jimdahl

See quite a discussion on this topic earlier. However, the extent to which this question has been recurring the last year or two certainly makes me realize the demand is higher than I thought. I'm a little surprised, in that there are so many other good sources for scores (at one point I was even considering dropping scores from the next home page design altogether!)

Now that USCHO has joined the party (USCHO publishing a PWR ranking identical to SiouxSports' marks the first known identical implementations of the new rules, which increases my confidence we're getting it right), time for the thread. Pairwise Rankings USCHO has also started doing bracketology posts. While I get caring who the top 16 are (because they're a decent predictor of the final top 16), I've never understand the interest in laying out regionals as if the season ended today. But, for those who enjoy it: USCHO bracketology blog I do have the simulator up with the new PWR/RPI formula so hope to get a forecast up after this weekend's games.

This has the potential to be a big deal: Agency rejects trademark of ‘Redskins Hog Rinds,’ calling term ‘derogatory’ If the PTO similarly finds that Redskins is a derogatory slang term in a football team's name (and why would its finding differ there vs. pork rinds?), the Washington Redskins could lose their trademark. That could open the floodgates to unapproved Redskins merchandise, and thus the revenue normally associated with licensing fees. Given that Snyder seems to care a fair bit about money, that could lead to an interesting dilemma as to what's costing him more -- having a team name that he can't license, or infuriating the loyal fans of his decidedly mediocre football team. Of course, a PTO finding against the football team's trademark would bring a lot more publicity and political pressure than the one for pork rinds, so one could imagine some higher up intervening.

Whew - I was losing sleep.

Couldn't tell you, but he's still here: http://forum.siouxsports.com/user/1001-cratter/

The call was charging (and an ejection for misconduct). Good call, IMHO. Having just seen the play once on TV, I too was surprised at the lack of additional suspension, but Shanahan's explanation made it pretty clear why it's not boarding: http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=515461 The NHL rule on Boarding includes the important disclaimer you alluded to: (emphasis mine) If you're facing the play but then turn away with the purpose of avoiding a hit, but then get hit into the boards from the side/behind, it is by definition not boarding. Still, scary hit that should be eliminated by rule to the maximum extent possible.

Stop with the personal attacks people. Disagree with people's posts by debating them, not by attacking them personally. Comments on a public broadcast are probably on topic, but I'll give the same advice I do when anonymous posters start to get personal about players, coaches, etc... -- remember that these are real people who read, and whose friends and families read, what you wrote. It's possible to be critical while not being cruel.

Please keep the discussion on topic and not about other posters. Thanks.

Stop trolling.

Well, let's not do THIS.... Is This The Worst Logo Update Of 2013?

Same answer as before... I still don't have a great source for automated football scores, let alone basketball. It's on the list, but not at the top. Alas, my list blew up this year with both a major conference rearrangement (including a new points system!) and new RPI and PWR formulas.

In response to this question: I got the PWR details working because they're largely the same as in the past (TUC is gone, but otherwise the same). However, the RPI details are very different -- games have different weights dependent on both the location AND outcome and there are bonuses for quality wins. I'll try to get a useful new "RPI details" screen designed in coming days/weeks, but it will probably be a work in progress this season until we all get a good handle on what really matters.

Great question, let me address it over here.

I've got my first attempt at the new RPI and PWR up now. There is modest ambiguity in the NCAA's description, and none of the big guys with connections (e.g. USCHO or CHN) have an online implementation yet, so it's possible one of my implementation detail guesses was wrong. I know what my assumptions were, so they'll be easy enough to fix once the details become clear.

I was struggling to keep up with the overlapping Washington vs. Minnesota double-header. Both required watching right to the end, but I was happy to see the Vikes win. I can't really get behind cheering for my team to lose so they get a better pick.

That was a crazy game -- my wife was out and texted me that I had to tune in because some crazy Philly guy was pounding on Holtby.

See note above... personal information about non-public figures (e.g. call jimdahl's boss at xxx and tell him what a horrible moderator he is) should be avoided. I don't think anyone in this thread is likely harassing the guy in real life, but posting his personal information could enable someone else to. Thanks!

Well, I have no real explanation, but things seem better now. Usually, there's an obvious cause (system got low on memory due to being very busy, etc...), but in this case it looked completely happy but was just responding to requests slowly. I'm not sure if any of my poking at it helped, or if it just got happy again on its own. I'll continue to keep an eye on it. Sorry for any inconvenience.

FYI -- I'm looking into the slowness of the site the last hour or so.

1. The NCHC's 3 point system requires me to recode the standings tables using data I wasn't even collecting before (SO wins)... as if I wasn't busy enough already because... 2. somewhat silly changes to the PWR that require data I wasn't even collecting before (bonuses for home/away wins) and annoying to implement RPI bonuses (QWB) that are just going to be reversed anyway within a couple years the first time someone gets screwed by it. Sigh. Things I don't mind-- hate on the Caps. I'm not used to being a fan of a team successful enough to be hated. Meanwhile, back to the Vikings.

Yeah, I don't love the archiving either. Maybe I'll crank it back to 5 years or something. You can always start a new thread and link to the old one.

Yep, please pay attention to the forum terms & rules:

Sorry about that, though it was marked as non-conference in the database it wasn't quite marked in the right way... Fixed.

My guess is that numerous people (CHN, Whelan?) are working feverishly at that right now. However, I'd also guess (based on past tweaks to the formulas) that they were tuned to make the past years look reasonable, and will only blow up when unique things happen in future years.

This does seem aimed to do that. Not only is there a huge premium for a win on the road (so when you go on the road you want to make sure it's going to be a win), but strength of schedule seems noticeably less important in the new scheme. So, the top schools should be trying to fill their schedules with easy road wins. The incentives to do so seem large enough that I wouldn't surprised to see these changes start affecting scheduling, unlike past changes. Assuming, of course, that the changes don't get reverted in the next couple years once people see how big an effect the home/road bonus actually has.