Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

[OnMAA]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

Polls play about as much of a role as me writing my personal rankings on the back of a McDonald’s napkin.

Don't discount writing on a napkin. Some brilliant ideas and important deals where conceived on a napkin.

Besides, I think about 50 Billion customers have put their faith in the big M napkin at some point. That is about 50 Billion more than the number of folks that follow or care about womens hockey.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

Polls play about as much of a role as me writing my personal rankings on the back of a McDonald’s napkin.

Seriously man, what is your deal? You have a problem with napkins? Tell me you've never used a napkin before and felt grateful. If you say otherwise, you're lying.
I really hope everyone gets that I'm being facetious.

 

[ManBehindTheCurtain]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

When I see the fifth place team in the Ivy League ranked sixth in the nation by Pairwise, I place more faith in your napkin.

Selections and pairings in past years have often seemed less reliable than napkins and that is a problem. But the truth is the selection committee is going to use a PairWise like process. I can almost guarantee that someone with a good case to be included will be left out and that someone else will get screwed by a match up based more on saving travel than on producing the best hockey.

 

[D2D]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

I can almost guarantee that someone with a good case to be included will be left out and that someone else will get screwed by a match up based more on saving travel than on producing the best hockey.

Maybe it's the selection committee that's using napkins.

 

[Watson Rink]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

When I see the fifth place team in the Ivy League ranked sixth in the nation by Pairwise, I place more faith in your napkin.

Sorry? Brown, the fifth-place team in the Ivy League, is sixth in the Pairwise?
Or perhaps you meant Harvard, currently the third-place team in the ECAC, 3 points out of second with two games in hand (against teams with a combined record of 4-18-4) is sixth in the Pairwise and eighth in RPI, KRACH and Rutter?
The Ivy League and the ECAC are not the same, and they are hardly minor-league concerns when the first-place team in both (Cornell) is currently #2 in both the national poll and the Pairwise.
The above quote has great zing to it, but it's probably a better idea to be accurate about stuff like the names of the leagues, who is actually where in the the league standings, the way that hockey standings are traditionally presented on the basis of points without regard to games in hand, and the consideration that non-league games are also counted in the PairWise. Referring to "a team which will probably end up (after playing its games in hand) in second place in a 12-team league headed by the current #2 team in the country" rather than to "the fifth place team in the Ivy League" would be pretty weak in rhetorical heft, but it does have the virtue of being accurate.
Which is not to say that the prevalent criticisms of the PowerWise and other statistical measures may not be correct: after Harvard's ECAC results to date and two decisive losses to #3 Minnesota and three wins over Hockey East teams that were all top 10 teams at one time or another in the recent past but aren't that powerful this season, I confess I'm quite surprised that it ranks as high as it does in the various statistical measures.
What probably got my goat is the post's cavalier dismissal of Ivy League athletics in general.
So let me give a friendly-rivalrous shout out to the poster of the above post and ask you how is YOUR college/university doing as compared with Harvard in the so-called "big-time" sports? How many of the 30 starting NFL quarterbacks graduated from YOUR college? (Ryan Fitzpatrick graduated from Harvard). How's YOUR college doing in the ESPN men's basketball poll? (Harvard is #23).

 

[Watson Rink]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

Just playing devil's advocate here:
What if the women's brackets went to what the men played prior to expanding to 16 teams and allow 12 to get in? Granted, this means 33 percent of the DI teams get in, but with some imagination and creative bracketing, it could work. More teams would be traveling and there may be issues with rinks like Wisconsin runs into with one facility hosting men's and women's basketball and hockey. Let's see what I can come up with just using current RPI and not taking into automatic bids...again just throwing it out there to see if something shakes out:
1. Wisconsin 2. Cornell 3. Minnesota 4. Mercyhurst 5. BC 6. Harvard 7t. Northeastern 7t. North Dakota 9. Dartmouth 10t. Duluth 10t. St. Lawrence 12. Bemidji St.
Okay, in this scenario, Wisc., Cornell, MN, and Mercyhurst would have home ice like normal. If the NCAA decided the field strictly using RPI, then BC would have been at Mercyhurst, Harvard at MN, NE at Cornell, and ND at Wisconsin anyway. Instead of this line up, teams 9-12 would play teams 5-8 with 1-4 opening round byes with those games at 1-4 rink. Now here is where we could "play" a little if we had to.
Send Bemidji to Madison to play ND with winner playing Wisconsin; St. Lawrence to Cornell to play N'eastern, winner v. Cornell; Duluth to Minneapolis to play Harvard, winner v. MN; and Dartmouth to Erie to play BC, winner v. Mercyhurst (with some liberties, could make BC #4 and have them host if travel costs are a concern).
Make sense to everyone? Good. I realize that the rankings easily could change from now until the beginning of March, but maybe will stir things up. There is probably something wrong with my logic, and I'm sure it would never happen like this until there are about another 10 women's programs in the NCAA. Let the debate begin....good, bad, or otherwise.

