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.

Utica College 2010-11

Re: Utica College 2010-11

PS:According to Biggar,the ECAC-W is 28-9-5 vs. the SUNYAC this season...

MORE evidence! :)
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

Fishman'81 said:
Doesn't mean a thing,as you must know.

Adrian is #3 in the national PWR and #5 in the poll,at 17-3...The "in-region" stipulation means nothing in this discussion.(There are apparently some quality teams outside the Northeast,right?)

MC beating Adrian is a much better win on Manhattanville's resume than is Middlebury on Platty's,clearly.

I have to think that any objective evaluator of merit would advance MC over PSU based solely on the W/L and SOS evidence,should the NCAA's start today,despite MC being dead-last in their own conference,and Plattsburgh being 3rd in theirs.
Click to expand...

Granted, you're right in the extent that KRACH means zip, but out-of-region PWC is nothing but a last-resort tiebreaker when making direct comparisons between Eastern region teams like Plattsburgh and Manhattanville; an out-of-region comparison would require out-of-region numbers, but this doesn't.

Currently, Manhattanville and Plattsburgh's Eastern PWC stacks up like this:

Code: 
Manhattanville vs Plattsburgh
WIN      0.6136  0           0.6905  1
SOS      0.5387  1           0.5352  0
H2H     0- 0- 0  0          0- 0- 0  0
COP     9- 5- 1  0          9- 2- 1  1
RNK     0- 0- 0  0          0- 0- 0  0
============================================
PTS              1                   2
============================================
PWR              9                   9

where the most conspicuous number is probably the teams' records versus common opponents. And while your other point is largely immaterial, I'll note that, regardless of the SUNYAC's aggregate record versus the ECAC-W, Plattsburgh is 1-0-1 :)
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

Thank you all....One more Q. 6.5 to 1 ratio actually means ??
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

There is one NCAA tourney team for each 6.5 teams that play the sport. Currently it appears that there are 71 D-III men's team (based on #teams in KRACH rankings). 71/6.5 = 10.92 so there are currently 11 teams that will be invited to the tournament. Should 4 new teams be added to the D-III ranks without the loss of any, 75 teams should allow the field to go to 12.

Thanks for your efforts to understand the quirky world of D-III sports. If the 1/6.5 ratio were applied to the D-I field of 58, there would only be 9 (!) teams picked for the D-I NCAA tourney.
 
Last edited:
Re: Utica College 2010-11

Thank you very much ! Some playoff games at the AUD would be tremendous.
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

sshablak said:
Thank you very much ! Some playoff games at the AUD would be tremendous.
Click to expand...
Yes, they will be ;)
However, I worry about the AUD's availability (not that I know anything about that) beyond the ECAC-W playoffs. That seems to be a very busy time of the year, with HS hockey and all.
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

93GreatLaker said:
And the top 3 SUNY teams are 6-1-2 against the ECAC West.
Click to expand...

Only Oswego and Geneseo have winning records against ECAC-W teams this year. One team is neutral, the other 6 teams have (badly) losing records. All 5 ECAC-W teams have winning records against SUNYAC teams, those records ranging from 5-3-3 (or perhaps 4-2-0 is worse) to 6-0-0 (and of course that last one is to the cellar dwelling M'ville). Of course, one of the Oswego's two losses came courtesy of the ECAC-W 4th place team.

Another way to look at it is that the ECAC-W is 27-5-5 against SUNYAC teams that do not begin with Os.
 
Last edited:
Re: Utica College 2010-11

vcxc3200 said:
The aud will be available somehow. i don't doubt it.
Click to expand...
The High School Section III and state games are played during the day (or have been in the past). The late game (DI) is usually at 3:00 so, even in the worst case of overtime the ice would be avalible by 5:00 or 6:00. As far as other events go, I don't know but would think that their main tenet would have preferecne. Lets just hope they get there first. We'll know if they still got a shot after this weekend. Hope there's a webcast someplace of the games. It's a long drive down there but I must admit I'm thinking of making the trip. Shabby, you missed your beer!! Not like you.
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

vcxc3200 said:
The aud will be available somehow. i don't doubt it.
Click to expand...

The year we hosted the ECAC-W championships, the games were Friday evening and Sunday afternoon because of a Saturday conflict. After that weekend, things were booked up on the usual playoff dates which would have caused a problem if Utica had won and if they had made the tournament (The "experts" that year predicted "no way" even if Utica had won the ECAC-W tournament.)
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

I remember that year and the "experts". If my memory is right (and that's a big if) UC almost beat M'ville 3 times (championship game loss) but M'vill was still going to get the NCAA bid. That would have been a hard pill to force down. As far as the Aud goes I know the state game times are in stone but the section games probably could be moved if need be. The other stuff, who knows? If worse comes to worse, there's always the Arena (just kidding).
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

UCBadger said:
Yep, I missed that one, so sorry (I had them at 0-0-1). I think 93GreatLaker's record in post 87 is not correct, at least today. Should it be 7-2-2?
Click to expand...

My bad, I missed the Genny/Hobart and Genny/Elmira games. None-the-less my point was the top of the SUNYAC is as good if not better than the ECAC W. Granted, I will give you the bottom of the ECAC W is far superior to the mid/lower of the SUNY (as the ECAC W has no bottom, they are all good).
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

CARDS_rule_the_Burgh said:
Pool B: Bid reserved for Independents and Conferences without an AQ. Eligible members are viewed as 1 group, and the number of Pool B slots is calculated using the same 1bid/6.5teams ratio as the tournament structure itself. Once the MASCAC meets the two-year requirement after this season, there will be only 5 teams vying for the Pool B. NCAA has shown they may be willing to round 6 up to 6.5, but 5 is not enough. This Pool will no longer be used for DIII Ice Hockey after this season, leaving the ECAC-W relying on Pool C
Click to expand...

Small correction, because otherwise we might have two Pool B's last year. The ratio used for determining the number of Pool B slots is the "access ratio" which is the number of Pool A slots divided by the number of Pool A teams. That number is going to come out more like 1:8. That was important because before LVC dropped out of the NCAA, the MASCAC + West totaled 13 teams. In either case, with only the ECAC W, there will be no B next year.
 
Re: Utica College 2010-11

UCBadger said:
There is one NCAA tourney team for each 6.5 teams that play the sport. Currently it appears that there are 71 D-III men's team (based on #teams in KRACH rankings). 71/6.5 = 10.92 so there are currently 11 teams that will be invited to the tournament. Should 4 new teams be added to the D-III ranks without the loss of any, 75 teams should allow the field to go to 12.

Thanks for your efforts to understand the quirky world of D-III sports. If the 1/6.5 ratio were applied to the D-I field of 58, there would only be 9 (!) teams picked for the D-I NCAA tourney.
Click to expand...

Actually, the NCAA truncates those calculations, they don't round. We are fortunate to be at 11. They actually do it the other way they take and multiply 11 by 6.5 and come up with 71.5 teams required for an 11 team field, and rounded down to get 71. We are at the bare minimum for an eleven team field. If one more program goes belly up, we're back to 10. To get to 12 we need 12*6.5 = 78 teams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top