NCAA seeding

[UND69er]

Some "experts" showing UND in Sioux Falls w UMD on the other side of that bracket. Don't like having to play them again. Also, would UND be ranked #1 or 2 wo the stupid loss to the Goophers?

[SJHovey]

40 minutes ago, UND69er said:

Some "experts" showing UND in Sioux Falls w UMD on the other side of that bracket. Don't like having to play them again. Also, would UND be ranked #1 or 2 wo the stupid loss to the Goophers?

We would still be #3, but our NPI would be a lot closer to Michigan and MSU.  As it is now, we have pretty much no chance to move higher than #3

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

17 minutes ago, SJHovey said:

We would still be #3, but our NPI would be a lot closer to Michigan and MSU.  As it is now, we have pretty much no chance to move higher than #3

That's not true.

We move up to #1 in 7% of remaining scenarios

We move up to #2 in 21% of remaining scenarios. 

We stay at #3 in 32% of remaining scenarios.

We drop to #4 in 25% of remaining scenarios. 

Keep in mind this doesn't even factor in conference tournament play so that adds even more opportunities to move up if we run the table there.

 

[The Sicatoka]

I can look at IHTINB's table (objective analytics), but looking at bracketology (subjective) this far out is just noise to me. Sorry. YMMV. 

[SJHovey]

1 hour ago, InHeavenThereIsNoBeer said:

That's not true.

We move up to #1 in 7% of remaining scenarios

We move up to #2 in 21% of remaining scenarios. 

We stay at #3 in 32% of remaining scenarios.

We drop to #4 in 25% of remaining scenarios. 

Keep in mind this doesn't even factor in conference tournament play so that adds even more opportunities to move up if we run the table there.

 

There is a big gap in NPI points between us and #2 Michigan (1.46 points).

That's the same gap as between #8 Denver and #15 Wisconsin.

[nodakvindy]

24 minutes ago, SJHovey said:

There is a big gap in NPI points between us and #2 Michigan (1.46 points).

That's the same gap as between #8 Denver and #15 Wisconsin.

A sweep of western would go a long way in narrowing that gap. 

[Dustin]

Unless you're going to be the #1 overall seed and get the Atlantic Hockey champion, I don't see much difference between playing seeds 13-15.  Now maybe there's an "undeserving" bid stealer from, say, the CCHA, but even so, the likely candidates would be just below the bubble.

[atxsioux]

Think with the CHL adding depth to almost all of college hockey you're now typically going to have a lot of quality "4 seeds" outside of that 4 seed from Atlantic hockey.

That even would happen once in a while in past years, just think it will likely be the case pretty much every year now.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

2 hours ago, SJHovey said:

There is a big gap in NPI points between us and #2 Michigan (1.46 points).

That's the same gap as between #8 Denver and #15 Wisconsin.

Ok? Not sure how that changes the percentages shared 

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

1 hour ago, Dustin said:

Unless you're going to be the #1 overall seed and get the Atlantic Hockey champion, I don't see much difference between playing seeds 13-15.  Now maybe there's an "undeserving" bid stealer from, say, the CCHA, but even so, the likely candidates would be just below the bubble.

Agreed and even if a team steals a bid in any other other leagues they’re coming into the ncaas hot and with confidence

[TNF]

1 hour ago, Dustin said:

Unless you're going to be the #1 overall seed and get the Atlantic Hockey champion, I don't see much difference between playing seeds 13-15.  Now maybe there's an "undeserving" bid stealer from, say, the CCHA, but even so, the likely candidates would be just below the bubble.

And in most scenarios heading to Sioux Falls for attendance reasons any way with Mich/Mich St going east/northeast. The only issue might be seeding wise if we should land with Denver and they have to be placed in Loveland. But even then the committee most likely would swap citing attendance. 

[90siouxfan]

I assume there is a scenario that drops us to fifth....  2nd seed in sioux falls?  What 1 seed would like that scenario?

[RedFrog]

Being toward the top of the rankings also provides more opportunities to fall than to rise, which also applies to the Michigans above us.

First thing first ... take care of business against St. Cloud.

[Dustin]

15 hours ago, 90siouxfan said:

I assume there is a scenario that drops us to fifth....  2nd seed in sioux falls?  What 1 seed would like that scenario?

I can't imagine any current or potential #1 seed liking having to travel to South Dakota (from Michigan or Pennsylvania, most likely) only to be in the same regional as North Dakota.  Same could be said for the #1 seed that will have to travel to Colorado (again, from somewhere Michigan or Pennsylvania) to be in the same regional as Denver.  The Sioux Falls regional could (and probably will) be awesome, but the others are just not well suited geographically this year.  I know you can't coordinate what teams are going to be good in 3-4 years, when the regionals are set, but maybe this is the year that finally results in a change.

[RedFrog]

2 hours ago, Dustin said:

I can't imagine any current or potential #1 seed liking having to travel to South Dakota (from Michigan or Pennsylvania, most likely) only to be in the same regional as North Dakota.  Same could be said for the #1 seed that will have to travel to Colorado (again, from somewhere Michigan or Pennsylvania) to be in the same regional as Denver.  The Sioux Falls regional could (and probably will) be awesome, but the others are just not well suited geographically this year.  I know you can't coordinate what teams are going to be good in 3-4 years, when the regionals are set, but maybe this is the year that finally results in a change.

