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.

Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

I think it's hard to evaluate the counterfactual if some of these games had different venues, simply by observing the actual game. Evidence support that home ice does matter, why is that? I don't know. I just know that it does. The WCHODR ranking estimates a home ice factor and it exists.

Off the top of my head, if you think of occasions where top West schools played at top East schools, there have been some where home ice definitely helped the Eastern schools.

I would say that possibly home ice matters less for the Frozen Four than NCAA quarterfinals or regular season games because teams have more time to settle down in the site.

To the extent home ice advantage exists, no road team will ever acknowledge it, because it's simply not something that's under one's control.

I do agree with ARM that UMD & Minnesota hosting more FF's is not simply "luck" but a reflection of the investment these schools have in their programs.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

dave1381 said:
I think it's hard to evaluate the counterfactual if some of these games had different venues, simply by observing the actual game. Evidence support that home ice does matter, why is that? I don't know. I just know that it does. The WCHODR ranking estimates a home ice factor and it exists.

Off the top of my head, if you think of occasions where top West schools played at top East schools, there have been some where home ice definitely helped the Eastern schools.

I would say that possibly home ice matters less for the Frozen Four than NCAA quarterfinals or regular season games because teams have more time to settle down in the site.

To the extent home ice advantage exists, no road team will ever acknowledge it, because it's simply not something that's under one's control.

I do agree with ARM that UMD & Minnesota hosting more FF's is not simply "luck" but a reflection of the investment these schools have in their programs.
Click to expand...


Isn't the NCAA just looking at the cheapest alternative?

WI is bidding on the women's FF in 2014 and 2015.

http://host.madison.com/sports/coll...cle_238fcb4e-4ecf-11e1-8590-001871e3ce6c.html
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

Might the NCAA give some thought to potential attendance and general quality of venue?
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

OnMAA said:
I knew there was something amiss when I read the "No FF East of Ohio" quote. Even nowheresville caught that one. :D
Click to expand...

Erie is like Kansas City, KS. Close enough to the border to ignore the 20 minute drive.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

EastFan1 said:
Mercyhurst? The DECC?
Click to expand...
Don't know about Erie. History of good attendance in Duluth though. The DECC has been replaced by AMSOIL and would be an attractive venue in the future I believe. Hence likely to host again at some point which you won't like I suppose. I always thought the DECC was a dump but potential attendance may have been of higher priority in the past. A guess.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

brookyone said:
Don't know about Erie. History of good attendance in Duluth though. The DECC has been replaced by AMSOIL and would be an attractive venue in the future I believe. Hence likely to host again at some point which you won't like I suppose. I always thought the DECC was a dump but potential attendance may have been of higher priority in the past. A guess.
Click to expand...

(Getting off topic here . . .) By and large I only heard very, very positive reviews from out-of-towner experiences of Amsoil and Duluth in general. People really seemed to like being able to walk anywhere - including to the games - from their hotel. (Good weather really helped!) And, again, in general extremely positive reviews of Amsoil. Though I agree that the DECC was well past it's prime to host FF type games (bad amenities) I do think many people miss the great, great sight lines that it has. If you were at Amsoil and sat in the upper deck you got a bit more of a feeling like what the seating was like at the DECC - only there, much closer to the ice. Anyway . . .

I heard the new UW arena is only going to seat 2500????? That seems too small not only for UW regular season games . . . but for the tournament. I mean, the DECC did sell out in 2003 (5,000+ capacity). I can't imagine that any FF UW was in wouldn't sell out in a heartbeat. I for one would rather a venue be a bit empty than to have to turn people away!!! :eek:
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

It would be interesting to know:

a) how many bids were submitted to the NCAA for each of the past 10 years
b) where they have been from
c) the selection criteria the NCAA uses
d) the main reason(s) why one site/school has been selected over the others, by year

You have to assume that it mainly boils down to the almighty dollar. But knowing the specifics might be revealing.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

The reason that the NCAA keeps going back to Minneapolis and Duluth, and will certainly jump at the chance to have it in Madison, is that those are among the only places where you have more than couple hundred fans of Womens Hockey. All 3 regularly draw more than 1000 to their regular season games and have a good built in fan base of people - like Dog fans in Duluth this weekend - who will come to the games and who will be excited about hosting. Its not hard to think that the eastern schools aren't bidding because they don't want the hassle of having what it likely a money losing event, when they only have a handful of fans who come to their regular games.

Of course, all of this presumes that there is any home ice advantage in the first place. The reality is that of the games that have been played so far, half have been east and half have been west, and the west has won all of them. There have only been 2 true cases of home ice advantage where the home team was playing on their home ice, both in Duluth and they did win both of them, but you're going to run that risk anytime you have games at campus sites. You've also had Minnesota and St. Lawrence make the Frozen Four in years they hosted on a different ice sheet and neither won the championship. The reality is that MN WI and UMD have all won championships out east, so its hardly a major factor in the dominance.

