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.

Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

Ralph Baer said:
Yes, I understand that. The topic of the cliff has come up many times. Somewhere I recall someone writing that switching from the top 25 being TUCs to everyone with .5 RPI would cure that. That made little sense since there still would be a cliff.
Click to expand...
Best guess is, they were hoping that at this point in the season, the TUCs would be more or less fixed, with only teams that would be securely TUCs still playing now. That's the only way to make any sense of such a suggestion. Even if that held (which obviously, it doesn't), it would just be hiding the problem behind the couch rather than fixing it.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

Craig P. said:
Best guess is, they were hoping that at this point in the season, the TUCs would be more or less fixed, with only teams that would be securely TUCs still playing now. That's the only way to make any sense of such a suggestion. Even if that held (which obviously, it doesn't), it would just be hiding the problem behind the couch rather than fixing it.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day the PWR is only valid when all the games have been played. I think the TUC criteria is a good one, how did you do against good teams, I do question a 1-0 team getting the point over a 15-5-2 team. I think there should be not only a minimum games played bar (like 5) but also a number of different teams bar (like 3 just to take out a schedule quirk issue).

The "cliff" only exists because we all monitor the PWR game by game.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

JB said:
At the end of the day the PWR is only valid when all the games have been played. I think the TUC criteria is a good one, how did you do against good teams, I do question a 1-0 team getting the point over a 15-5-2 team. I think there should be not only a minimum games played bar (like 5) but also a number of different teams bar (like 3 just to take out a schedule quirk issue).

The "cliff" only exists because we all monitor the PWR game by game.
Click to expand...

The problem with putting bars out there is that the component loses meaning. If we put the bar at five games and three opponents, BC has qualifying comparisons with only 10 teams. Yale qualifies vs 11 teams, but only five from outside the ECAC. It would work nicely for a criteria to show how a team did against the best teams in its conference, but not great nationally.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

Priceless said:
The problem with putting bars out there is that the component loses meaning. If we put the bar at five games and three opponents, BC has qualifying comparisons with only 10 teams. Yale qualifies vs 11 teams, but only five from outside the ECAC. It would work nicely for a criteria to show how a team did against the best teams in its conference, but not great nationally.
Click to expand...

Which is all a problem with college hockey's insular schedules. HEA, WCHA, and CCHA all play a crap ton of conference games, leaving just a handful of non-conference series.

Would be nice to see conference schedules pared down to 25 or so games at the most, freeing up more interconference dates. By comparison, basketball has roughly the same number of games (between 30-35 after conference tournaments end), yet only about 20 of those are conference games (16-18 during the regular season and conference tourny games).
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

unofan said:
Which is all a problem with college hockey's insular schedules. HEA, WCHA, and CCHA all play a crap ton of conference games, leaving just a handful of non-conference series.

Would be nice to see conference schedules pared down to 25 or so games at the most, freeing up more interconference dates.
Click to expand...

Throw in that the ivies play one less month and 5 less games than everyone else, and it all gets convoluted. This is one of the reasons I don't like the ECAC is because it truly is unbalanced, hence why the ivies have gotten the autobids as of late (obviously with some exception, like CCT back in 2007), while non-ivies that play full schedules are left to hope that their NC play is good enough to get them in at-large.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

FlagDUDE08 said:
Throw in that the ivies play one less month and 5 less games than everyone else, and it all gets convoluted. This is one of the reasons I don't like the ECAC is because it truly is unbalanced, hence why the ivies have gotten the autobids as of late (obviously with some exception, like CCT back in 2007), while non-ivies that play full schedules are left to hope that their NC play is good enough to get them in at-large.
Click to expand...

Wait...you're saying the Ivies have an advantage by starting play a month later? Qua?

The Ivies have gotten the bids as of late because they're the better teams as of late.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

FlagDUDE08 said:
Throw in that the ivies play one less month and 5 less games than everyone else, and it all gets convoluted. This is one of the reasons I don't like the ECAC is because it truly is unbalanced, hence why the ivies have gotten the autobids as of late (obviously with some exception, like CCT back in 2007), while non-ivies that play full schedules are left to hope that their NC play is good enough to get them in at-large.
Click to expand...

Being able to offer scholarships to better players may offset some of that disparity for the non-ivy's, which is another part of the whole mess.:D
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

JB said:
At the end of the day the PWR is only valid when all the games have been played.
Click to expand...

That's a cop-out. The issues exist regardless. At the end of the day, if there are times when it's better for a team's selection or seeding prospects for them to lose, you have a problem.

I don't mean to suggest that the underlying philosophy of the PWR is wrong, but there remain serious flaws in its implementation.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

unofan said:
Wait...you're saying the Ivies have an advantage by starting play a month later? Qua?

The Ivies have gotten the bids as of late because they're the better teams as of late.
Click to expand...

The non-ivies are usually more banged up by January or February because of the longer schedule. There are also a few other reasons which I won't discuss on here, as they have been mentioned countless times on some of the other threads.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

Well, Yale, Dartmouth and Cornell aren't going to play five less games than RPI this year. After this weekend, they'll be even.

(Of course, that's not right... but they will have played five more than RPI in the last two weeks. Let's see who's banged up NOW.)
 
Last edited:
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

unofan said:
Wait...you're saying the Ivies have an advantage by starting play a month later? Qua?

The Ivies have gotten the bids as of late because they're the better teams as of late.
Click to expand...

Add in that the Ivy teams' late start means they have less time to get warm during the initial OOC stretch at the start of the season, which in a conference like the ECAC in crucial in helping one's at-large chances.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

unofan said:
Which is all a problem with college hockey's insular schedules. HEA, WCHA, and CCHA all play a crap ton of conference games, leaving just a handful of non-conference series.

