babson beats a team ranked ahead of them (who they are 2-1 against with the one loss going to OT) and doesn't move and still sits behind UMB. I simply do not respect the "criteria". Does anyone think that Belisle would rank his own team above Babson? Human element!
Yes. That was the nature of my exercise. I personally feel that the two polls are a more accurate reflection of the true rankings than the NCAA "criteria" polls. An example of how frivolous the NCAA rankings are were on display today. Trinity loses to a bad Tufts squad and drops one spot. UMass-Boston loses to a very good Babson team and drops two spots. Babson beats a team ranked ahead of them (who they are 2-1 against with the one loss going to OT) and doesn't move and still sits behind UMB. I simply do not respect the "criteria". Does anyone think that Belisle would rank his own team above Babson? Human element!
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
(Of course he also has two Norwich guys and an Elmira player, too!)
That, and the fact that Oswego has two players on The Prez's projected Eastern All-American team while Plattsburgh has none.
(Of course he also has two Norwich guys and an Elmira player, too!)
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
Looks like SNC needs to win, otherwise they're done.
If they both win, it looks like Hobart is toast.
Plattsburgh needs to win, otherwise they're done.
Looks like SNC needs to win, otherwise they're done.
If they both win, it looks like Hobart is toast.
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
A Hobart win and a Stevens Point loss would be interesting for Pool B. I think Stevens Point would still get it, but an argument could be made..
A Hobart win and a Stevens Point loss would be interesting for Pool B. I think Stevens Point would still get it, but an argument could be made..
Fishman'81
Black Bear since D-2
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
Interesting post, thanks.
I agree that neither Platty nor OSU seems likely to get a Pool C if either loses, but of course one of them will win the AQ anyway. It's hard to fathom leaving Trinity or Amherst out, but stranger things have happened. I'd predict Hobart getting a C-bid if they beat Neumann, and being well off the table if they lose.
Very close call this year, considering all the possibilities. If I were a betting man, I'd put my money on Hobart and Oswego to seal the deals there, and Trinity and AC to back-in, but Adrian is in that mix as well. I don't predict that Norwich will garner a bid unless they win out.
Interesting post, thanks.
I agree that neither Platty nor OSU seems likely to get a Pool C if either loses, but of course one of them will win the AQ anyway. It's hard to fathom leaving Trinity or Amherst out, but stranger things have happened. I'd predict Hobart getting a C-bid if they beat Neumann, and being well off the table if they lose.
Very close call this year, considering all the possibilities. If I were a betting man, I'd put my money on Hobart and Oswego to seal the deals there, and Trinity and AC to back-in, but Adrian is in that mix as well. I don't predict that Norwich will garner a bid unless they win out.
Last edited:
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
That's great, of course you would. If you understood the process in the slightest bit you might get it a little better... let me slow it down one more time....Polls...Don't ... Matter..... Criteria....Does....
A loss to a Non-Ranked team is better criteria wise...been this way for years....
See above. Babson was a ranked team....losing to a rank team (especially if they are a common opponent with others) can really hurt....has been this way for years still....
Because
A. It was 1 game, not the season B. Plattsburgh still beats Babson on criteria but not UMB (which I am not sure how) C. Head to Head is just 1 criteria (again).
No offense here but we could care less if you respect it or not. The committee could care less if you respect it or not. Guess what, they use the criteria to select the teams. Until you decide to get over it and accept the fact they use criteria and not a poll in which most coaches don't even look into things, you will still be a lost soul on a dark dirt road in the middle of West Virginia....
I don't respect the fact they have tennis, baseball, and women's basketball coaches on a hockey championship committee which are selecting just a few teams to make the dance, but guess what...they don't care either....Like I said, you want human element...so if the tennis coach likes Oswego more because they look like tennis balls, or the basketball coach likes Amherst because he had lunch with their basketball coach...or what if the baseball coach thinks "icing" is still something you put on a cake. I highly doubt these people understand the full game of hockey. I will say it again, do you want a group of people who have probably only scene a couple games all season deciding your teams fate? Could everyone of them spout off DIII hockey stats and history? With so few Pool C bids I want the most knowledgeable hockey minds crunching numbers, watching tape, listening to your polls/rankings (okay maybe not), but we don't have that.
That's great, of course you would. If you understood the process in the slightest bit you might get it a little better... let me slow it down one more time....Polls...Don't ... Matter..... Criteria....Does....
A loss to a Non-Ranked team is better criteria wise...been this way for years....
See above. Babson was a ranked team....losing to a rank team (especially if they are a common opponent with others) can really hurt....has been this way for years still....
Because
A. It was 1 game, not the season B. Plattsburgh still beats Babson on criteria but not UMB (which I am not sure how) C. Head to Head is just 1 criteria (again).
No offense here but we could care less if you respect it or not. The committee could care less if you respect it or not. Guess what, they use the criteria to select the teams. Until you decide to get over it and accept the fact they use criteria and not a poll in which most coaches don't even look into things, you will still be a lost soul on a dark dirt road in the middle of West Virginia....
I don't respect the fact they have tennis, baseball, and women's basketball coaches on a hockey championship committee which are selecting just a few teams to make the dance, but guess what...they don't care either....Like I said, you want human element...so if the tennis coach likes Oswego more because they look like tennis balls, or the basketball coach likes Amherst because he had lunch with their basketball coach...or what if the baseball coach thinks "icing" is still something you put on a cake. I highly doubt these people understand the full game of hockey. I will say it again, do you want a group of people who have probably only scene a couple games all season deciding your teams fate? Could everyone of them spout off DIII hockey stats and history? With so few Pool C bids I want the most knowledgeable hockey minds crunching numbers, watching tape, listening to your polls/rankings (okay maybe not), but we don't have that.
