Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Regional Rankings
Collapse
X
-
Re: Regional Rankings
Originally posted by Fishman'81 View Post
How about this: if D-3 is so in love with the silly weekend AQ's, fine, but let the rest of the field be chosen via any objective measure. That could be KRACH, could be RPI, could be a PWR of some sort, but for God's sake make it transparent, already. Pretty sure that there's no iron-clad ridiculous D-3 by-law that precludes that, and the field therefore selects itself, and the committee will only be called-upon to site the games.
(Yes, another can of worms there.)
The NCAA operates national tournaments of conference champions, with other teams added to fill out the field. There is no claim that these are the best 11, 32, 68 teams (whatever the number is for that sport) in the country.
And it's clear the schools want it this way... and likely most of the public as well.
The schools want it because that's what they've chosen, of course. And, other than the few independents out there in whatever sport, EVERY team knows it has one simple, logical path to the NCAA tournament: win your conference's automatic bid. Unlike the B1G not making the College Football Playoff this year, in all other sports and divisions, the conference winner goes. Everyone else is, for lack of a better word, "filler."
Fans like it, too. Take the D1 basketball tournament. They want to see Florida Gulf Coast win its lower-echelon conference and then make it to the Sweet 16. That's the excitement of the tournament. I would rather see another Horizon, MEAC or Atlantic Sun team than the 8th B1G team. Not going to happen most times, of course. But Cinderella is usually the conference winner from a non-power league.
Of course, it is more problematic when D3 hockey or D3 football doesn't have nearly the same number of at-large bids as the D1 hoops monstrosity. But that tourney pays the bills, too.
So I get not liking it, but it is here for a reason, as I see it: the schools & conferences want to guarantee their opportunity & representation, respectively, in the national tournament. And when you accept that it is not claiming to be the tourney of the best "x" number of teams, it makes more sense. At least to me.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 Birdwatcher View PostRefer to the Static Sheets at www.ncaa.com and it may help you understand why the rankings are what the are. Only W/L percentage and SOS were used this week.
Comment
-
Re: Regional Rankings
Originally posted by GB Puck Fan View PostD3 is in love with the AQ? Try the entire NCAA outside of D1 football.
The NCAA operates national tournaments of conference champions, with other teams added to fill out the field. There is no claim that these are the best 11, 32, 68 teams (whatever the number is for that sport) in the country.
And it's clear the schools want it this way... and likely most of the public as well.
The schools want it because that's what they've chosen, of course. And, other than the few independents out there in whatever sport, EVERY team knows it has one simple, logical path to the NCAA tournament: win your conference's automatic bid. Unlike the B1G not making the College Football Playoff this year, in all other sports and divisions, the conference winner goes. Everyone else is, for lack of a better word, "filler."
Fans like it, too. Take the D1 basketball tournament. They want to see Florida Gulf Coast win its lower-echelon conference and then make it to the Sweet 16. That's the excitement of the tournament. I would rather see another Horizon, MEAC or Atlantic Sun team than the 8th B1G team. Not going to happen most times, of course. But Cinderella is usually the conference winner from a non-power league.
Of course, it is more problematic when D3 hockey or D3 football doesn't have nearly the same number of at-large bids as the D1 hoops monstrosity. But that tourney pays the bills, too.
So I get not liking it, but it is here for a reason, as I see it: the schools & conferences want to guarantee their opportunity & representation, respectively, in the national tournament. And when you accept that it is not claiming to be the tourney of the best "x" number of teams, it makes more sense. At least to me.
"FEAR THE BIRD!"
Comment
-
Re: Regional Rankings
Originally posted by Birdwatcher View PostAnother reason...In D1 Hoops....Look at Vermont (UVM) they have won 16 straight games in the conference, they will probably end up with the auto bid by winning the conference playoffs.....without that Vermont would NOT have a chance at dancing !
Comment
-
Re: Regional Rankings
Originally posted by Fishman'81 View PostSaid this a bunch of times, but if you're going to award AQ's, at least do so on the basis of the entire season. Far more equitable that way. It's utterly illogical to implement a system that allows a weekend tournament to negate the entire preceding body of work.
Of course, that doesn't mean the NCAA can't dictate how to decide the AQ, but apparently the schools don't want them to. Remember, it's the schools that make the decisions on how to run the NCAA. The NCAA merely enacts and enforces the schools' wishes.Russell Jaslow
[Former] SUNYAC Correspondent
U.S. College Hockey Online
Comment
-
Re: Regional Rankings
Originally posted by Birdwatcher View PostKRACH MEANS NOTIHING...the NCAA does their own metrics.
The D-3 "metrics" are not metrics at all. It's a sham, a shell-game, or however you want to parse it.
The committee is free to weigh the "criteria" in any fashion they care to, which completely negates any concept of statistical integrity... Then, it has yet another layer of BS available to them (as in: the "secondary criteria") to cover its tracks, if need be, and thus can select the AL's with impunity. It's a deeply flawed system, with no accountability to be seen.
It amazes me that so many people on here are just fine with this ruse, as though the D-3 process is as inevitable as Death and taxes.
Comment
-
Re: Regional Rankings
Originally posted by Birdwatcher View PostAnother reason...In D1 Hoops....Look at Vermont (UVM) they have won 16 straight games in the conference, they will probably end up with the auto bid by winning the conference playoffs.....without that Vermont would NOT have a chance at dancing !
Say, Vermont was the odds-on favorite to win America East (they were), then then decided to forfeit every RS game to stay home, stay healthy, and practice.
Then, they get to play in the AE tournament by default and win it going away, thus garnering a bid to The Dance via, what, three games?
You OK with that? It's more or less what happens under the current system, as-in the RS means nothing to many teams in many sports.Last edited by Fishman'81; 02-16-2018, 11:37 PM.
Comment
-
I feel every conference deserves at least one team in the tournament. I am a Syracuse fan, but not too many years ago SU was a three seed and UVM a 14.. UVM deserved to be there and proved it by beating Syracuse. I saw how much it meant for them and really understood the system for the first time.
"FEAR THE BIRD!"
Comment
-
Re: Regional Rankings
Originally posted by Birdwatcher View PostI feel every conference deserves at least one team in the tournament. I am a Syracuse fan, but not too many years ago SU was a three seed and UVM a 14.. UVM deserved to be there and proved it by beating Syracuse. I saw how much it meant for them and really understood the system for the first time.
The current system is beyond dumb, no way around that.
Comment
-
Re: Regional Rankings
I am not a fan of the post season tournament determining the AQ. It seems to me that the reg season champ should get the bid. However, the conferences want to keep everybody interested in the season, even if they aren't contending for the RS title. Some leagues give some meaning to the RS by not letting everyone into the playoffs - SUNAC takes the top 6, MIAC takes the top 5. NESCAC takes the top 8 (which to me is digging pretty deep). Conferences want their season ending tournament and they want the title to mean something, so they decided that whoever wins this gets to play in the NCAAs. This isn't unique to hockey. The only sport where it really doesn't work this way is football because there are no tournaments.2007-2008 ECAC East/NESCAC Interlock Pick 'em winner
2007-2008 Last Person Standing Winner,
2013-2014 Last Person Standing Winner (tie)
2016-2017 Last Person Standing Winner
Comment
-
Originally posted by Birdwatcher View PostKRACH MEANS NOTIHING...the NCAA does their own metrics.CCT '77 & '78
4 kids
5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)
”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
- Benjamin Franklin
Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).
I want to live forever. So far, so good.
Comment
Comment