Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Regional Rankings

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Regional Rankings

    Originally posted by joecct View Post
    Have the Prezidential Three (Elmira, Oswego, Norwich) all missed the NCAAs in the same year?
    Unless there is a massive amount of upsets in the AQ slots, Oswego is in. And may even be in with a lot of upsets.

    But to your point, I hate the Prez for that very reason...
    Russell Jaslow
    [Former] SUNYAC Correspondent
    U.S. College Hockey Online

    Comment


    • Re: Regional Rankings

      Geneseo needs to win the AQ to make the tournament. I'm skeptical they will get a Pool C due to their winning percentage against ranked teams.

      This Saturday in the SUNYAC semifinal will be the third time they've played Buff State this year and they are 1-0-1 against them this season. Buff State is the #10 ranked and last team ranked in the East, and there is a good chance a loss will make them unranked in the next rankings. A team is only considered ranked if they are ranked in either of the two final rankings.

      Geneseo's current winning percentage against ranked teams (from D3 Hockey Bracketology): .400 (1-2-2)

      Hypotheticals:
      RNK if Geneseo wins and Buff State becomes unranked: .000 (0-2-1)
      RNK if Geneseo wins and Buff State stays ranked: .500 (2-2-2)
      RNK if Geneseo loses and Buff State stays ranked: .333 (1-3-2)

      Obviously Geneseo must win Saturday because the AQ is the only sure way to get in, but their case without Buff State being ranked is really really slim. I guess a best case for Geneseo getting a Pool C is Buff State loses Saturday but manages to stay ranked due to higher ranked teams losing as well. Then Geneseo could possibly absorb another ranked loss to Oswego and get in, but only if the conference tournaments are chalk.

      So basically, win the AQ and make all of this moot
      #OneKnight

      Comment


      • Originally posted by joecct View Post
        Have the Prezidential Three (Elmira, Oswego, Norwich) all missed the NCAAs in the same year?
        Everyone has short term memories. 2015-16 all three missed.
        The Poster Formerly Known as Purple_and_Gold10©
        "The Prezidential Three - Elmira, Oswego, Norwich" © Joecct
        GO EAGLES!!! R.I.P. L.H. #4 In our hearts forever
        GO LAKERS!!!
        GO CADETS!!! R.I.P. Charlie Crosby '63
        "Reisweber trying to circle in front of the net, he does, HE SCORES! that's it! Oswego State has done it!! The Lakers take home the first NCAA title of any kind in school history. It's celebration time in Upstate New York!"
        Oswego State '09

        Comment


        • Re: Regional Rankings

          Originally posted by pete99race View Post
          Matt Webb's Bracketology Second Edition::


          http://d3hockey.com/bracketology/men/2018/feb-20
          Thanks for the link. I don't seek this out myself (because Matt attempts to logically analyze the unfathomable), but it's a fun read just the same. As a Utica fan, of course I'm most interested on his take on its chances...

          He cites UC's lousy SOS as a reason it's on the bubble -as well he should- but the irony of that situation is inescapable.

          The "old" ECAC-W was generally the strongest conference in D-3 from top to bottom in recent years. But, in order to garner an AQ, it added (arguably) warm bodies in Chatham and King's, which went an astoundingly dismal 2-45 this year, combined... And even worse, perennial-power Hobart defected, apparently as a result of the increased travel issues the dubious "additions" imposed.

          So what we have now is a far-flung conference that's waaaay weaker, yet somehow now worthy of an Auto-Bid (next year) without any logical basis to support that mandate..?

          Go figger, but it's another example of why AQ's possess no intrinsic validity at all.
          Last edited by Fishman'81; 02-23-2018, 04:34 PM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Fishman'81 View Post
            Thanks for the link. I don't seek this out myself (because Matt attempts to logically analyze the unfathomable), but it's a fun read just the same. As a Utica fan, of course I'm most interested on his take on its chances...

            He cites UC's lousy SOS as a reason it's on the bubble -as well he should- but the irony of that situation is inescapable.

            The "old" ECAC-W was generally the strongest conference in D-3 from top to bottom in recent years. But, in order to garner an AQ, it added (arguably) warm bodies in Chatham and King's, which went an astoundingly dismal 2-45 this year, combined... And even worse, perennial-power Hobart defected, apparently as a result of the increased travel issues the dubious "additions" imposed.