Would be nice to see conference schedules pared down to 25 or so games at the most, freeing up more interconference dates. By comparison, basketball has roughly the same number of games (between 30-35 after conference tournaments end), yet only about 20 of those are conference games (16-18 during the regular season and conference tourny games).
Click to expand...

Yep, it would be nice if it was required that teams play 1 OOC game with a team from each conference.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

JimDahl said:
<p>It would definitely be interesting to hear if anyone has found anything outside those ranges.</p>
Click to expand...

I found 75 scenarios that put UNH at #4 and 6 scenarios that put Maine at #21, other than that everything I've found matches up with the ranges you posted.

UNH Example:
Code: 
Semifinal: Holy Cross over Air Force. Likelihood 38.90%.
Semifinal: RIT over Connecticut. Likelihood 79.35%.
Final: RIT over Holy Cross. Likelihood 75.43%.
CCHA
Semifinal: Notre Dame over Miami.
Semifinal: Western Michigan over Michigan.
Final: Western Michigan over Notre Dame.
Consolation: Miami ties Michigan.
ECAC
Semifinal: Dartmouth over Cornell.
Semifinal: Yale over Colgate.
Final: Dartmouth over Yale.
Consolation: Colgate ties Cornell.
HEA
Semifinal: New Hampshire over Merrimack.
Semifinal: Boston College over Northeastern.
Final: New Hampshire over Boston College.
WCHA
Play-In: Bemidji State over Minnesota-Duluth.
Semifinal: Bemidji State over Denver.
Play-In: Alaska-Anchorage over Colorado College.
Semifinal: North Dakota over Alaska-Anchorage.
Final: North Dakota over Bemidji State.

Maine Example:
Code: 
AHA
Semifinal: Holy Cross over Air Force.
Semifinal: RIT over Connecticut.
Final: Holy Cross over RIT.
CCHA
Semifinal: Miami over Notre Dame.
Semifinal: Michigan over Western Michigan.
Final: Michigan over Miami.
Consolation: Western Michigan ties Notre Dame.
ECAC
Semifinal: Cornell over Dartmouth.
Semifinal: Colgate over Yale.
Final: Colgate over Cornell.
Consolation: Dartmouth ties Yale.
HEA
Semifinal: Merrimack over New Hampshire.
Semifinal: Boston College over Northeastern.
Final: Boston College over Merrimack.
WCHA
Play-In: Bemidji State over Minnesota-Duluth.
Semifinal: Bemidji State over Denver.
Play-In: Alaska-Anchorage over Colorado College.
Semifinal: Alaska-Anchorage over North Dakota.
Final: Alaska-Anchorage over Bemidji State.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

RHamilton said:
I found 75 scenarios that put UNH at #4 and 6 scenarios that put Maine at #21, other than that everything I've found matches up with the ranges you posted.

UNH Example:
Code: 
Semifinal: Holy Cross over Air Force. Likelihood 38.90%.
Semifinal: RIT over Connecticut. Likelihood 79.35%.
Final: RIT over Holy Cross. Likelihood 75.43%.
CCHA
Semifinal: Notre Dame over Miami.
Semifinal: Western Michigan over Michigan.
Final: Western Michigan over Notre Dame.
Consolation: Miami ties Michigan.
ECAC
Semifinal: Dartmouth over Cornell.
Semifinal: Yale over Colgate.
Final: Dartmouth over Yale.
Consolation: Colgate ties Cornell.
HEA
Semifinal: New Hampshire over Merrimack.
Semifinal: Boston College over Northeastern.
Final: New Hampshire over Boston College.
WCHA
Play-In: Bemidji State over Minnesota-Duluth.
Semifinal: Bemidji State over Denver.
Play-In: Alaska-Anchorage over Colorado College.
Semifinal: North Dakota over Alaska-Anchorage.
Final: North Dakota over Bemidji State.

Maine Example:
Code: 
AHA
Semifinal: Holy Cross over Air Force.
Semifinal: RIT over Connecticut.
Final: Holy Cross over RIT.
CCHA
Semifinal: Miami over Notre Dame.
Semifinal: Michigan over Western Michigan.
Final: Michigan over Miami.
Consolation: Western Michigan ties Notre Dame.
ECAC
Semifinal: Cornell over Dartmouth.
Semifinal: Colgate over Yale.
Final: Colgate over Cornell.
Consolation: Dartmouth ties Yale.
HEA
Semifinal: Merrimack over New Hampshire.
Semifinal: Boston College over Northeastern.
Final: Boston College over Merrimack.
WCHA
Play-In: Bemidji State over Minnesota-Duluth.
Semifinal: Bemidji State over Denver.
Play-In: Alaska-Anchorage over Colorado College.
Semifinal: Alaska-Anchorage over North Dakota.
Final: Alaska-Anchorage over Bemidji State.
Click to expand...

Did all of these scenarios require ties in both consolation games, or were those just the cases that you chose to post?
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

Ralph Baer said:
Did all of these scenarios require ties in both consolation games, or were those just the cases that you chose to post?
Click to expand...
Cornell defeating Colgate in the ECAC consolation game kept UNH in the #4 spot.
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

neg rep said:
write something knowledgeable
Click to expand...

Sounds like I rubbed someone the wrong way :p
 
Re: Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!

Eaglefan06 said:
It was probably Red Cloud.....jealous that you get the attention for doing a great job and he gets none.
Click to expand...

Nah, I have him on ignore, so when he negs me (which he does, repeatedly) I don't see what he wrote. :)

No, I have Extra so I know who it was. I assume he gave me the neg because I had the audacity to point out that Maine is still alive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top