D-I Brackets Announced

[dave1381]

Wanted to kick this off with some posts from the polls thread... will post more in a minute.

With 6 weeks to go there will undoubtedly be some shuffling of positions and most likely of the field itself. But if the season ended today and there weren't any autobids from outside the top 8, this is what the PWR results would be:

<pre>
Rk Team GP W- L- T Win% Rk RPI Rk PWR
1 Harvard 18 17- 1- 0 0.9444 2 | 0.6588 1 | 15
2 Minnesota-Duluth 26 22- 3- 1 0.8654 3 | 0.6303 2 | 14
3 New Hampshire 25 21- 3- 1 0.8600 4 | 0.6221 3 | 13
4 Minnesota 26 19- 4- 3 0.7885 5 | 0.6040 5 | 12
5 St. Lawrence 26 19- 7- 0 0.7308 9 | 0.5920 6 | 11
6 Mercyhurst 26 19- 5- 2 0.7692 6 | 0.5876 7 | 10
7 Wisconsin 26 18- 6- 2 0.7308 9 | 0.5840 8 | 9
8 Connecticut 24 16- 4- 4 0.7500 7 | 0.5738 9 | 8
</pre>

Assuming that the committee would move UW away from UMD as it has done every other year, that yields one of the following scenarios. I'd expect a) in that it protects the #1 seed, although I was surprised by what the committee chose to do last year:

a)
#8 Connecticut at #1 Harvard
#6 Mercyhurst at #2UMD
#7 Wisconsin at #3 New Hampshire
#5 St. Lawrence at #4 Minnesota

b)
#7 Wisconsin at #1 Harvard
#8 Connecticut at #2 UMD
#6 Mercyhurst at #3 New Hampshire
#5 St. Lawrence at #4 Minnesota

Either scenario offers a rematch of last year's quarters with the opposite team hosting -- Mercyhurst/UMD or UW/Harvard. Maybe the committee would favor b), just because it makes it more likely that host UMD would be playing in the FF in Duluth.

I'd think that the most likely movement of teams would see someone from the WCHA moving down, because they have the most H2H games with Wisconsin traveling to both Duluth and Minneapolis. Although UConn and UNH could meet 3 times over the season's final two weekends, so that could cause some juxtapositioning of the teams as well. I'm sure a lot will change as we move into March, but it is kind of fun to see what may await us.

ARM -- I'm positive the committee would favor (a) actually. The reason is geographical considerations. In option (a), there are three flights. In option (b), there are four flights. So it's clearly option (a).

Remember avoiding flights is why BC got to Dartmouth last year. They could just have well have sent UMD to Dartmouth and Harvard to Mercyhurst, and BC to Wisconsin, but they didn't so they could avoid a flight with BC-Dartmouth.

Roughly speaking, the committee's priorities appear to be 1) making sure the top four don't play each other (this is trivial), 2) avoiding intraconference matchups, 3) avoiding air travel, and 4) preserving bracket integrity for the bottom four. I think this is pretty clear now how they operate.

I guess one exception is in 2005, they flew Providence to Minnesota when they could have sent Providence to Harvard and then given Minnesota Mercyhurst, but they ponied up the cash for four flights. I think part of the reason why that didn't happen is the bracket worked out perfectly so they didn't have to make any swaps from the top 8, so they didn't mess with it. Also maybe it helped that it was the first year of the tournament.

So maybe a better theory of how they operate might be, (1) See how the teams fall, if there are no interconference matchups, just go with it, (2) if there are swaps to be made, do the swaps that are the best in terms of avoiding air travel.

One other quick thought -- if the top 3 holds as is, I think it's a good chance Mercyhurst is headed to UMD. Because UMD can't get Wisconsin, if Dartmouth/Clarkson make it they'll give them to UNH to avoid a flight, if UConn or some Hockey East tourney upstart make it, they'll probably go to Harvard. It seems to me that where Wisconsin goes will be more dictated by who that 8th team is than anything else.

[dave1381]

So a few more thoughts: not a whole lot has changed since our last discussion on this topic. The projected bracket is still:

(8) UConn at No. 1 Harvard
(7) Mercyhurst at No. 2 UMD
(6) Wisco at No. 3 UNH
(5) SLU at No. 4 Minnesota

If this stays as is, it'll be an easy day for the committee. As good a bracket as you can get in terms of avoiding intraconference matchups, avoiding flights (since you have UConn at Harvard), and preserving bracket integrity.