BTW, I agree Amsoil was a great place for the event and I hope they do have it there again. Its a great site and it was nice to see the number of Duluth fans who still showed up even though their team wasn't in it. It was hard to argue with the weather too! I also believe that if Wisconsin gets the Frozen Four, they are looking to have it at the Kohl Center, not the new rink.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

There have been 11 D3 women's championships and they have all been won by the eastern schools. Only 1 time has the D3 Frozen Four been in the "west" and we didn't win that one. It does add more data into the "home-ice" advantage concept a little bit. The tournament this year was at RIT, all 3 eastern teams in the Frozen Four have played at the RITTER many times, but Gustavus had played there in 2 games, both at last years FF. I don't necessarily feel that their is a home ice advantage, but familiarity with the rink probably comes into play. Wisconsin and Minnesota had each played 3 games at the AMSOIL this year compared to 0 for Cornell and BC.


6 teams have won the D3 title.

Elmira 2
Middlebury 3
Plattsburgh 2
Amherst 2
Norwich 1
RIT 1
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

gojackets said:
Wisconsin and Minnesota had each played 3 games at the AMSOIL this year compared to 0 for Cornell and BC.
Click to expand...
Minnesota had played four games at AMSOIL before this weekend (2 regular + 2 WCHA) and BC had played two to open the season.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

gojackets said:
I don't necessarily feel that their is a home ice advantage, but familiarity with the rink probably comes into play. Wisconsin and Minnesota had each played 3 games at the AMSOIL this year compared to 0 for Cornell and BC.
Click to expand...
Just a minor clarification here, the Sunday championship game was the sixth game played this season by Minnesota at Amsoil (2 regular season at Duluth, 2 WCHA Final Face-off games, North Dakota and UMD, and the semi-final against Cornell being the first 5) and Wisconsin's fifth (same as Minnesota except only 1 WCHA tournament game).

I think the primary reason why the WCHA keeps winning the NCAA tournament is that almost every year the best team in the country has been a WCHA team.

Anyone care to argue that that isn't true for Minnesota this year, Wisconsin any of the years they won, Minnesota with Wendell and Darwitz, the early UMD teams? That isn't 12 out of 12 but it is a majority.

See explanation put forward by dave1381 for reasons for the other wins. I don't necessarily agree with every single point he makes but overall his explanation pretty much nails it.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

ARM said:
Minnesota had played four games at AMSOIL before this weekend (2 regular + 2 WCHA) and BC had played two to open the season.
Click to expand...

Ya i forgot about the 2nd WCHA tourney game...also must have missed BC's games when I scanned the schedule fairly quickly
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

It's pretty simple talent likes to go to a winning program! Look at the top picks from both our U18 and Canada's U18 national teams, Most of the top talent headed straight to winning programs, oh there are a few that try to find that great top team top academic fit but for the most part they are sucked up by the top or winning programs. The other two issues the obvious, scholarships and academics hurdles.

My two cents!!
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

Shotblocker said:
It's pretty simple talent likes to go to a winning program! Look at the top picks from both our U18 and Canada's U18 national teams, Most of the top talent headed straight to winning programs, oh there are a few that try to find that great top team top academic fit but for the most part they are sucked up by the top or winning programs. The other two issues the obvious, scholarships and academics hurdles.

My two cents!!
Click to expand...

This!

But I think there is one other factor we haven't discussed, dilution. The WCHA only has 8 teams for the entire area west of the Appalachian mountains. The majority of the other 29 teams are all towards the east. You see this at play in Minnesota, where you have two stong teams, 1 team that can steal games and 2 other teams that don't have a chance. Now compare that to New England, which is smaller in size than Minnesota. There are 14 teams in this area. The city of Boston has 4 teams alone. New York, not really a hot bed of high school hockey, has 6 teams. Before HockeyEast was formed, BC, BU and NU were almost non-existant, as such, Harvard and Providence both had much stronger teams.

You also have to looke at the recruiting classes. Most of club/high school teams may have 1-5 players that are truly D1. When you have a recruiting class of 200, that requires 50-60 teams to fill those spots. I can only think of about 15-20 club teams in the U.S. that may have a few of these players on it so the rest is going to come from High School hockey in Minnesota or Canada. Not surprisingly, many of these players want to stay closer to home. In order to pursue their dreams, their families have usually been a necessary and important support system for them, and I have not yet met a player who does not love it when her family is able to watch her play.

