Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 116

Thread: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    43

    NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    While it is OK for tournament winners to go to NCAA’s, the next in line should be the conference seasonal top finisher, not skipped over for conference teams further down. This happened to BC twice now. And BC is A proven tough NCAA tournament competitor. Bemidji got robbed last year. This year Providence and Northeastern had weak Nonconference opponents. Also what’s up with selecting Penn State? They had a losing conference record. A Big Ten team last won the NCAA Championship in 2007. The apparent reason for their conference was to get more teams in the NCAAs.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    856

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    BC finished 3rd in HE last season. They wouldn’t have been “next in line”.

  3. #3
    (Comrade Fox)
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Burlington, VT
    Posts
    1,122

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    I'm going to say OOC games don't matter enough. Namely in the quality of opposition. You can't help who you play in conference, but you CAN help who you play in OOC. Like, if you're struggling against a good OOC, that's understandable, especially with a young team like BC's. If you're playing only cupcakes, then you're not building a quality resume.
    https://twitter.com/TheVTHockeyBlog
    https://thevermonthockeyblog.wordpress.com/

    Frozen Four: '96, '09
    NCAA Tournament: '88, '96, '97, '09, '10, '14

    UVM record in games I've attended as a student:

    Men's: 22-22-4
    Women's: 11-17-7

    /r/collegehockey moderator
    Fan of the UVM Catamounts, Charlotte Hornets, Oakland A's, and Philadelphia Union

  4. #4
    Capt
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    I'm on a boat/TPAFL
    Posts
    12,523

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    Do better in conference and OOC, and you don't need to worry about anything!

    Simple. Math.

  5. #5
    there's a good buck in that racket.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    oasis in the middle east
    Posts
    40,506

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    Thought the reason for the big 10 conf was so mich st never again makes the tourney

  6. #6
    there's a good buck in that racket.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    oasis in the middle east
    Posts
    40,506
    Quote Originally Posted by hockeyplayer1015 View Post
    Simple. Math.
    So true, so true

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Mankato
    Posts
    415

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    Quote Originally Posted by freedomfighter View Post
    While it is OK for tournament winners to go to NCAA’s, the next in line should be the conference seasonal top finisher, not skipped over for conference teams further down. This happened to BC twice now. And BC is A proven tough NCAA tournament competitor. Bemidji got robbed last year. This year Providence and Northeastern had weak Nonconference opponents. Also what’s up with selecting Penn State? They had a losing conference record. A Big Ten team last won the NCAA Championship in 2007. The apparent reason for their conference was to get more teams in the NCAAs.
    So you would be OK with both Mercyhurst and Air Force making the NCAA from Atlantic Hockey?

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14,075

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    Scheduling a cream puff non conference is the way to go

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14,075
    Quote Originally Posted by Middle Street View Post
    BC finished 3rd in HE last season. They wouldn’t have been “next in line”.
    Semantics much? Believe it was a three way tie for first which means you share the RS title.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    856

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    Quote Originally Posted by J.D. View Post
    Semantics much? Believe it was a three way tie for first which means you share the RS title.
    Thin skinned much? His argument is misleading and I was pointing out that BC finished 3rd on tiebreakers. What happens if there's a 3 way tie in the AHA or WCHA, should all three make it? You need to draw a line somewhere.

  11. #11
    2016 Hockey East Overlords
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    484
    Quote Originally Posted by J.D. View Post
    Scheduling a cream puff non conference is the way to go
    You keep saying this but I really don't think it's true. Look at Northeastern, they were 23-9-5 and a 3 seed. 7 teams in the country had less than 10 losses this year, and their rankings were 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. 6, and Northeastern. If you flip almost any of their regular season wins to a loss, including a loss in the Beanpot, they finish 22-10-5 and miss the field in favor of Minnesota. A 10 loss Northeastern team would have been the only 22 win team to miss the field, the only 10 loss team to miss the field, the only sub-12 loss team to miss the field, and the only sub-13 loss non-AHC/WCHA team to miss the field. They may have barely ended up on the right side of the cliff, but the cliff was there, and to say playing the weak schedule didn't hurt them is clearly untrue. If they lose a single game of the six against Atlantic hockey they miss the field, and that seems just as much of a risk as playing a harder schedule and winning zero times, like another Hockey East team we won't mention.
    Last edited by TheRevengeance; 04-08-2018 at 12:41 PM.