A lot of potential motion between teams won't change things dramatically. Those matchups are pretty stable because the committee will avoid intraconference matchups. Wisco still has some outside shot at home ice but'll take a lot of wins over a Gopher team that hasn't lost in a while.

The tricky issue is what happens if Clarkson gets in over UConn. (if Clarkson gets in over Mercyhurst, easy, replace Clarkson with Mercyhurst above, or if some Hockey East team gets in, replace UConn/Mercyhurst). Or equivalently, if Dartmouth or some other ECACHL upstart makes it.

Under that scenario, you'd have the choice between, assuming avoiding intraconference is top priority, as the committee has made clear in the past:
(7) Mercyhurst at No. 1 Harvard
(8) Clarkson at No. 2 UMD
(6) Wisco at No. 3 UNH
(5) SLU at No. 4 Minnesota
vs.
(6) Wisco at No. 1 Harvard
(7) Mercyhurst at No. 2 UMD
(8) Clarkson at No. 3 UNH
(5) SLU at No. 4 Minnesota

So the first bracket is clearly the best in terms of integrity. My question is, is the second bracket better in terms of flight? The issue is, is sending Clarkson to UNH clearly far superior to sending Mercyhurst to Harvard in terms of costs? I'm not sure about that one. Last year, it was pretty clear that sending BC to Dartmouth, Harvard to Wisconsin, UMD to Mercyhurst dominated UMD to Dartmouth, BC to Wisconsin, Harvard to Mercyhurst. But it may be that Wisconsin and Harvard will be stuck together for a second year in a row.

Edit, some distance notes:
1st bracket, Mercyhurst to Harvard: 539 miles
2nd bracket, Clarkson to UNH: 304 miles

One other note: of course, if somehow Clarkson and a 4th ECACHL team make it, then Harvard's guaranteed the 3rd-place WCHA team, though in such a case scenario Harvard would deserve it. The worst-case bracket integrity scenario is if Harvard wins out and ends up drawing a WCHA team like Wisconsin or Minnesota that's ranked 5th in the country.

[dave1381]

1st bracket, Mercyhurst to Harvard: 539 miles
2nd bracket, Clarkson to UNH: 304 miles
So the general NCAA standard for distance is you have permission to fly if the distance is greater than 300 miles. So Clarkson-UNH is right on the bubble there. I did a city-to-city difference on google maps, might make a difference if the measure is rink-to-rink!

So I'm wondering about these cases. I assume Mercyhurst flew to Harvard in 2005. (I know the fans took a bus!!)

The more relevant question is how did SLU get to UNH in 2007? I'm sure they bus it for their usual series. But for NCAAs did they instead bus to Montreal, fly to Manchester/Boston, bus to Durham? One-way total that's about 130 miles ground, 260 air going through Manchester, instead of 300 on the ground.

[ARM]

The more relevant question is how did SLU get to UNH in 2007? I'm sure they bus it for their usual series. But for NCAAs did they instead bus to Montreal, fly to Manchester/Boston, bus to Durham? One-way total that's about 130 miles ground, 260 air going through Manchester, instead of 300 on the ground.When you add in having to go across the border, then through customs, it can't be any quicker to fly with a trip that includes Montreal. But maybe it makes the whole NCAA experience more exotic.

[dave1381]

Good point on the international travel.

...

I was also considering a "UMD season death sentence" bracket which hopefully we won't see:

UConn at (1) Harvard
Clarkson at (2) UNH
Mercyhurst at (3) Minnesota
Wisconsin at (4) SLU

So Wisco has three losses to UMD, Mercyhurst 1 and a tie, SLU has 2, and Minnesota has 1. I didn't work out all the details whether that would lead one team to jump another. With only 2 WCHA teams, it'd be a whole lot easier to preserve bracket integrity, with only one league having three teams in the tourney, but those quarterfinals would be a lot less interesting.