You had me and then you lost me. You could have a committee full of national coach of the year winners and they wouldn't be watching tape on teams, because the "eyeball test" is not one of the criteria!
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
While the "eyeball test" is not "part of the criteria", the committee can "weight" criteria differently. Of which I want "hockey minds" weighting criteria, not basketball coaches, tennis coaches, baseball coaches. Make sense now? The criteria could be tweaked, but putting such a small number of at large bids solely in the hands of a hodge-podge committee based on the "eyeball test" (like some people want) is absurd. I, as well as others, would be further satisfied if A. All rankings are public and B. The Committee must publish a complete synopsis of how they came to their decision. Never happen.
While the "eyeball test" is not "part of the criteria", the committee can "weight" criteria differently. Of which I want "hockey minds" weighting criteria, not basketball coaches, tennis coaches, baseball coaches. Make sense now? The criteria could be tweaked, but putting such a small number of at large bids solely in the hands of a hodge-podge committee based on the "eyeball test" (like some people want) is absurd. I, as well as others, would be further satisfied if A. All rankings are public and B. The Committee must publish a complete synopsis of how they came to their decision. Never happen.
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
I may not sleep tonight!
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
Based on the rankings and the numbers, I would think the East guys are doing their jobs and ranking based on numbers, not eyeballs. This is a welcome change.
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
With your lack on basic concepts it's not surprising....
With your lack on basic concepts it's not surprising....
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
Agree. I don't have as much of an issue as we have seen in years past and maybe I am selling those non-hockey minds short. One thing people forget is that things can change with one game (especially if its a loss/win to the right person). I still would like to see "hockey" minds only on the committee, but then again too many hockey minds and they would get away from the criteria more and more possibly. I just don't see the reason why they can't sit down and go team by team as to why they were selected and publish all rankings. There should be no hiding and an explanation, and no "Coach McShane told us to do it this way" is NOT one of them like some believe....
Agree. I don't have as much of an issue as we have seen in years past and maybe I am selling those non-hockey minds short. One thing people forget is that things can change with one game (especially if its a loss/win to the right person). I still would like to see "hockey" minds only on the committee, but then again too many hockey minds and they would get away from the criteria more and more possibly. I just don't see the reason why they can't sit down and go team by team as to why they were selected and publish all rankings. There should be no hiding and an explanation, and no "Coach McShane told us to do it this way" is NOT one of them like some believe....
Re: The polls - scratching KRACH, PWC, CoP and robbery! ...---...
Dude! Can you read? Have I not acknowledged REPEATEDLY that I UNDERSTAND the "basic concepts" of the selection process? Do you not get that, despite my UNDERSTANDING of that process, I DO NOT AGREE WITH IT. It is flawed. That is all I'm trying to say. Sorry that my opinion upsets you. But, in case you werent aware, "FAN FORUMS" are intended for guys like you and me to share OPINIONS…hopefully without being belittled for our opinions. If you do AGREE with the selection process, great! If you believe that losing to bad teams holds less weight than losing to good teams, great!. If you believe that OOWP matters, great!. If you agree that a team's win-loss record, despite having no control over who their opponents will be, in their last 25% of the season holds more weight than the other 75%, great!
I apologize for interfering with "your" fan forum and for having an opinion about the "selection process". I will take my pillow and leave now. Thanks for entertaining me for a few minutes.
Dude! Can you read? Have I not acknowledged REPEATEDLY that I UNDERSTAND the "basic concepts" of the selection process? Do you not get that, despite my UNDERSTANDING of that process, I DO NOT AGREE WITH IT. It is flawed. That is all I'm trying to say. Sorry that my opinion upsets you. But, in case you werent aware, "FAN FORUMS" are intended for guys like you and me to share OPINIONS…hopefully without being belittled for our opinions. If you do AGREE with the selection process, great! If you believe that losing to bad teams holds less weight than losing to good teams, great!. If you believe that OOWP matters, great!. If you agree that a team's win-loss record, despite having no control over who their opponents will be, in their last 25% of the season holds more weight than the other 75%, great!
I apologize for interfering with "your" fan forum and for having an opinion about the "selection process". I will take my pillow and leave now. Thanks for entertaining me for a few minutes.
PSUChamps2001
Member of the REAL Zoo Crew
No you make frivolous statements on whats going to happen based on "your" logic. When we try to tell you the process you abandon all hope. I don't care if you think its flawed, we all do...but guess what it's the way things are. Until you come to the reality that this is the process and all your polls mean squat, you will continue to not sleep well at night. I am all for opinions that use the aplicable criteria (of which doesn't matter if you think its flawed or not) and not cry about all this "human aspect".
I told you that you are free to have your opinions, it would help if you actually made them based on the facts, process, and the way things are run then to make up your own. We could all make up our own poll/ranking using our biased knowledge of the teams and some unbiased and if that's what you want to do then fine, but don't get your panties in a bunch when you get laughed at and annoy those who are making predictions using the criteria and the selection process used by the selection committee. With some of your rants I still doubt you fully understand how this is done. Once again you don't have to like it, you don't have to think its fair. For those of us who have followed college hockey for decades and not just a few seasons while their son plays, those are the ones trying to explain the process. Again you don't have to like it, agree with it, or even want it....but this is how it is. And yes, it's a lot more fair then having 20 people with 20 different views pick 4 teams. You keep bringing up the whole "The West has dominated"....yet years prior when the East dominated I didn't see too many Westerners agreeing with an 8-3 automatic split. What about women's hockey? Should we even have Western representation?