  12. #12
    Anti-Semantic The Rube's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Chez Rube
    Posts
    115,602

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    A strong OOC is a major key to getting in the tourney. Let's break it down for everyone: 2 + 2 = 4. This is called simple math. This is what gets you into the tourney.
    Never really developed a taste for tequila. Kind of hard to understand how you make a drink out of something that sharp, inhospitable. Now, bourbon is easy to understand.
    Tastes like a warm summer day. -Raylan Givens

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    14,075

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    For an autobid, it does make more sense to reward a regular season champion. Much larger sample than a conference tournament. Leagues can set their tiebreakers to determine who gets autobid in the event of a tie.

    But i realize there are unbalanced league schedules and also the drama/chance to bring in some money for the league with a tournament. But in theory it makes more sense to reward a RS champion.

  14. #14
    Anti-Semantic The Rube's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Chez Rube
    Posts
    115,602

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    For the weaker conferences, hard to get quality OOC, and the conferences are weak enough, the teams would NEVER make the tourney if the autobid didn't exist.

    As for conferences like HE, B1G, and Nacho, conference tourneys are just money grabs.
    Never really developed a taste for tequila. Kind of hard to understand how you make a drink out of something that sharp, inhospitable. Now, bourbon is easy to understand.
    Tastes like a warm summer day. -Raylan Givens

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    framingham, ma
    Posts
    5,296

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    Quote Originally Posted by J.D. View Post
    For an autobid, it does make more sense to reward a regular season champion. Much larger sample than a conference tournament. Leagues can set their tiebreakers to determine who gets autobid in the event of a tie.

    But i realize there are unbalanced league schedules and also the drama/chance to bring in some money for the league with a tournament. But in theory it makes more sense to reward a RS champion.
    Depends on what you mean by "makes sense". It makes sense to reward your regular season champion if your point of view is fairness.

    It makes sense to reward your tournament champion because (for the power conferences, in an ordinary year) your regular season champion will probably make it anyway. Giving the autobid to the tournament champion improves your chances to get more teams in the tournament if the tournament winner wouldn't have made it on their regular season record. Also, giving the autobid to the tournament champion is more likely to get the "hot" team in the tournament, and often the "hot" team wins, not necessarily the team that had the best record over the course of the season.

    And, as you say or imply, giving the autobid to the regular season champion could render your tournament meaningless, and could mean that about half the teams in your conference have nothing to play for after Christmas.

  16. #16
    (Comrade Fox)
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Burlington, VT
    Posts
    1,122

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    Quote Originally Posted by J.D. View Post
    Scheduling a cream puff non conference is the way to go
    Michigan's best win outside the Big Ten was *48th* in the PWR
    https://twitter.com/TheVTHockeyBlog
    https://thevermonthockeyblog.wordpress.com/

    Frozen Four: '96, '09
    NCAA Tournament: '88, '96, '97, '09, '10, '14

    UVM record in games I've attended as a student:

    Men's: 22-22-4
    Women's: 11-17-7

    /r/collegehockey moderator
    Fan of the UVM Catamounts, Charlotte Hornets, Oakland A's, and Philadelphia Union

  17. #17
    2009 NCAA Champions Sean Pickett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Posts
    2,334

    Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

    Quote Originally Posted by Brenthoven View Post
    For the weaker conferences, hard to get quality OOC, and the conferences are weak enough, the teams would NEVER make the tourney if the autobid didn't exist.