            So what we have now is a far-flung conference that's waaaay weaker, yet somehow now worthy of an Auto-Bid (next year) without any logical basis to support that mandate..?

            Go figger, but it's another example of why AQ's make no sense at all.
            I would imagine stability in the AQ probably influenced that decision as well.
            The Poster Formerly Known as Purple_and_Gold10©
            "The Prezidential Three - Elmira, Oswego, Norwich" © Joecct
            GO EAGLES!!! R.I.P. L.H. #4 In our hearts forever
            GO LAKERS!!!
            GO CADETS!!! R.I.P. Charlie Crosby '63
            "Reisweber trying to circle in front of the net, he does, HE SCORES! that's it! Oswego State has done it!! The Lakers take home the first NCAA title of any kind in school history. It's celebration time in Upstate New York!"
            Oswego State '09

            Comment


            • Re: Regional Rankings

              Originally posted by Fishman'81 View Post
              Thanks for the link. I don't seek this out myself (because Matt attempts to logically analyze the unfathomable), but it's a fun read just the same. As a Utica fan, of course I'm most interested on his take on its chances...

              He cites UC's lousy SOS as a reason it's on the bubble -as well he should- but the irony of that situation is inescapable.

              The "old" ECAC-W was generally the strongest conference in D-3 from top to bottom in recent years. But, in order to garner an AQ, it added (arguably) warm bodies in Chatham and King's, which went an astoundingly dismal 2-45 this year, combined... And even worse, perennial-power Hobart defected, apparently as a result of the increased travel issues the dubious "additions" imposed.

              So what we have now is a far-flung conference that's waaaay weaker, yet somehow now worthy of an Auto-Bid (next year) without any logical basis to support that mandate..?

              Go figger, but it's another example of why AQ's possess no intrinsic validity at all.
              Fish - The most telling clause from Matt's analysis ... "the overall weakness of the UCHC is a complete anchor" which (ironically) was historically its strength.

              BTW - Your insistent and incessant obsessing on the AQ debacle has me a bit worried;<) Hope to meet you in Placid if you decide to make the (short) trip.

              Comment


              • Re: Regional Rankings

                Originally posted by elbojpb View Post
                Fish - The most telling clause from Matt's analysis ... "the overall weakness of the UCHC is a complete anchor" which (ironically) was historically its strength.

                BTW - Your insistent and incessant obsessing on the AQ debacle has me a bit worried;<) Hope to meet you in Placid if you decide to make the (short) trip.
                Elbo, you used the "debacle" word -might be a bit of an overstatement- but not too far off the mark. The D-3 field is just too small to have nearly 70% of it automatically rewarded, don't you think? And I explicitly cited UC's ghastly SOS... Not sure we have an argument here.

                Anyway, Placid is about 3 1/2 hours on rural roads from Utica, but we'll be there should UC find a way... And there's a good local craft for you -on me- if such a thing happens.
                Last edited by Fishman'81; 02-23-2018, 07:13 PM.

                Comment


                • Re: Regional Rankings

                  Originally posted by Fishman'81 View Post
                  The D-3 field is just too small to have nearly 70% of it automatically rewarded, don't you think?
                  I've pounded on the AQ since last century, specifically those awarded to the ECAC/NE and MASCAC. On play-in night on this board, I've nearly lost my mind a couple of times, fortunately, the board upgrade erased all those posts.

                  But, the NCAA doesn't want the best teams in the nation, they want to spread around the recognition and host a tournament of champions. It's their game and their call, but I'd personally prefer the 12 best teams.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by elbojpb View Post
                    I've pounded on the AQ since last century, specifically those awarded to the ECAC/NE and MASCAC. On play-in night on this board, I've nearly lost my mind a couple of times, fortunately, the board upgrade erased all those posts.

