UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

[Ma#1ne Hky]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

two against six teams (home and home), three against four teams (two teams two games home one away, two teams two games away one game home).

thanks.

 

[Sean Pickett]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

Could use this year's standings? Bottom 5 teams play each other 3 times and play the top 6 teams twice? For example, Maine would play BU,BC, UML, Providence,Vermont and Merrimack twice (12 games). Three games against NU, Connecticut, UNH (maintain rivalry) and UMass (12 games). This may keep the league competitive in terms of points?

Except then then the top six are playing each other 3 times (5x3=15) and the bottom 5 twice (5x2=10) which adds up to 25. So that don't work.

Sean

 

[Runsub5]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

Except then then the top six are playing each other 3 times (5x3=15) and the bottom 5 twice (5x2=10) which adds up to 25. So that don't work.

Good point. That schedule won't work for the top six teams.

 

[Drew S.]

Good point. That schedule won't work for the top six teams.

I think hockey east should try to set it up so rivalries play each other more. Teams are going to move up and down each year and basing it on previous year's table doesn't ensure everyone has the same schedule difficulty. I think when teams play each other plays a big part too. I'm just happy there will be more league games.

 

[BoSox3066]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

No Hockey East all rookie team nods. Awesome sauce.

 

[Sean Pickett]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

I think hockey east should try to set it up so rivalries play each other more. Teams are going to move up and down each year and basing it on previous year's table doesn't ensure everyone has the same schedule difficulty. I think when teams play each other plays a big part too. I'm just happy there will be more league games.

Yes, but playing your rivals more has at least two issues: 1) who decides what rivalries are selected and 2) possibly having some teams play much harder or much easier schedules than other teams.

Who would you have Maine play 3 times every season?

Based on 2016-17 league games
UML, BU, BC, PC, UVM, MC, NU, CT, UNH, ME, MA
Based on 2016-17 all games
UML, BU, PC, UVM, BC, NU, MC, CT, UNH, ME, MA

The top 2 and bottom 4 remain the same, but BC drops from 3 to 5 while PC and UVM both move up one spot each and MC and NU flip places.

Based on the last 5 seasons league games
BC, PC, UML, BU, UNH, NU, UVM, CT, MC, ME, MA
Base on the last 5 seasons all games
UML, BC, PC, BU, NU, UVM, UNH, MC, CT (3 yrs), ME, MA

Again, a fair amount of shifting, but the top 4 remain the same in 3 of the 4 cases, and 3 of the bottom 4 remain the same in all 4 cases.

I would try for a somewhat balanced schedule by ranking the teams using their 5 season overall winning percentage and then I would schedule 2 teams in the 5 top and 2 teams in the bottom 5 (excluding the team in question). For example, Maine is in 10th place my ranking above: They would play 3 games against 2 of UML, BC, PC, BU and NU and 3 games against 2 of UVM, UNH, MC, CT and MA. So, for example Maine could be scheduled to play 3 games against BC, BU, UNH and UVM.

I created a possible 2016-17 schedule for Hockey East using my ranking which I put into a spreadsheet. Vermont was the 6th place team in my ranking so they are in the top 5 teams' top 5 and the bottom 5 teams' bottom 5.

Regarding more league games, I'm still working on league vs non-league attendance, but I now have 3 seasons (2014-17) averages and league games in general do have higher attendance.

Sean

 

[UML Puck Hawk]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

Yes, but playing your rivals more has at least two issues: 1) who decides what rivalries are selected and 2) possibly having some teams play much harder or much easier schedules than other teams.

Who would you have Maine play 3 times every season?

Based on 2016-17 league games
UML, BU, BC, PC, UVM, MC, NU, CT, UNH, ME, MA
Based on 2016-17 all games
UML, BU, PC, UVM, BC, NU, MC, CT, UNH, ME, MA

The top 2 and bottom 4 remain the same, but BC drops from 3 to 5 while PC and UVM both move up one spot each and MC and NU flip places.