Your idea is great! Anything that expands extra-conference play at the end of the season is a big plus in my eyes. If Minnesota and Harvard and all the other colleges that pay out of their own pockets for East-West-Central match-ups during the regular season can do so, the NCAA should be able to spring for it also!

The ultimate luxury in women's collegiate sports post-season play is squash, where all 40-odd teams compete in the national tournament: but all the teams except for Stanford are able to travel by bus to one central location where all matches can be played in a single long weekend.

 

[ARM]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

What probably got my goat is the post's cavalier dismissal of Ivy League athletics in general.

I think the post in question came from a Cornell fan, so you may have extrapolated just a tad. The post was calling into question the PWR, not your beloved league or any NFL quarterbacks, however irrelevant they may be on this forum.

 

[granddaddyscout]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

Sorry? Brown, the fifth-place team in the Ivy League, is sixth in the Pairwise?
Or perhaps you meant Harvard, currently the third-place team in the ECAC, 3 points out of second with two games in hand (against teams with a combined record of 4-18-4) is sixth in the Pairwise and eighth in RPI, KRACH and Rutter?
The Ivy League and the ECAC are not the same, and they are hardly minor-league concerns when the first-place team in both (Cornell) is currently #2 in both the national poll and the Pairwise.
The above quote has great zing to it, but it's probably a better idea to be accurate about stuff like the names of the leagues, who is actually where in the the league standings, the way that hockey standings are traditionally presented on the basis of points without regard to games in hand, and the consideration that non-league games are also counted in the PairWise. Referring to "a team which will probably end up (after playing its games in hand) in second place in a 12-team league headed by the current #2 team in the country" rather than to "the fifth place team in the Ivy League" would be pretty weak in rhetorical heft, but it does have the virtue of being accurate.
Which is not to say that the prevalent criticisms of the PowerWise and other statistical measures may not be correct: after Harvard's ECAC results to date and two decisive losses to #3 Minnesota and three wins over Hockey East teams that were all top 10 teams at one time or another in the recent past but aren't that powerful this season, I confess I'm quite surprised that it ranks as high as it does in the various statistical measures.
What probably got my goat is the post's cavalier dismissal of Ivy League athletics in general.
So let me give a friendly-rivalrous shout out to the poster of the above post and ask you how is YOUR college/university doing as compared with Harvard in the so-called "big-time" sports? How many of the 30 starting NFL quarterbacks graduated from YOUR college? (Ryan Fitzpatrick graduated from Harvard). How's YOUR college doing in the ESPN men's basketball poll? (Harvard is #23).

Better hope he isn't from Ohio State, I bet they lead the women's hockey world schools in NFL players and are one of the top team in Bball this year as well.

That said, you may be going a bit over-board in touting the ECAC's strength as a league. In a world with only 3 NCAA auto bid conferences they are probably the third strongest. Even counting all 4 leagues they are only 3 out of 4. I think the poster should be careful to be more accurate, but the message I heard was that he doesn't have much confidence in the process to select the top 8 teams. I share those sentiments and feel that the WCHA should have 4 representatives before the ECAC or HC are given 2.

BTW, you should go with the most Senators or Presidents in the future. Just a suggestion!

 

[NUWH DogHouse]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

Anyone else notice Mercyhurst passed bc for 4th in the USA Today poll but dropped down to 7th in the USCHO poll? Any ideas for the discrepancy?

 

[comefrombehind]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

Sorry? Brown, the fifth-place team in the Ivy League, is sixth in the Pairwise?
Or perhaps you meant Harvard, currently the third-place team in the ECAC, 3 points out of second with two games in hand (against teams with a combined record of 4-18-4) is sixth in the Pairwise and eighth in RPI, KRACH and Rutter?
The Ivy League and the ECAC are not the same, and they are hardly minor-league concerns when the first-place team in both (Cornell) is currently #2 in both the national poll and the Pairwise.
The above quote has great zing to it, but it's probably a better idea to be accurate about stuff like the names of the leagues, who is actually where in the the league standings, the way that hockey standings are traditionally presented on the basis of points without regard to games in hand, and the consideration that non-league games are also counted in the PairWise. Referring to "a team which will probably end up (after playing its games in hand) in second place in a 12-team league headed by the current #2 team in the country" rather than to "the fifth place team in the Ivy League" would be pretty weak in rhetorical heft, but it does have the virtue of being accurate.
Which is not to say that the prevalent criticisms of the PowerWise and other statistical measures may not be correct: after Harvard's ECAC results to date and two decisive losses to #3 Minnesota and three wins over Hockey East teams that were all top 10 teams at one time or another in the recent past but aren't that powerful this season, I confess I'm quite surprised that it ranks as high as it does in the various statistical measures.
What probably got my goat is the post's cavalier dismissal of Ivy League athletics in general.
So let me give a friendly-rivalrous shout out to the poster of the above post and ask you how is YOUR college/university doing as compared with Harvard in the so-called "big-time" sports? How many of the 30 starting NFL quarterbacks graduated from YOUR college? (Ryan Fitzpatrick graduated from Harvard). How's YOUR college doing in the ESPN men's basketball poll? (Harvard is #23).