                    But, the NCAA doesn't want the best teams in the nation, they want to spread around the recognition and host a tournament of champions. It's their game and their call, but I'd personally prefer the 12 best teams.
                    Best is so subjective. It's what I hate about the current College Football Playoff. The most deserving should be rewarded. For most teams (Non-Pool B, DIII hockey is a bit unique in that regard) the shot at the NCAA tournament js clear: win your tourney. It's fair for everyone. And if the SUNYAC champ is really so much better than the MASCAC champ (for example) then they get rewarded by playing an inferior opponent at home in the first round.
                    Norwich '13

                    2017-2018 Last Person Standing Champion

                    Comment


                    • Re: Regional Rankings

                      Originally posted by elbojpb View Post
                      I've pounded on the AQ since last century, specifically those awarded to the ECAC/NE and MASCAC. On play-in night on this board, I've nearly lost my mind a couple of times, fortunately, the board upgrade erased all those posts.

                      But, the NCAA doesn't want the best teams in the nation, they want to spread around the recognition and host a tournament of champions. It's their game and their call, but I'd personally prefer the 12 best teams.
                      And as I've said since the days of time, you will NEVER get the "12 best teams" with a restriction on games able to be played. Especially cross region. No KRACH system can fix that. Not with so many teams in DIII. On top of that we should probably go back to a best of 3 game series for the Quarter Finals, Semi Finals and Finals. I mean hey, if we want the "best" teams in, we better make sure the "best" team wins.

                      Secondly, while I semi agree that the ECAC NE was an "unworthy" conference to receive a bid, let's play devils advocate here. If I told you 10-15 years ago Lebanon Valley would finish tied for 2nd in the defunct ECAC West, UNE would be a top 5 Team in the NATION, Endicott is playing hockey, and Salve Regina is more than just a funny name to say, you would have laughed yourself to the ground. Those same ECAC NE teams/Conferences that you carried on about 10-15 years ago are now some of the best teams in DIII. If you don't think having that auto bid was a MAJOR factor in that,.......

                      Now before some get all upset and in an uproar, it takes MORE than having an auto bid to make a competitive team. The school has to WANT to do it. So no, the auto bid isn't the ONLY reason these teams went from the laughing stock to a competitive contender, but it has a major roll IMO. I was actually right there with you years ago as I fell DIII doesn't have the numbers to support so many weak AQ's. If every conference was like our "Power 5's" then yes. DIII has too many "weak sisters" who just putting a team on ice is an accomplishment.

                      The fact of the matter is, complaining on a message board and thinking your opinion matters to the NCAA gets you no where (not you in particular elbojpb). The NCAA will not change their rules for sports because hockey is "different". I'd love to see a 16 team field, AQ's and Pool C bids, 40 game seasons, 3 game series, and more cross over games. But I've come to the reality you will not change the NCAA. The coaches don't care/want it. The AD's don't care/want it. So why should we think just because we want it, we will get it? The process, while not perfect, is nearly predictable these days. There is a reason why people like Webb and Ray pretty much nail the teams every year lately. When you understand the process, accept the process, and live with the process, its not hard to see. Instead, some people would rather ***** and complain and cause more confusion when it's pretty simple to see who is in, why, and who is out, and why.

                      Sorry, end of rant. Cheers.
                      Remy Babineaux
                      remyb616@gmail.com
                      D3FHL Web Page

                      Comment


                      • Re: Regional Rankings

                        Originally posted by Fishman'81 View Post
                        Elbo, you used the "debacle" word -might be a bit of an overstatement- but not too far off the mark. The D-3 field is just too small to have nearly 70% of it automatically rewarded, don't you think? And I explicitly cited UC's ghastly SOS... Not sure we have an argument here.

                        .
                        As opposed to football, where IIRC just 5 of 32 bids (what, 16%?) are true at large, hockey is in a better spot...
                        Last edited by GB Puck Fan; 02-24-2018, 12:33 PM.
                        St. Norbert College Green Knights
                        NCHA regular season champs: 97-99, 02-08, 10-12, 14, 16, 19
                        NCHA playoff champs: 98-99, 03-05, 07-08, 10-14, 17-19, 24
                        NCAA Champions: 2008, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2018
                        ---
                        SNC women: 2013 O'Brien Cup Champions

                        Comment


                        • Re: Regional Rankings

                          Originally posted by NU Pastime View Post
                          Best is so subjective. It's what I hate about the current College Football Playoff. The most deserving should be rewarded. For most teams (Non-Pool B, DIII hockey is a bit unique in that regard) the shot at the NCAA tournament js clear: win your tourney. It's fair for everyone. And if the SUNYAC champ is really so much better than the MASCAC champ (for example) then they get rewarded by playing an inferior opponent at home in the first round.
                          "Best" doesn't have to be subjective... There are reasonable, objective, metrics out there that make a whole lot more sense.

