2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

[elbojpb]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

True or False: those teams have improved and have gotten more competitive.

The answer is true.

I agree completely that the conferences have statistically become more competitive. However, the D3 Interconference Records, which may be the only way to measure competitiveness, reveals that much of the improvement has been at the expense of the NE-10 teams, and each other.

My statement was no "appreciable improvement." A collective 2-14 score in year [whatever] of this AQ process is quite disappointing.

When this whole thing first started ~15 years ago, I was one of the most supportive of the AQs on these boards hoping that the entire landscape of D3 hockey would be more competitive (having watched some of the "no-class" double-digit blowouts). In my feeble estimation, that hope is now gone. In fact, not only has the overall quality of D3 hockey not improved, I believe that it has declined substantially. Ergo, some of the improvement of the "weaker" leagues can be attributed to the increased level of stink of other teams.

[joecct]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

Maybe the quality of players produced by the (heavily watered down) Eastern junior leagues has declined?

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

It doesn't say they were wrong about the whole "defending champion invitation", to me it says they were wrong about a Non Conference Final team making it in winning the National Title. I don't see anything being said that allowing a defending champion in the dance is an "absurd thought". Had they actually SAID that, I wouldn't have added the "dumbest thing ever". Get your panties out of a bunch. They said they were wrong. Wrong about what? A "defending champion" criteria or a non conference championship finalist making it in to the NCAA or wrong about thinking Trinity didn't deserve to be there? Once again, had they said that their "defending champion" argument was absurd (which is pretty much what I did, sorry your big boy pants can't handle the whole "one of the all time dumbest thing ever") I would have agreed 110% and probably added that it would go against everything people argued about for years of it was more "who" you were then "what you've done" THAT year that we heard all the time. Sorry I guess I need your secret decoder ring to be able to pull the phrase "my thought of a defending champion criteria is and was absurd" out of that context.

Like I said, you clearly misread him.

Now, don't make me say S-T-F-U.

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

Why would Williams and Plattsburg(h) be compared first on a national call when that work was already done by the regional committee? I think you need some new sources.

You just answered your own question.

Good heavens!

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

Maybe the quality of players produced by the (heavily watered down) Eastern junior leagues has declined?

This is a totally different discussion, but there are many reasons behind perhaps a supposed decline in D3 talent. Many more D1 schools exist for starters, thus drawing away those on the borderline D1 players who used to go to D3 schools but now attend schools like AHA teams. (Trevor Hills of Geneseo by way of St. Lawrence, though obviously not an AHA team, is a perfect example of that.)

I also believe there are far too many AAA youth organizations because everybody has to have an opportunity to play AAA hockey, so instead they get no real competition to drive their talent levels up. Just look at places like Boston and Buffalo. Seemingly every other year, a new AAA organization springs up, diluting the AAA talent level into mediocrity.

However, on the flipside, there are so many more players involved in hockey, that perhaps with higher numbers to choose from, it turns out to be a wash.

[PSUChamps2001]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

Like I said, you clearly misread him.

Now, don't make me say S-T-F-U.

And like I said, CLEARLY you have a secret decoder ring to pick that out of his statement...

...is that supposed to scare me? there...that will make it better....

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

And like I said, CLEARLY you have a secret decoder ring to pick that out of his statement...

It's called brains. Try engaging yours even if you are from Plattsburgh.

[ColdInRomney]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

it's called brains. Try engaging yours even if you are from plattsburgh.

Zing!

[PSUChamps2001]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

Zing!

It's actually a Zang since I only lived in Plattsburgh for about 2 years, but anyways....I would respond to him, but I wouldn't want to hurt his feelings.

[spwood]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

It's called brains. Try engaging yours even if you are from Plattsburgh.

Hey, hey, hey..... this was amusing right up to this comment... keep it classy.

[OZFEST]

Hey, hey, hey..... this was amusing right up to this comment... keep it classy.

Yes please go to your respective corners.....

[Sir Nubs]

You just answered your own question.

Good heavens!

That is most certainly not what you implied with your post. Especially by saying you had a source. Why would you need a source for regional rankings when Williams would obviously be ahead of Plattsburgh due to head-to-head. Do you just make this up as you go?

[Russell Jaslow]

That is most certainly not what you implied with your post. Especially by saying you had a source. Why would you need a source for regional rankings when Williams would obviously be ahead of Plattsburgh due to head-to-head. Do you just make this up as you go?

Because you (I thought) were implying that Plattsburgh got compared to UWSP. That never happened.

BTW, it was not obvious that Wiiliams beat out Plattsburgh just because of head to head. All the primary criteria were considered, and it was very close as many here assumed it would be. But as many assumed, Wiiliams won that comparison, but it was not obvious (they did look at secondary criteria, BTW.)

[OZFEST]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

Meanwhile FGCU won the first game of the Tourney, next up is Adrian, er North Carolina.

[joecct]

Re: 2016 NCAA Tournament Thread

Seed this tournament made up of just the conference winners
Adrian
Augsburg
Wisconsin-Stevens Point
Hobart
Geneseo
Trinity
Salem St.
Salve Regina

500 mile rule does not apply.