jimdahl

I noticed while working on the PWR simulations this week, there's a new #1 in KRACH.

This is UND's best chance at climbing to #1 in a long time: http://collegehockeyranked.com/2015/02/25/big-pwr-games-of-the-week/ KRACH says the teams are about equal, with #3 Michigan Tech having about a 46% chance of winning each game. Even one loss by Minnesota State would open the door for North Dakota.

Oh my, UND made the "Big PWR Game of the Week"TM (not really). Alas, it's not because anything interesting is happening to UND, but UND could give quite a gift to Western Michigan by dropping a couple

I see what happened, it got lost in a bunch of spam. Fixed.

Sorry about that, I'm making some back end changes to improve security which sometimes breaks things. I catch most of them, but be sure to point anything out that stops working. The newsfeed is fixed. Re: collegehockeyblogs, does this form not work for you? http://collegehockeyblogs.com/suggestfeed2014.php Re: contacting me, this form sends me an email: http://siouxsports.com/feedback.php (there's a link to it on the front page labeled "feedback")

Not surprisingly, this weekend is a big PWR matchup for UND. Weekly PWR outlook

People already buy/sell things like jerseys in the respective sports forums. Plus, there's a forum just for tickets. I suppose we could expand the ticket buy/sell into "Tickets, memorabilia, etc... buy/sell"? But I always thought people kind of liked having those threads in the sports forums.

And if you're wondering how teams other than UND are doing, Tournament cutlines revisited

UND's probably not moving up in it's idle week, but is in pretty good shape for the season. Weekly UND PWR Outlook

UND stands a chance of taking over #1 this weekend

Google says now they've really fixed it.

It seems some some guys snuck a bad ad (that redirects you to a different web page) past google. It was apparently a very widespread problem (google search results for "lemode-mgz redirect" -- though I wouldn't follow any of the advice on the pages offering to help "clean your computer"). Google said a few days ago that they were working on it network-wide, so hopefully they can stay better ahead of this sort of thing going forward: Google forum discussion on topic

I'm not a good enough statistician to answer that correctly. If you think of all of the games as the population and the completed results as the sample, you could probably create a confidence interval for some hypothesis (the ranked quality of a team?). But, the games aren't independent so I'm already lost. What I have done is some analysis as to how well the as-of-today PWR predicts the final PWR, which is what we probably really want to know. That's in When to start looking at PWR (revisited). The bottom line is that it has some predictive power right away in November, but gets continually better. I personally start paying attention after the Christmas break tournaments.

That's a good point -- polls are more useful than rankings for the first couple months because historical performance is probably a better indicator of likely strength than the small sample of games.

This isn't even a PWR vs KRACH question, because the rankings mentioned are all actually pretty much in agreement right now: Rankings comparison Harvard is #1, UND is #6-7. Where it gets interesting is teams like Minnesota-Duluth which only has the 15th best win percentage, but KRACH/PWR/RPI all put at #3 because of strength of schedule (or Mass.-Lowell getting the opposite effect). I think this is actually a rankings vs polls question. While polls have some relative strengths (they can take changes like injuries or hot streaks into account), they also have relative weaknesses (historical performance bias, lack of voters' consistent exposure to all the teams). I personally find the rankings a bit more credible.

A first look at the at-large tournament cutlines To save you the trouble of reading it... Who's a lock? No one. Who's out? #38 New Hampshire and below, but #28 Notre Dame and below have a steep hill to climb.

Moderator advice -- no one was talking about NDSU but you. Please desist. This is a thread about UND recruits.

There's a link at the bottom that says "moderating team", but here's a shortcut: The moderating team

Yeah, there's definitely a tension between wanting some new blood and fresh enthusiasm, but needing to make sure that the team can operate consistently (people get REALLY upset when moderation actions affect them differently than someone else). To that end, I've been asking the existing mods to think about it and help identify potential candidates. And, I'd really want a consensus. So, it's going to be a slow process. Meanwhile, the mods are trying to show their presence in the football threads more (those threads have always been monitored, but mods have generally just posted when they think there's a problem; now we'll post "yes we're here, and we have no problem with what we're seeing").

Thanks! As mentioned above, the primary concerns are better monitoring of the under-monitored football recruiting thread while ensuring consistent application of forum rules and moderation standards. If you think you're well suited to contributing toward those goals, drop me a PM.

Thanks so much for the offer! I'll move the public portion of my reply to the admin forum to try to help keep this thread on topic, as was the concern.

Thanks so much for the offer! Given that you raised these topics publicly, I'll respond to a few publicly. I appreciate the criticism of the existing moderation (the whole point of my offer was to try to realign moderation to better meet the desires of the community). But, I do want to comment on the suggestion that non-UND fans should be held to a different standard than UND fans--I wouldn't be comfortable sponsoring a site where posters were held to a different standard if they were UND fans than not (e.g. if UND fans got to refer to NDSU as FU, but where we punished NDSU fans for referring to our teams as Sue, or some other slur). But, if you are willing to help consistently moderate the forum and hold all posters to the same standards, we'd be thrilled to add you to the team. Let's follow up via PM.

There's been some concern in the football recruits thread lately that it hasn't received enough moderator attention, so I wanted to extend an invitation to the community that we're always interested in expanding the moderation team to include additional members who can help consistently apply the forum rules (while also having an increased opportunity to shape them).

If you look back a few pages, it was a UND fan who responded to a snipe about UND's recruiting stature with a lengthy post comparing the recruiting stature of UND to NDSU. It was a fine post because it was clearly relevant to the timely event, but of course NDSU fans are going to reply to that! It's pretty difficult to figure out how to exclude discussion of NDSU when they're competing for recruits, but if people really want us to try to make this thread an NDSU-free zone we can see what we can do. But it would apply to everyone. As to the concern that there aren't enough mods paying attention to this thread, I'd be thrilled to take an application from some regular posters in this thread who are interested in helping moderate the football forum. I've tried to recruit from active people in a cross-section of the forums over the years, but it's been a few years since we recruited new mods and it's certainly possible this particular discussion is underrepresented.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ Got it. That's maddening, the editor running in IE detects the URL and automatically turns it into a link. The only way I've found to work around it so far is to hit the "Paste as plain text" icon instead (the third one in from the right on the top row) and paste the URL into there.