Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Far too early, but what the hell...Bracketology


petey23
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, MafiaMan said:

I should have remembered that as the Broadmoor is in Colorado Springs...duh.

So now that you've taken care of that "name",  what is the NCHC trophy/cup called? Haven't paid attention since it has yet to reside in theralph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So with UND most likely being a bubble team and their fate resting on a decision by NCAA tourney committee … does the need for fans, and fan base potential with location of Sioux Falls and possible St. Paul trump their hatred for UND

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, sprig said:

So now that you've taken care of that "name",  what is the NCHC trophy/cup called? Haven't paid attention since it has yet to reside in theralph.

NCHC Frozen Faceoff Championship Trophy! :ohmy:

Maybe the NCHC can attain Broadmoor Trophy naming rights? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, sprig said:

So now that you've taken care of that "name",  what is the NCHC trophy/cup called? Haven't paid attention since it has yet to reside in theralph.

I still say they should name it after former Denver coach, Armstrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, yelo09 said:

So with UND most likely being a bubble team and their fate resting on a decision by NCAA tourney committee … does the need for fans, and fan base potential with location of Sioux Falls and possible St. Paul trump their hatred for UND

Once the field is selected (a combination of auto-bids and at-large bids ranked by the Pairwise), teams have been moved around within their seeding bands for attendance purposes. Since the mathematical formula (PWR) was developed and made public, there has never been an instance of a team being included in the tourney field over another, more worthy team for financial reasons. And I, for one, am glad for that. In or out, it's all about the math. No more smoke-filled rooms for me.

Dave

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dave Berger said:

Once the field is selected (a combination of auto-bids and at-large bids ranked by the Pairwise), teams have been moved around within their seeding bands for attendance purposes. Since the mathematical formula (PWR) was developed and made public, there has never been an instance of a team being included in the tourney field over another, more worthy team for financial reasons. And I, for one, am glad for that. In or out, it's all about the math. No more smoke-filled rooms for me.

Dave

Put quite frankly, we wanted in the hard conference, and we haven't played well enough to be in the tourney this year. I'm all for the you want to be there, win it attitude we have to take going into this weekend. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dave Berger said:

Once the field is selected (a combination of auto-bids and at-large bids ranked by the Pairwise), teams have been moved around within their seeding bands for attendance purposes. Since the mathematical formula (PWR) was developed and made public, there has never been an instance of a team being included in the tourney field over another, more worthy team for financial reasons. And I, for one, am glad for that. In or out, it's all about the math. No more smoke-filled rooms for me.

Dave

Agreed, I would not even want to see UND get in if not for it being justified by the pairwise. It would take any integrity out of the process to show favoritism based on host school, potential revenue, or program history. I want to see UND get in by winning the NCHC tourney, but would gladly sneak in with an at large bid, so long as it is justified.

I understand that we have a 25% chance with only one win  in St Paul, but I think those percentages are also highly volatile, based on other results. If we win Friday night, and pending other results, that could drastically improve or decrease.  Just as the percentages drastically changed with a single outcome last night in Mankato. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Dave Berger said:

Once the field is selected (a combination of auto-bids and at-large bids ranked by the Pairwise), teams have been moved around within their seeding bands for attendance purposes. Since the mathematical formula (PWR) was developed and made public, there has never been an instance of a team being included in the tourney field over another, more worthy team for financial reasons. And I, for one, am glad for that. In or out, it's all about the math. No more smoke-filled rooms for me.

Dave

And here's a real-world example from 2008-2009:

#3 Minnesota (10-3-5) came to the Ralph on January 9th and 10th, 2009. North Dakota crushed the Gophers (6-3, 6-1) and sent them into a tailspin (Minnesota went 7-10-2 down the stretch and lost the WCHA Final Five Thursday evening play-in game at Xcel Energy Center). By the time the weekend's games had all been played, Minnesota was tied for 15th in the Pairwise with Ohio State and Wisconsin. The only auto-bid that took away a spot that year was Bemidji State (CHA), so the top fifteen teams in the Pairwise were going to make the NCAA tournament.

According to the Pairwise, Ohio State won the tiebreaker over both Minnesota and Wisconsin.

Oh, and did I mention that the University of Minnesota was hosting the West Regional at Mariucci Arena in Minneapolis that season?

There were plenty of people who were suggesting that the committee would move the Gophers ahead of Ohio State for financial/attendance purposes, but it didn't happen. This is why I believe in the system wholeheartedly. Q.E.D.

Dave

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Dave Berger said:

And here's a real-world example from 2008-2009:

#3 Minnesota (10-3-5) came to the Ralph on January 9th and 10th, 2009. North Dakota crushed the Gophers (6-3, 6-1) and sent them into a tailspin (Minnesota went 7-10-2 down the stretch and lost the WCHA Final Five Thursday evening play-in game at Xcel Energy Center). By the time the weekend's games had all been played, Minnesota was tied for 15th in the Pairwise with Ohio State and Wisconsin. The only auto-bid that took away a spot that year was Bemidji State (CHA), so the top fifteen teams in the Pairwise were going to make the NCAA tournament.

