Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Boring 2018 Bracketology Thread - Here we go again...

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by Numbers View Post
    Which won't be necessary to fill the barn. So, I think the committee goes with Proper seeding first, and MN vs UND 2nd.

    Btw, where are you from?
    Maine.

    It isn't about selling seats, it's the marquee match.
    Although ESPN wouldn't care. They'd hype the hell out of Notre Dame vs BC though. Two BCS teams!

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Boring 2018 Bracketology Thread - Here we go again...

      A quick question (and apologies in advance if I missed it quickly scanning this and related threads) - is there a rule currently in place that prevents sub-0.500 teams from being awarded at-large NCAA bids? I ask because looking at the current PWR there are teams such as UNO, Western, and Penn State (and even perhaps BU) currently in PWR contention for bids that could conceivably end their seasons fairly soon with just such an overall record. The fratricide in the NCHC is especially acute, but will it actually knock a fellow conference member right out of the National Tournament? I realize there's still a lot of hockey yet to be played, and this concern may end up being moot, but I'm curious nonetheless whether such an eventuality has officially been factored into the Committee's selection criteria ...

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Boring 2018 Bracketology Thread - Here we go again...

        Originally posted by jeteye1717 View Post
        A quick question (and apologies in advance if I missed it quickly scanning this and related threads) - is there a rule currently in place that prevents sub-0.500 teams from being awarded at-large NCAA bids? I ask because looking at the current PWR there are teams such as UNO, Western, and Penn State (and even perhaps BU) currently in PWR contention for bids that could conceivably end their seasons fairly soon with just such an overall record. The fratricide in the NCHC is especially acute, but will it actually knock a fellow conference member right out of the National Tournament? I realize there's still a lot of hockey yet to be played, and this concern may end up being moot, but I'm curious nonetheless whether such an eventuality has officially been factored into the Committee's selection criteria ...
        This was discussed upthread, and the answer is that, yes, the .500 rule exists. In practice here, it will get really dicey...Next week: NoDak @ miami, CC @ omaha, UMD @ WMU. Currently, NoDak is a +4, so it's unlikely they fall below .500 (Would need to go 0-4 and then lose their NCHC 1/4final), without falling from the field anyway.
        Miami is not in the discussion
        CC Could be, but not without a real run, which would have them safe on the .500 rule
        For kicks, let's say that Omaha goes 0-1-1, UMD and WMU go 1-1, then....
        Omaha..even
        UMD...+3
        WMU...even
        The last week has...WMU @ CC and Omaha @ UMD. Let's say CC goes 1-0-1, and Omaha goes 0-2...then
        UMD..safe
        WMU -1
        Omaha -2
        But, now Omaha sweeps the first round playoffs.....(even) and the loses their semi-final. I think they would be (-1), but probably still in the field.

        Like you say, it's a real situation.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Boring 2018 Bracketology Thread - Here we go again...

          Keep in mind the NCHC has a 3rd place game which could end up a big factor.
          "If you leave ignorance and stupidity alone, ignorance and stupidity will think it's ok."
          -Gallagher

          R.I.P.
          Grandpa G. ~ Feb 11, 1918-Oct. 6, 1999
          Grandma ~ Jan 2004
          Dad ~ Nov. 4, 1958-April 21, 2008
          Grandpa S. ~ June 21, 1932-November 11, 2013

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Numbers View Post
            I'm not sure what you fellows are actually saying.
            What I’m saying is that I oppose efforts to give teams that already have the high ground — in the form of weaker opponents — an additional home ice advantage in a sport where it is notoriously hard to win in another team’s arena.

            At that point you’re just letting the Frozen Four participants host exhibition games.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Boring 2018 Bracketology Thread - Here we go again...

              Originally posted by Schmitty View Post
              What I’m saying is that I oppose efforts to give teams that already have the high ground — in the form of weaker opponents — an additional home ice advantage in a sport where it is notoriously hard to win in another team’s arena.

              At that point you’re just letting the Frozen Four participants host exhibition games.
              Got it. I appreciate the input.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Boring 2018 Bracketology Thread - Here we go again...