2011-12 Women's Ice Hockey Standings
Ivy League
GP Record Win % Pts GF GA
Cornell 8 7-1-0 0.875 14 34 9
Princeton 8 5-2-1 0.688 11 22 8
Dartmouth5 2-2-1 0.500 5 11 11
Brown 5 2-3-0 0.400 4 8 15
Harvard 5 1-4-0 0.200 2 7 14
Yale 5 0-5-0 0.000 0 4 29

Source: http://www.ivyleaguesports.com/sports/wice/2011-12/standings

 

[comefrombehind]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

I think the post in question came from a Cornell fan, so you may have extrapolated just a tad. The post was calling into question the PWR, not your beloved league or any NFL quarterbacks, however irrelevant they may be on this forum.

As usual, your observation was insightful. I will have to settle for inciting.

 

[tragicallyhip]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

I would like to see Robert Morris get some recognition. They have a great record, and finally beat Mhurst. If they can go undefeated for the rest of the season and/or at least split against Mhurst and win the rest, I hope they can crack the top 10, maybe top 8!!

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

Anyone else notice Mercyhurst passed bc for 4th in the USA Today poll but dropped down to 7th in the USCHO poll? Any ideas for the discrepancy?

Please see Arlan Marttila's column:

The mysteries of the PairWise Rankings
The week saw Mercyhurst swap places in the PWR with Boston College, with the Lakers moving up to No. 4 while the Eagles dropped to No. 5. At first glance, that switch makes little sense, as BC went 2-0-1 for the week, defeating Providence and Connecticut after tying Northeastern, while Mercyhurst split a series with Robert Morris. However, the Lakers profited from a good week for St. Lawrence that made the Saints a TUC, allowing MC to claim that category of the comparison from the Eagles, as SLU was a common opponent of both teams, losing twice to the Lakers while defeating BC. The difference between fourth or fifth is huge, because the top four teams at the end of the season host an NCAA quarterfinal.


Read more: http://www.uscho.com/womens-d1-blog/2012/01/23/womens-d-i-wrap-0123/#ixzz1kRN3C0Om

 

[pakidnyc]

I would like to see Robert Morris get some recognition. They have a great record, and finally beat Mhurst. If they can go undefeated for the rest of the season and/or at least split against Mhurst and win the rest, I hope they can crack the top 10, maybe top 8!!

I too ink RMU deserves some credit, but to suggest top-8 this year is a pipe dream. Only way possible would be to sweep throughout including 2 more games vs Mercyhurst and 1 away game vs Princeton, aka Team Weber. I think they've made great strides but not this year. Maybe next when Paul gets a year of of his own recruits.

 

[NUWH DogHouse]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

I meant in the voting polls not the PWR. I knew about the TUC comparison but the voters are just so widely differentiated between the two polls.

 

[pakidnyc]

Anyone else notice Mercyhurst passed bc for 4th in the USA Today poll but dropped down to 7th in the USCHO poll? Any ideas for the discrepancy?

Well, they lost to unranked RMU so those voters obviously cared more about that. I don't watch the polls team by team that. Closely, but I would venture to say it's rare to lose a game to an unranked team and somehow move up in the polls. BC lost today pretty big to unranked BU so either BU has gotten healthy just in time....which may be bad news for NU or else BC had a bad day. But they seem to be trending down while NU is trending up.

All of it makes for good blog fodder. Haha

 

[northhockey]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

I still see a strong case for UMD to make the NCAA's. Im not a fan of the bulldogs, coach, "tradition", etc. but I believe there should be 4/7 teams WCHA

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

BC lost today pretty big to unranked BU so either BU has gotten healthy just in time....

All I had to see was one name in the box score....... interesting!

 

[brookyone]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

I still see a strong case for UMD to make the NCAA's. Im not a fan of the bulldogs, coach, "tradition", etc. but I believe there should be 4/7 teams WCHA

11 losses, winning % rank of 17 @ .5577, TUC record of 4-9-1 and TUC winning % of .3214...I dunno. Although a number of teams have far from stellar records vs. TUC and low winning % vs. TUC...as well as a few who've not played many TUC. I'm not convinced they belong just yet. I hope the Buckeyes can properly focus the lens for a clearer picture.

 

[skatefast]

Re: Women's D1 Rankings/Polls 2011-2012

Brooky- UMD could have all your favorite MN girls you so closely, the coach you revere the most, and a flawless record... and you still would come up with some reason to hate them.