According to the Pairwise, Ohio State won the tiebreaker over both Minnesota and Wisconsin.

Oh, and did I mention that the University of Minnesota was hosting the West Regional at Mariucci Arena in Minneapolis that season?

There were plenty of people who were suggesting that the committee would move the Gophers ahead of Ohio State for financial/attendance purposes, but it didn't happen. This is why I believe in the system wholeheartedly. Q.E.D.

Dave

Ok, so you're dialed in on this...Back a few years, there was controversy because Wisconsin got into the tourney and they happened to be hosting the regional as well in Madison.  I believe their record was sub .500 but they still managed to get in...Do you remember any of the details of that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Blackheart said:

Ok, so you're dialed in on this...Back a few years, there was controversy because Wisconsin got into the tourney and they happened to be hosting the regional as well in Madison.  I believe their record was sub .500 but they still managed to get in...Do you remember any of the details of that?

2007-2008, Wisconsin had 15-16-7 at the end of regular season but their PWR was #15, so they still made the tournament despite record. Rule was created afterwards because of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Blackheart said:

Ok, so you're dialed in on this...Back a few years, there was controversy because Wisconsin got into the tourney and they happened to be hosting the regional as well in Madison.  I believe their record was sub .500 but they still managed to get in...Do you remember any of the details of that?

How about the year where Bucky won an NCAA title without ever having to travel outside the state of Wisconsin to do so?  2006.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Blackheart said:

Ok, so you're dialed in on this...Back a few years, there was controversy because Wisconsin got into the tourney and they happened to be hosting the regional as well in Madison.  I believe their record was sub .500 but they still managed to get in...Do you remember any of the details of that?

That was in 2007-2008. The Badgers went 15-16-7 but were still high enough in the Pairwise to get in as an at-large bid. They were placed in their regional (Midwest Regional at the Kohl Center) as the host school and were a #3 seed (which tells you about where they were in the Pairwise). Granted, three of the #4 seeds were tournament championship autobids - Princeton (ECAC, 21-13-0), Niagara (CHA, 22-10-4), and Air Force (Atlantic Hockey, 21-11-6) - but Wisconsin was still ranked higher than at-large Notre Dame (CCHA, 24-15-4).

The committee changed the rule shortly after that season to only consider teams with a .500 record or above.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, yelo09 said:

So with UND most likely being a bubble team and their fate resting on a decision by NCAA tourney committee … does the need for fans, and fan base potential with location of Sioux Falls and possible St. Paul trump their hatred for UND

I asked Schloss that on one of his article comment sections. and got "zero chance", unless they bring back women's hockey..  :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Dave Berger said:

Once the field is selected (a combination of auto-bids and at-large bids ranked by the Pairwise), teams have been moved around within their seeding bands for attendance purposes. Since the mathematical formula (PWR) was developed and made public, there has never been an instance of a team being included in the tourney field over another, more worthy team for financial reasons. And I, for one, am glad for that. In or out, it's all about the math. No more smoke-filled rooms for me.

Dave

How does that situation play out with a team being under .500 for the season, or did that fall by the wayside?  or is the "strictly pairwise" protocol a result of that, I think it was Wisconson hosting....

 

Oops, guess I need to read to the end, wish there were post numbers so I could find my way around...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MafiaMan said:

How about the year where Bucky won an NCAA title without ever having to travel outside the state of Wisconsin to do so?  2006.  

What was the committee supposed to do? Wisconsin was the #1 overall seed and thus were placed in the closest regional (Resch Center in Green Bay, WI, with Michigan Tech as the host school). Cornell took the Badgers to three overtimes in the regional final before falling 1-0.

The 2006 Frozen Four was played at the Bradley Center (Milwaukee, Wisconsin).

Incidentally, North Dakota hosted the 2006 West Regional at Ralph Engelstad Arena that season. The other participating teams in Grand Forks? Minnesota, Michigan, and Holy Cross.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 90siouxfan said:

How does that situation play out with a team being under .500 for the season, or did that fall by the wayside?  or is the "strictly pairwise" protocol a result of that, I think it was Wisconson hosting....

 

5 minutes ago, Dave Berger said:

That was in 2007-2008. The Badgers went 15-16-7 but were still high enough in the Pairwise to get in as an at-large bid. They were placed in their regional (Midwest Regional at the Kohl Center) as the host school and were a #3 seed (which tells you about where they were in the Pairwise). Granted, three of the #4 seeds were tournament championship autobids - Princeton (ECAC, 21-13-0), Niagara (CHA, 22-10-4), and Air Force (Atlantic Hockey, 21-11-6) - but Wisconsin was still ranked higher than at-large Notre Dame (CCHA, 24-15-4).

The committee changed the rule shortly after that season to only consider teams with a .500 record or above.

Dave

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://collegehockeyranked.com/forecast/pwrtournament/

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/probabilityMatrix.php

Are the differences between these two in that CHR runs the probabilities of games and the outcome is strictly based on that?

While CHN does the same but weighs the games with the probability that certain teams win based on how good they are?

For example CHR has Minnesota at 76% but CHN has them at 92%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...