                Originally posted by Schmitty View Post
                What I’m saying is that I oppose efforts to give teams that already have the high ground — in the form of weaker opponents — an additional home ice advantage in a sport where it is notoriously hard to win in another team’s arena.

                At that point you’re just letting the Frozen Four participants host exhibition games.
                I'm neither for nor against home games in the tournament, but I think we ought to pick a rationale and stick with it. Right now, we insist on regional sites because they are neutral and "fair," but then we have host schools and we mess with bracket integrity by swapping teams to boost attendance. What are we trying to achieve?

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by purpleinnebraska View Post
                  What are we trying to achieve?
                  To make as much money as possible for the NCAA.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Boring 2018 Bracketology Thread - Here we go again...

                    Originally posted by ticapnews View Post
                    To make as much money as possible for the NCAA.
                    Then home ice in arenas of at least 5000 makes the most sense.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by purpleinnebraska View Post
                      Then home ice in arenas of at least 5000 makes the most sense.
                      But then you have the occasional 1 seed whose arena isn't large enough or is too remote. The NCAA can make more money long-term with regional hosts paying out the *** for the right to lose money on the games (seriously, read the agreement the NCAA makes hosts sign) and just tweak the brackets when they need to. I would love to see the financials for the hockey regionals.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Boring 2018 Bracketology Thread - Here we go again...

                        Nowadays does anyone appreciate how hard it would be to keep rinks open for the potential of a couple games?

                        Agganis will no doubt have events planned months in advance. Mookie is sure other barns also schedule stuff. You are asking buildings to forgo revenue with no guarantee at all.
                        a legend and an out of work bum look a lot alike, daddy.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by ticapnews View Post
                          But then you have the occasional 1 seed whose arena isn't large enough or is too remote. The NCAA can make more money long-term with regional hosts paying out the *** for the right to lose money on the games (seriously, read the agreement the NCAA makes hosts sign) and just tweak the brackets when they need to. I would love to see the financials for the hockey regionals.
                          This is exactly what leads to the discussion. Grand Rapids, MI no longer bids because they lose money. I doubt you'll see a Cincinnati bid again. Notre Dame hosted on campus a couple years ago and the committee said.. No one else bid. Now, Allentown is trying for two years. The only chance they have of making it work is it the committee treats them like a third eastern regional.

                          West is going to be ok, because NoDak will bid every year at either Sioux Falls or Fargo, and never lose money doing it. In theory,St Cloud or Duluth could do the same because their rinks are not on campus (I think). East is usually fine, but Albany is out of the rotation, because not enough fans go up there.

                          All this would take is a couple of lean years in the East, and no one would bid. Then what would the committee do?
                          Last edited by Numbers; 02-19-2018, 11:14 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Numbers View Post
                            This is exactly what leads to the discussion. Grand Rapids, MI no longer bids because they lose money. I doubt you'll see a Cincinnati bid again. Notre Dame hosted on campus a couple years ago and the committee said.. No one else bid. Now, Allentown is trying for two years. The only chance they have of making it work is it the committee treats them like a third eastern regional.

                            West is going to be ok, because NoDak will bid every year at either Sioux Falls or Fargo, and never lose money doing it. In theory,St Cloud or Duluth could do the same because their rinks are not on campus (I think). East is usually fine, but Albany is out of the rotation, because not enough fans go up there.

                            All this would take is a couple of lean years in the East, and no one would bid. Then what would the committee do?
                            The committee can count on suckers like the Portland, Maine bid. It will be a financial mess if it comes here. Especially if Maine or New Hampshire don't make it (which isn't exactly a long shot).

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by ticapnews View Post
                              The committee can count on suckers like the Portland, Maine bid. It will be a financial mess if it comes here. Especially if Maine or New Hampshire don't make it (which isn't exactly a long shot).
                              Has it been there before?

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Numbers View Post
                                Has it been there before?
                                No, but they bid for at least 2019 and 2020. The Icebreaker in 2015 was their audition and dry run. I think the tournament went well but there is a huge difference between that tournament and hosting a regional - particularly financial. Looking over the application I can't see how the university plans to make a cent, and it will likely cost them $50-100000. That's money we don't have.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X