Stromer Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 The thing that is screwing things up is UW in the tourney. With a WCHA team in the top 4, our chances of playing Michigan and a team liek BC go up when they have to protect the top seed and allow for no interconference matchups. I guess we either hope UW doesn't make it. Quote
HaksHomey Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 The thing that is screwing things up is UW in the tourney. With a WCHA team in the top 4, our chances of playing Michigan and a team liek BC go up when they have to protect the top seed and allow for no interconference matchups. I guess we either hope UW doesn't make it. Without fog, I like UND's chances against BC Quote
Stromer Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 Without fog, I like UND's chances against BC Maybe. I just want to play someone new. I didn't know that college hockey consisted of the WCHA, BC, Holy Cross, Michigan, and Michigan St. Seriously can we get some diversity? Quote
siouxweet Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 In this week's bracketology Jason Moy said that there were no longer bonus points for good non conference wins, none. however in the pairwise on siouxsports.com if you look at each individual comparison we have a .003 bonus as do some other teams. Am I taking Moy's statement the wrong way and there still is a .003 bonus? Quote
jimdahl Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 In this week's bracketology Jason Moy said that there were no longer bonus points for good non conference wins, none. however in the pairwise on siouxsports.com if you look at each individual comparison we have a .003 bonus as do some other teams. Am I taking Moy's statement the wrong way and there still is a .003 bonus? No, the bonus isn't used by the committee this year and so hasn't been used in the siouxsports.com PWR calculations since December. Any references to it are just me having failed to eradicate those traces of it. Thanks for pointing out that display error, I see what you're referring to and will fix it ASAP. Again, the calculations and rankings were correct, but that particular page incorrectly displayed that aspect of the background details behind the ranking. Quote
Old Time Hockey Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 Without fog, I like UND's chances against BC Maybe a better result this year if we get a crack at them earlier in the tourney. Still, can't we play someone else besides BC or Michigan. Would like to get a shot at a "powerhouse" CCHA team like Miami. Quote
Goon Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 Maybe a better result this year if we get a crack at them earlier in the tourney. Still, can't we play someone else besides BC or Michigan. Would like to get a shot at a "powerhouse" CCHA team like Miami. I agree; I am sick and tired of seeing the same teams every years how many times have we seen Minnesota, (2005, 2007) Holy Cross (2004, 2006) B.C. (1999, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2007), Michigan (1998, 2006, 2007). Quote
riders06 Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 Here is the first week of INCH 4X4 from insidecollegehockey.com http://www.insidecollegehockey.com/5Polls/0708/44_0620.htm Quote
Goon Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 Here is the first week of INCH 4X4 from insidecollegehockey.com http://www.insidecollegehockey.com/5Polls/0708/44_0620.htm Another region of death. MADISON Midwest Regional 1. North Dakota 2. New Hampshire 3. Wisconsin 4. Northeastern Quote
stickboy1956 Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 Another region of death. MADISON Midwest Regional 1. North Dakota 2. New Hampshire 3. Wisconsin 4. Northeastern I would like our chances against any of these teams, including the Badgers, at Kohls big ice surface. Wisco did not look any better this weekend than they did when we played them earlier this year. Quote
mikejm Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 Everyone complaining about the "same old, same old" when it comes to NCAA tourney: You do realize there are only 59 DI college hockey teams, right? And it isn't like there is parity. In any given year there are probably only 30 decent teams in the whole country, and 16 of them get in. So your odds of seeing the same teams in the playoffs is at least 50-50. Quote
Goon Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 I would like our chances against any of these teams, including the Badgers, at Kohls big ice surface. Wisco did not look any better this weekend than they did when we played them earlier this year. Maybe we call this the region of death (lite), its definately not as tough as the last two years. i think we would match up well against UNH and North Eastern. Quote
brianvf Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 Another region of death. MADISON Midwest Regional 1. North Dakota 2. New Hampshire 3. Wisconsin 4. Northeastern I would really like this bracket if it actually happened. We have played all three of these teams already, and beaten them once as well. And the Sioux played all 3 of them before they really started to play better. Plus, it would be nice to stay in Madison to go watch the Sioux play. But, I'm not sure if the Sioux will rise to get a #1 seed. It could certainly happen, but things would have to align right for them for that to happen. Quote