[ARM]

I was also considering a "UMD season death sentence" bracket which hopefully we won't see:

UConn at (1) Harvard
Clarkson at (2) UNH
Mercyhurst at (3) Minnesota
Wisconsin at (4) SLU

So Wisco has three losses to UMD, Mercyhurst 1 and a tie, SLU has 2, and Minnesota has 1.One of Wisconsin's losses is to a no-Gavrilova version of UMD, so I don't know that they'd necessarily get that game back. If you go back and refigure everything with UMD having a record of 3 and whatever, that would shoot some big holes in the RPI of Minnesota and Wisconsin. I guess they get most of those back through wins for the other teams in the conference, but UMD's nonconference mark goes from 3-0-1 to 0-4, and that hits every conference team in opponents' winning %, so yuck.

The simplest case would be if UMD just disqualified themselves from postseason play and let the forfeits come later, but I don't see that ever happening.

[TonyTheTiger20]

I was also considering a "UMD season death sentence"
Perhaps I'm missing something but...how in the heck would this happen???

[RStarr]

Perhaps I'm missing something but...how in the heck would this happen???
you need to get out more often.

[TonyTheTiger20]

Nevermind, I got it.

Holy crap!!! :eek:

[binnyrus]

The simplest case would be if UMD just disqualified themselves from postseason play and let the forfeits come later, but I don't see that ever happening.

You almost snuck this one in ARM!! :eek: This would be the "simplest case" in the mind of a deranged Gopher fan. ;) More likely, UMD will need to win the WCHA tournament, sans Iya, to make it in. More challenging, but not impossible.

I'm going to go back to closing my eyes and wishing as hard as I can for a miracle!! :rolleyes:

[dave1381]

interesting... if UMD were to win the WCHAs having forfeited their entire season minus the last 4 games, would the committee then pair them with Harvard, UMD being the lowest ranked team in the tournament? Hmm.

[ARM]

You almost snuck this one in ARM!! :eek: This would be the "simplest case" in the mind of a deranged Gopher fan. More likely, UMD will need to win the WCHA tournament, sans Iya, to make it in. More challenging, but not impossible."Deranged Gopher fan"? I'm afraid I'm guilty as charged.:o That might even be redundant.

I think they'd have to self-forfeit and then win the WCHA for the results to stand up. Because if they go in as a -- for want of a better term -- unearned #1 seed, then it throws into question even the validity of a tourney win. A #1 seed faces at most one of the #2/#3 seeds. Anybody who has followed the history of the WCHA knows that there is a big difference between teams' likelihood of winning the WCHA tourney if they have to beat two of UMD/UM/UW to be champs (nobody ever has). The #1 seed has won every time with the exception of 2001, when the Gophers lost in the semis. So IMO, if #8 is found to have been ineligible, then the only way a Bulldog NCAA championship could stand is if they forfeit those games in advance of the WCHA tourney.

I don't see any way the NCAA acts that fast, so either the Bulldogs or the WCHA would need to. I doubt that the league would unless it is very clearcut. As for UMD, I guess it would depend on whether or not they think that a) this player was ineligible; b) there are no other violations to be found. If they think "true" for both, then IMO, forfeiting those contests is the best course.

[ARM]

interesting... if UMD were to win the WCHAs having forfeited their entire season minus the last 4 games, would the committee then pair them with Harvard, UMD being the lowest ranked team in the tournament? Hmm.Presumably, it would be up to 6 games by then, plus at least 4 WCHA tourney games. But in any case, they'd still be lowest ranked team unless the ECAC low seed catches fire, in which case, the avoid intraconference clause puts us back in the same place.

Is there any applicable precendent for this in any sport?

[binnyrus]

then the only way a Bulldog NCAA championship could stand is if they forfeit those games in advance of the WCHA tourney.


I assumed this would be the case . . . the forfeiting of all games she played in, leaving only 6 others . . .

and I don't intend for more UMD discussion here . . . it would simply make the selection very interesting indeed.

[Skate79]

interesting... if UMD were to win the WCHAs having forfeited their entire season minus the last 4 games, would the committee then pair them with Harvard, UMD being the lowest ranked team in the tournament? Hmm.

Let me see if I understand this. UMD forfeits all but 4 or 6 of their games, plays the WCHA tournament, wins the tournament and gets a bid to the NCAAs? How do you explain that to Clarkson, UConn, Wayne State and Dartmouth, all of whom played their regular season untainted and by the rules? By doing this, the NCAA basically throws Pairwise out the window.