Based on the last 5 seasons league games
BC, PC, UML, BU, UNH, NU, UVM, CT, MC, ME, MA
Base on the last 5 seasons all games
UML, BC, PC, BU, NU, UVM, UNH, MC, CT (3 yrs), ME, MA

Again, a fair amount of shifting, but the top 4 remain the same in 3 of the 4 cases, and 3 of the bottom 4 remain the same in all 4 cases.

I would try for a somewhat balanced schedule by ranking the teams using their 5 season overall winning percentage and then I would schedule 2 teams in the 5 top and 2 teams in the bottom 5 (excluding the team in question). For example, Maine is in 10th place my ranking above: They would play 3 games against 2 of UML, BC, PC, BU and NU and 3 games against 2 of UVM, UNH, MC, CT and MA. So, for example Maine could be scheduled to play 3 games against BC, BU, UNH and UVM.

I created a possible 2016-17 schedule for Hockey East using my ranking which I put into a spreadsheet. Vermont was the 6th place team in my ranking so they are in the top 5 teams' top 5 and the bottom 5 teams' bottom 5.

Regarding more league games, I'm still working on league vs non-league attendance, but I now have 3 seasons (2014-17) averages and league games in general do have higher attendance.

Sean

Hi Sean,

Over on reddit a discussion about how to pull this off (in this case setting up 2 rivalries for each team). Link if you are interested. (note I am not OP obviously)

 

[Runsub5]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

Yes, but playing your rivals more has at least two issues: 1) who decides what rivalries are selected and 2) possibly having some teams play much harder or much easier schedules than other teams.

Who would you have Maine play 3 times every season?

Based on 2016-17 league games
UML, BU, BC, PC, UVM, MC, NU, CT, UNH, ME, MA
Based on 2016-17 all games
UML, BU, PC, UVM, BC, NU, MC, CT, UNH, ME, MA

The top 2 and bottom 4 remain the same, but BC drops from 3 to 5 while PC and UVM both move up one spot each and MC and NU flip places.

Based on the last 5 seasons league games
BC, PC, UML, BU, UNH, NU, UVM, CT, MC, ME, MA
Base on the last 5 seasons all games
UML, BC, PC, BU, NU, UVM, UNH, MC, CT (3 yrs), ME, MA

Again, a fair amount of shifting, but the top 4 remain the same in 3 of the 4 cases, and 3 of the bottom 4 remain the same in all 4 cases.

I would try for a somewhat balanced schedule by ranking the teams using their 5 season overall winning percentage and then I would schedule 2 teams in the 5 top and 2 teams in the bottom 5 (excluding the team in question). For example, Maine is in 10th place my ranking above: They would play 3 games against 2 of UML, BC, PC, BU and NU and 3 games against 2 of UVM, UNH, MC, CT and MA. So, for example Maine could be scheduled to play 3 games against BC, BU, UNH and UVM.

I created a possible 2016-17 schedule for Hockey East using my ranking which I put into a spreadsheet. Vermont was the 6th place team in my ranking so they are in the top 5 teams' top 5 and the bottom 5 teams' bottom 5.

Regarding more league games, I'm still working on league vs non-league attendance, but I now have 3 seasons (2014-17) averages and league games in general do have higher attendance.

Sean

Outstanding. I like it. It maintains rivalries and balances the competition based on past performance.

 

[Sean Pickett]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

Hi Sean,

Over on reddit a discussion about how to pull this off (in this case setting up 2 rivalries for each team). Link if you are interested. (note I am not OP obviously)

Thanks for the link, I posted my thoughts in a condensed version with a link to my schedule chart. As the thread was a month old I don;t know if it will anyone will actually read it.

Outstanding. I like it. It maintains rivalries and balances the competition based on past performance.

Thanks, it was a first effort. I tried to pick a rivalry for each team before going back to a second, third and fourth round. Some teams ended up with 4 longstanding rivalries, some with 3 and I hope the rest with at least 2, even if some of them are relatively new.

Sean

 

[Runsub5]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

Thanks for the link, I posted my thoughts in a condensed version with a link to my schedule chart. As the thread was a month old I don;t know if it will anyone will actually read it.

Thanks, it was a first effort. I tried to pick a rivalry for each team before going back to a second, third and fourth round. Some teams ended up with 4 longstanding rivalries, some with 3 and I hope the rest with at least 2, even if some of them are relatively new.