                          Example: when D-1 football did it that way -with an objective ranking- there was a great hue and cry when TCU won its last game, but slipped out of the top-4... Thing is, they were overtaken by another team (don't remember who, Baylor?) that also won its last game, and vs. a much better opponent. (SOS.)

                          That's just sound statistical analysis, not a beauty-contest, and I don't see what's wrong with that.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Regional Rankings

                            Originally posted by PSUChamps2001 View Post
                            And as I've said since the days of time, you will NEVER get the "12 best teams" with a restriction on games able to be played. Especially cross region. No KRACH system can fix that. Not with so many teams in DIII. On top of that we should probably go back to a best of 3 game series for the Quarter Finals, Semi Finals and Finals. I mean hey, if we want the "best" teams in, we better make sure the "best" team wins.

                            Secondly, while I semi agree that the ECAC NE was an "unworthy" conference to receive a bid, let's play devils advocate here. If I told you 10-15 years ago Lebanon Valley would finish tied for 2nd in the defunct ECAC West, UNE would be a top 5 Team in the NATION, Endicott is playing hockey, and Salve Regina is more than just a funny name to say, you would have laughed yourself to the ground. Those same ECAC NE teams/Conferences that you carried on about 10-15 years ago are now some of the best teams in DIII. If you don't think having that auto bid was a MAJOR factor in that,.......

                            Now before some get all upset and in an uproar, it takes MORE than having an auto bid to make a competitive team. The school has to WANT to do it. So no, the auto bid isn't the ONLY reason these teams went from the laughing stock to a competitive contender, but it has a major roll IMO. I was actually right there with you years ago as I fell DIII doesn't have the numbers to support so many weak AQ's. If every conference was like our "Power 5's" then yes. DIII has too many "weak sisters" who just putting a team on ice is an accomplishment.

                            The fact of the matter is, complaining on a message board and thinking your opinion matters to the NCAA gets you no where (not you in particular elbojpb). The NCAA will not change their rules for sports because hockey is "different". I'd love to see a 16 team field, AQ's and Pool C bids, 40 game seasons, 3 game series, and more cross over games. But I've come to the reality you will not change the NCAA. The coaches don't care/want it. The AD's don't care/want it. So why should we think just because we want it, we will get it? The process, while not perfect, is nearly predictable these days. There is a reason why people like Webb and Ray pretty much nail the teams every year lately. When you understand the process, accept the process, and live with the process, its not hard to see. Instead, some people would rather ***** and complain and cause more confusion when it's pretty simple to see who is in, why, and who is out, and why.

                            Sorry, end of rant. Cheers.
                            So, you say bend-over and take it, because there's no way in the world the process can possibly be made more equitable, owing to the fact that the D-3 hockey by-laws were something Moses brought down from The Mount, and are completely immutable..?

                            Okaaaay.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Regional Rankings

                              Originally posted by GB Puck Fan View Post
                              As opposed to football, where IIRC just 5 of 32 bids (what, 16%?) are true at large, hockey is in a better spot...
                              Huh? No AQ's in D-1 football, last I checked. And FCS has a field of 16. Not as bad as D-3 hockey, by any means.
                              Last edited by Fishman'81; 02-24-2018, 06:04 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Regional Rankings

                                Originally posted by elbojpb View Post
                                I've pounded on the AQ since last century, specifically those awarded to the ECAC/NE and MASCAC. On play-in night on this board, I've nearly lost my mind a couple of times, fortunately, the board upgrade erased all those posts.

                                But, the NCAA doesn't want the best teams in the nation, they want to spread around the recognition and host a tournament of champions. It's their game and their call, but I'd personally prefer the 12 best teams.
                                "Never doubt that a small group of dedicated, committed people can change the world; indeed it's the only thing that ever has."

                                (Yup, I'm pulling-out Margaret Mead on this one!)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X