The Whistler Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 Another region of death. MADISON Midwest Regional 1. North Dakota 2. New Hampshire 3. Wisconsin 4. Northeastern That's good enough for me. Quote
siouxweet Posted January 30, 2008 Posted January 30, 2008 I would really like this bracket if it actually happened. We have played all three of these teams already, and beaten them once as well. And the Sioux played all 3 of them before they really started to play better. Plus, it would be nice to stay in Madison to go watch the Sioux play. But, I'm not sure if the Sioux will rise to get a #1 seed. It could certainly happen, but things would have to align right for them for that to happen. I think if cc can sweep clarkson this weekend and we go 7-3(2 wins against bemidji is a must) in our last 10 games, win our first round series and make it to the f5 title game we should get us a one seed. Quote
mikejm Posted January 31, 2008 Posted January 31, 2008 I think if cc can sweep clarkson this weekend and we go 7-3(2 wins against bemidji is a must) in our last 10 games, win our first round series and make it to the f5 title game we should get us a one seed. Wow. I didn't realize it would be that easy. Quote
HeidiSioux62 Posted February 2, 2008 Posted February 2, 2008 How come we didn't move at all in the pairwise with Michigan tying to a much lower team and DU losing to a much lower team (I know it was great for us that Mankato won to keep them as a TUC)? Quote
farce poobah Posted February 2, 2008 Posted February 2, 2008 That's good enough for me. Looks awful. Any chance the Badger fans would go bonkers for Northeastern? Ugh. Send us east. Quote
farce poobah Posted February 2, 2008 Posted February 2, 2008 Wow. I didn't realize it would be that easy. We're gonna need help ... New Hampshire is going to have to lose a couple in there. Quote
AZSIOUX Posted February 2, 2008 Posted February 2, 2008 How come we didn't move at all in the pairwise with Michigan tying to a much lower team and DU losing to a much lower team (I know it was great for us that Mankato won to keep them as a TUC)? way to complicated to explain. just keep winning and a few tops lose and we will be fine. 1 game isnt gona tilt the pairwise the wa it works. we are still at a 19 but we are only 1 pairwise point behind cc and unh but i dont think the cc game has been recorded yet. didnt realize clarkson was so high up on the pairwise. a cc sweep there is good for them Quote
yzerman19 Posted February 2, 2008 Posted February 2, 2008 I think the rules committee should start looking at bracket pairings that account for teams you have and haven't played. According to INCH's projection, there will be 7 teams in the tournament that we haven't played, and 8 that we have played. How is it then that in their projected brackets, we end up in a region having played all 3 other teams in the region before, and end up on a conference rival's home rink...STUPID Quote
yzerman19 Posted February 2, 2008 Posted February 2, 2008 correction: selection committee, not rules committee Quote
HeidiSioux62 Posted February 2, 2008 Posted February 2, 2008 I just didn't wait long enough. Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk 1 Miami 24 25-3-0 .8929 1 .6110* 1 2 Michigan 23 22-3-2 .8519 2 .6044* 2 3t Colorado College 21 19-7-1 .7222 3 .5915 3 3t Denver 21 18-7-0 .7200 4 .5867 4 5t North Dakota 20 17-8-1 .6731 8 .5834 5 5t New Hampshire 20 16-7-1 .6875 6 .5728* 6 7 Michigan State 17 17-6-5 .6964 5 .5597 8 8 Clarkson 16 15-8-2 .6400 11 .5390 12 Edit: Now we just need to have Miami and Michigan show their true colors. Quote
HaksHomey Posted February 2, 2008 Posted February 2, 2008 I just didn't wait long enough. Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk 1 Miami 24 25-3-0 .8929 1 .6110* 1 2 Michigan 23 22-3-2 .8519 2 .6044* 2 3t Colorado College 21 19-7-1 .7222 3 .5915 3 3t Denver 21 18-7-0 .7200 4 .5867 4 5t North Dakota 20 17-8-1 .6731 8 .5834 5 5t New Hampshire 20 16-7-1 .6875 6 .5728* 6 7 Michigan State 17 17-6-5 .6964 5 .5597 8 8 Clarkson 16 15-8-2 .6400 11 .5390 12 Edit: Now we just need to have Miami and Michigan show their true colors. NMU took a point from Michigan tonight Quote
Goon Posted February 2, 2008 Posted February 2, 2008 I just didn't wait long enough. Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk 1 Miami 24 25-3-0 .8929 1 .6110* 1 2 Michigan 23 22-3-2 .8519 2 .6044* 2 3t Colorado College 21 19-7-1 .7222 3 .5915 3 3t Denver 21 18-7-0 .7200 4 .5867 4 5t North Dakota 20 17-8-1 .6731 8 .5834 5 5t New Hampshire 20 16-7-1 .6875 6 .5728* 6 7 Michigan State 17 17-6-5 .6964 5 .5597 8 8 Clarkson 16 15-8-2 .6400 11 .5390 12 Edit: Now we just need to have Miami and Michigan show their true colors. I agree bounced in the first or second round again. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.