Sean

Send it to Bertagna. It will save he and his staff a lot of work. I would guess that the coaches may have some input in to the schedule and getting them all to agree will be difficult.

 

[Runsub5]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

No Hockey East all rookie team nods. Awesome sauce.

UMass and Maine were the only two teams not to receive any sort of award or runnerup award. Pretty sad.

 

[Fishman'81]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

No Hockey East all rookie team nods. Awesome sauce.

I didn't see a candidate wearing Maine blue. Fossier posted great numbers very early, but he seemed to be a right time/right place guy in retrospect. Nobody else comes to mind.

 

[Runsub5]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

I didn't see a candidate wearing Maine blue. Fossier posted great numbers very early, but he seemed to be a right time/right place guy in retrospect. Nobody else comes to mind.

Fossier was injured for a few games. The best numbers were by Pearson with 14-8-22. Fossier was something like 8-8-16 and played in something like 9 fewer games.

 

[BoSox3066]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

I didn't see a candidate wearing Maine blue. Fossier posted great numbers very early, but he seemed to be a right time/right place guy in retrospect. Nobody else comes to mind.

Me either but I read here how great this recruiting class was so.....

 

[Ma#1ne Hky]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

UMass and Maine were the only two teams not to receive any sort of award or runnerup award. Pretty sad.

But again that's why there 11th & 12th place teams, lacking talent compared to other teams...not that some of these players from this years recruiting class can rise...but overall the recruiting @ both schools have not been able to move either team up in the standings. These teams now a days will pull a diamond out of the rough...but most of the time these are players that would be depth and 3rd/4th liners and 5/6 pairings on defense on the top 6 teams in Hockey East. When you win and win each and every year you attract better players and "IF" you have a Coaching Staff in place that "CAN SELL" the Program and the future direction of the team onwards and upwards in the standings and into Post Season play and beyond to the NCAA's. Tough sell for both these days. (imo)

 

[NorthMike]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

Regarding the above discussion on HE rookie recognition, this doesn't concern me at all. This freshman class as a team scored 36 goals, 2nd in HE to BUs stacked freshman group. This is very encouraging​.

Ideally a sniper or three would be great, but overall give me a team over individuals anyday. Hopefully the freshmen, soph, juniors, seniors think about being a team.

 

[Runsub5]

Re: UMaine Black Bears, 2nd verse same as the first 2016-2017

Regarding the above discussion on HE rookie recognition, this doesn't concern me at all. This freshman class as a team scored 36 goals, 2nd in HE to BUs stacked freshman group. This is very encouraging​.

Ideally a sniper or three would be great, but overall give me a team over individuals anyday. Hopefully the freshmen, soph, juniors, seniors think about being a team.

No, I'm not concerned either. This coming season (according to Gendron), Maine will be competing for a national championship.

 

[Drew S.]

Regarding the above discussion on HE rookie recognition, this doesn't concern me at all. This freshman class as a team scored 36 goals, 2nd in HE to BUs stacked freshman group. This is very encouraging​.

Ideally a sniper or three would be great, but overall give me a team over individuals anyday. Hopefully the freshmen, soph, juniors, seniors think about being a team.

It would be nice to have a freshman come in and score 50 points but the downside is they would leave soon after. For where Maine is at right now they're better off having guys who are in the 20-30 point range their first year and stick around for three or four years. How people can be unhappy with Maine's freshmen class is really beyond me.

 

[BoSox3066]

It would be nice to have a freshman come in and score 50 points but the downside is they would leave soon after. For where Maine is at right now they're better off having guys who are in the 20-30 point range their first year and stick around for three or four years. How people can be unhappy with Maine's freshmen class is really beyond me.

Just us fans and the voting Hockey East coaches who watch film On and compete against em. What do they know, obvs they're just looking for 50 point guys!

 

[NorthMike]

No, I'm not concerned either. This coming season (according to Gendron), Maine will be competing for a national championship.

Oh don't get me wrong, the team isnt going to do much next year. I'm just speaking of the freshman class.

I dont have confidence in the coach staff, hockey office nor the athletic department to get them where us fans want to see them.