Honestly, I think the way this year is shaping up is giving more fuel for those who want to keep it the way it is by having neutral regional sites.  With the top 4 seeds all likely being from the west there will be the argument that there wouldn't be any games in the east.

[Goon]

On 2/19/2026 at 8:45 AM, The Sicatoka said:

I can look at IHTINB's table (objective analytics), but looking at bracketology (subjective) this far out is just noise to me. Sorry. YMMV. 

Now you’re clouding the issue with facts. Just win! That’s the message. 

[Dustin]

51 minutes ago, RedFrog said:

having neutral regional sites

I am fine having neutral regional sites, but what I'd like to see is two super regionals (an East and West) with 8 teams.  They would function the same way, essentially, they would just play 6 games in one venue over 4 days. The venue should an NHL rink in a city centrally located for the majority of college hockey programs, like St. Paul, Detroit, Boston, and maybe Denver.  This way, people can travel to a place (or just be close by, potentially, depending on how the seeding shakes out) they would actually be interested in going.  Basically, image half of the bracket being all in one place.  You'd get a mixture of eastern and western teams in both regionals.  The assignment of teams to a regional could based on which regional is closest to the overall #1 seed and everything else would fall into place.  Or if one side of the bracket were lopsided with, say, western teams, they could be assigned the West Regional.

These are the current 2-7-10-15 and 3-6-9-14 pods, based on USCHO bracketology.  Now imagine all these games are played in St. Paul.

 

[RedFrog]

1 hour ago, Dustin said:

I am fine having neutral regional sites, but what I'd like to see is two super regionals (an East and West) with 8 teams.  They would function the same way, essentially, they would just play 6 games in one venue over 4 days. The venue should an NHL rink in a city centrally located for the majority of college hockey programs, like St. Paul, Detroit, Boston, and maybe Denver.  This way, people can travel to a place (or just be close by, potentially, depending on how the seeding shakes out) they would actually be interested in going.  Basically, image half of the bracket being all in one place.  You'd get a mixture of eastern and western teams in both regionals.  The assignment of teams to a regional could based on which regional is closest to the overall #1 seed and everything else would fall into place.  Or if one side of the bracket were lopsided with, say, western teams, they could be assigned the West Regional.

These are the current 2-7-10-15 and 3-6-9-14 pods, based on USCHO bracketology.  Now imagine all these games are played in St. Paul.

 

I would be agreeable to this as an alternative to campus sites and the current neutral site format.

[nodakvindy]

1 hour ago, Dustin said:

I am fine having neutral regional sites, but what I'd like to see is two super regionals (an East and West) with 8 teams.  They would function the same way, essentially, they would just play 6 games in one venue over 4 days. The venue should an NHL rink in a city centrally located for the majority of college hockey programs, like St. Paul, Detroit, Boston, and maybe Denver.  This way, people can travel to a place (or just be close by, potentially, depending on how the seeding shakes out) they would actually be interested in going.  Basically, image half of the bracket being all in one place.  You'd get a mixture of eastern and western teams in both regionals.  The assignment of teams to a regional could based on which regional is closest to the overall #1 seed and everything else would fall into place.  Or if one side of the bracket were lopsided with, say, western teams, they could be assigned the West Regional.

These are the current 2-7-10-15 and 3-6-9-14 pods, based on USCHO bracketology.  Now imagine all these games are played in St. Paul.

 

Very much like this format, but id cut it down to 3 days but 4 ticket sessions

Friday Region 1 semis 

Saturday  Region 2 semis

Sunday both regional finals

I'd also do it like basketball where each region is a pod, so that the two regions decided at the site dont necessarily have to meet at the Frozen Four.  So it's just any two regions, not half the bracket. 

You'd have a ton of NHL and AHL arenas that could host. 

[atxsioux]

2 hours ago, Dustin said:

I am fine having neutral regional sites, but what I'd like to see is two super regionals (an East and West) with 8 teams.  They would function the same way, essentially, they would just play 6 games in one venue over 4 days. The venue should an NHL rink in a city centrally located for the majority of college hockey programs, like St. Paul, Detroit, Boston, and maybe Denver.  This way, people can travel to a place (or just be close by, potentially, depending on how the seeding shakes out) they would actually be interested in going.  Basically, image half of the bracket being all in one place.  You'd get a mixture of eastern and western teams in both regionals.  The assignment of teams to a regional could based on which regional is closest to the overall #1 seed and everything else would fall into place.  Or if one side of the bracket were lopsided with, say, western teams, they could be assigned the West Regional.

These are the current 2-7-10-15 and 3-6-9-14 pods, based on USCHO bracketology.  Now imagine all these games are played in St. Paul.

 

NCAA basketball does this with 2 - 4 team groups at each regional usually. You can't tell me it doesn't help boost the attendance by at least a decent percentage.

 

Bare minimum it should be an improvement on the current system.