Also, in 2005, Providence won the HE tournament and was not invited to participate in the NCAA tournament if memory serves. So how does UMD warrant a bid based on winning the WCHA tourney? And supposing Clarkson or Dartmouth were to win the ECAC tournament yet not be ranked in the top 8 according to Pairwise? What then?

You forfeit, you lose out on participating in the NCAA tournament. Otherwise, you render the Pairwise meaningless.

[Brian Schulz]

Winning WCHAs would be an automatic bid. Providence earned Hockey East's automatic bid in 2005. If Clarkson or Dartmouth won ECACs from outside the top 8, also an automatic bid. CHA is the only league where there is no automatic bid.

[ARM]

How do you explain that to Clarkson, UConn, Wayne State and Dartmouth, all of whom played their regular season untainted and by the rules? By doing this, the NCAA basically throws Pairwise out the window.For UMD to forfeit and still make the NCAAs, they'd have to start by going to either Madison or Minneapolis and winning a best of three playoff, then returning home and winning a semifinal and final, so it is a challenge in its own right. The big difference is that the WCHA gives all 8 teams a shot at the autobid, while the ECAC only considers the top 8, HEA the top 4, and of course the CHA doesn't get an autobid. So a lot of the difference is in how the individual conferences chose to award their autobid.

[dave1381]

Now an intertesting question is if UMD forfeits, where do they get seeded in the WCHA tourney? It'd seem pretty unfair to have them play Wisco and Minnesota in the first round!! I think the fairest thing to do for all involved would be to give them the No. 3 seed, IMO. Of course, I'd only do that if it gained approval from a majority of the league's coaches. Similarly, if they make the tournament, I'd send UMD to the lowest-ranked non-WCHA host site, (probably UNH or SLU), and not the No. 1 seed. Again, it's a matter of balancing punishing UMD vs. being realistic about how good they are and being fair to their opponents.

[ARM]

I think the fairest thing to do for all involved would be to give them the No. 3 seed, IMO. Of course, I'd only do that if it gained approval from a majority of the league's coaches. Similarly, if they make the tournament, I'd send UMD to the lowest-ranked non-WCHA host site, (probably UNH or SLU), and not the No. 1 seed. Again, it's a matter of balancing punishing UMD vs. being realistic about how good they are and being fair to their opponents.I don't think that you can give them home ice, as they would get at #3. There really isn't a "fair" way to do this. No matter what is decided, at a WCHA or NCAA level, it will be immensely unfair to someone. Someone is going to be playing a team they shouldn't have to play at that stage, and the comparison of one team to another based on results versus UMD is impossible to fairly judge. If I'm Wisconsin or Minnesota, I'd welcome getting them on my own campus as opposed to a 1-game shot at the DECC. The problem comes if the RPI results are then viewed as being against a team with a 5-29 record, or whatever it would be, because they obviously wouldn't be your typical 5-win team.

[UMassHockey98]

Wow, I was just looking for thoughts on how the tourney would look this year and stumbled onto something unexpected. Just my two cents worth based on what I've read here...

It is correct that this is probably too quick for the plodding NCAA to investigate and act with a tourney ban. If UMD says from its internal investigation that the girl was ineligible and foreits all of the games in which she played then this is an admission of guilt on some level. UMD could still be allowed to play in the WCHA tourney as the low seed if the league allows but would be ineligible for the NCAA tourney bid if they won. The Maine men had the same scenario in 1994 when their scandal broke late in the year and they were stuck with the #8 seed in HE and sent to BU for the quarters which didn't go so well for Maine.

If UMD's admin, after forfeiting almost their whole season, allowed their team to play in the NCAA Tourney (only by winning WCHA because their record is now 5-25 or so), they would risk some extremely heavy sanctions when the NCAA does inevitably rule on it. The school should know full well that all of this is true and an NCAA ban would be a highly likely punishment and thus the team would have to forfeit its appearance anyway. Yet it would have ignored this inevitability and in the process deprived a worthy team like UConn or Clarkson that chance and UMD's punishment would probably go up a notch for this disobediance.

So, from what I'm reading here, I'd do your brackets without UMD. How the forfeits affect the almighty PWR, I don't know. But, if these allegations are true, I wouldn't plan on the Bulldogs in the NCAAs even if they win the conference. Like I said, it reminds me of the 1994 Maine men who were basically dead men skating as they awaited final word from the NCAA.