All of these factors have some influence on why the WCHA has won the National Championships so many years in a row. But I think you also have to look to the east and appreciate that the growth in hockey there has had an impact (not positively) on their ability to win championships.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

I just don't buy the explanation that the WCHA champion has always had a vast edge in talent compared to the top eastern team in any given year (though it may be true in some individual years). You consider the teams I mentioned before as coming close, 2003 Harvard, 2010 Cornell, or the top seeds from the East, 2001 Dartmouth, 2006 UNH, 2008 Harvard&UNH, 2010 Mercyhurst... were these teams all clearly inferior in talent to NCAA champions that year? I don't see it, and even if they were, the gap was small enough we'd expect at least some kind of upset.

I compiled a list of the NCAA champions results against the best eastern teams in any given year. Where I drew the line at best was somewhat arbitrary, but every team mentioned made the national tournament, except 2000 Harvard which was 2-0-1 against the top 3 teams in the tournament field and left out.

In years where there were better or comparable eastern teams the best west team did not play, I made note.

2000 Minnesota
@Minnesota 4, Brown 0
Harvard 8, @Minnesota 3 **
@Minnesota 5, Dartmouth 4
@Minnesota 4, Dartmouth 3

2001 UMD
@UMD 7, SLU 0
@UMD 4, SLU 3
@UMD 4, Harvard 3
@UMD 5, Harvard 2
(did not play No. 1 Dartmouth)

2002
UMD 2, @Brown 2

2003
Harvard 2, @UMD 1
@UMD 5, Dartmouth 3
@UMD 6, Dartmouth 3

2004
Dartmouth 3, @Minnesota 2
@Minnesota 7, Dartmouth 3
(did not play Harvard)

2005
Minnesota 5, @Harvard 3
@Dartmouth 7, Minnesota 5
Minnesota 4, @Dartmouth 3

2006
UNH 2, Wisconsin 1 (at Dartmouth)

2007
Wisconsin didn't play anyone

2008
@UMD 1, Mercyhurst 1
@UMD 3, Mercyhurst 1
(did not play UNH&Harvard)

2009
Wisconsin 8, UNH 2 (@Florida)
Wisconsin 2, UNH 0 (@Florida)
(did not play Mercyhurst)

2010
@Mercyhurst 5, UMD 2
UMD 4, @Mercyhurst 3
(did not play Cornell/Harvard)

2011
Wisconsin 7, Mercyhurst 4 (@SCSU)

2012
(did not play Cornell/BC/BU)

Total 18-6-1
@West 13-3-0
@East 3-3-1
@Florida 2-0-0

So a few things to note:
--Certainly the WCHA is stronger overall, but not close to undefeated
--The WCHA champion is only .500 playing in the East
--2000 Harvard, 2003 Harvard, 2004 Dartmouth all beat the national champion on the road.
--2005 Minnesota & 2010 UMD were the only teams to beat the best eastern teams in any given year on the road, and Minnesota split at Dartmouth and UMD split at Mercyhurst.

I don't want to play up the home-road thing too much, but my point is that this suggests to me that the talent gap isn't huge and there are other factors making a difference, mainly the quality of competition the top WCHA schools face down the stretch against each other.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

scrambledlegs said:
Not surprisingly, many of these players want to stay closer to home. In order to pursue their dreams, their families have usually been a necessary and important support system for them, and I have not yet met a player who does not love it when her family is able to watch her play.

All of these factors have some influence on why the WCHA has won the National Championships so many years in a row.
Click to expand...
That is a factor in Minnesota's success, less so in the case of Wisconsin, and hardly at all for UMD. Even the Gophers relied far more on talent from outside the area this season than they did in winning in 2005.

There are likely many reasons why any given team has success, and a few of these may be true for only a portion of the championship squads.
 
Re: Why is WCHA always winning NCAA.

dave1381 said:
... there are other factors making a difference, mainly the quality of competition the top WCHA schools face down the stretch against each other.
Click to expand...
In that regard, I think this is an example of a year where the depth of the WCHA was very key in providing that quality of competition. Before the championship game, Wisconsin and Minnesota last met during the first series of January. I wondered whether that may be an issue heading into the Frozen Four. However, each played UMD at the WCHA tournament -- IMO, the Bulldogs were playing comparably to a Frozen Four team by that point -- and Minnesota got a steady diet of North Dakota. Each roster contains several world-class players. Even more than the talent gap of the teams in an east/west comparison, the majority of the top individual players, at least in the upper classes, appeared to be in the WCHA this year.

Future years may provide some illumination on whether this is because the top WCHA teams recruit better talent to start with, or if perhaps those players develop a bit more over the course of their careers because of either better competition or any advantage in playing two-game series.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top