    As for conferences like HE, B1G, and Nacho, conference tourneys are just money grabs.
    Maybe, but the first league tournaments, the WCHA and the ECAC tournaments, were created to have the teams under consideration for the NCAA tournament to win their way in. For the ECAC the tournament champion was given automatic selection with the second team being selected by committee, and for the WCHA they had playoffs to determine which 2 teams would make the NCAA tournament 17 out of 22 years (1960-61, 1966-76 and 1978-81), with a single champion 5 years (1962-65 and 1977) with the runner-up being selected along with the winner each year.

    Quote Originally Posted by freedomfighter View Post
    While it is OK for tournament winners to go to NCAA’s, the next in line should be the conference seasonal top finisher, not skipped over for conference teams further down. This happened to BC twice now. And BC is A proven tough NCAA tournament competitor. Bemidji got robbed last year.
    Quote Originally Posted by J.D. View Post
    For an autobid, it does make more sense to reward a regular season champion. Much larger sample than a conference tournament. Leagues can set their tiebreakers to determine who gets autobid in the event of a tie.

    But i realize there are unbalanced league schedules and also the drama/chance to bring in some money for the league with a tournament. But in theory it makes more sense to reward a RS champion.
    Each league with an autobid is allowed to award it as they see fit and all see fit to award it to their tournament champion. There is a lot of discussion about this issue on the Power rankings making conference play irrelevant thread, including several post by me including:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Pickett View Post
    Back in 1994 Colorado College rose from last place the the previous season to win the WCHA regular season, but after being upset in the WCHA quarterfinals 2 games to 1, they were not selected for the NCAA tournament. There was much complaining about how autobids were awarded and how the regular season champion deserved an autobid. Supposedly the committee then added a "CC Rule" that the RS champion of each league would always be selected until the NCAA learned of the rule and let it be known that each league was to get only one autobid, determined by each league. I have no idea if such a rule was ever invoked, but no regular season champion missed the tournament until the formation of the MAAC in 1998-99, when no MAAC team made the NCAA tournament. The following season the CHA was formed and Niagara won the regular season and tournament titles and made the NCAA field as an at-large team. Then in 2001 Clarkson won the ECAC regular season, was upset in the quarterfinals 2 games to 1 and missed the NCAA tournament.

    As for byes, the NCAA tournament had them from 1988 through 2002. In 1988 no teams won both league titles, in 1989 only one did, in 1990 all four did and in 1991 three teams did. Of the 8 teams only one, Clarkson in 1991, failed to get a bye. Again there was much complaining about how a regular season and tournament champion deserved a bye, with many calling for a "Clarkson Rule" to insure that would happen. To my knowledge no such rule was ever invoked by the committee, but no other double champion from Hockey East, ECAC, CCHA or WCHA missed the bye until Michigan in 2002. Niagara (CHA, 2000) and Mercyhurst (MAAC, 2001) also won both leagues titles, but did not receive byes.
    and

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Pickett View Post
    Since the NCAA Tournament expanded to 8 teams 34 regular season champions have not made the tournament. Three in the 8 team field, 2 coming from the ECAC as it split into three division each with its own regular season champion, eight in the 12 team field, and twenty-three in the 16 team field.
    Eight Teams
    1981 – ECAC East – Boston College
    1983 – CCHA – Bowling Green
    1984 – ECAC Ivy – Harvard
    Twelve Teams
    1992 – ECAC – Harvard
    1994 – WCHA – Colorado College
    1999 – MAAC – Quinnipiac
    2000 – MAAC – Quinnipiac
    2001 – ECAC – Clarkson
    2001 – CHA – Alabama Huntsville
    2002 – MAAC – Mercyhurst
    2002 – CHA – Wayne State*
    Sixteen Teams
    2003 – CHA – Alabama Huntsville
    2004 – ECAC – Colgate
    2004 – CHA – Bemidji State
    2005 – AH – Quinnipiac
    2006 – ECAC – Dartmouth (tie)
    2006 – ECAC – Colgate (tie)
    2006 – CHA – Niagara
    2007 – AH – RIT
    2007 – CHA – Niagara
    2008 – AH – Army
    2008 – CHA – Bemidji State
    2009 – AH – RIT (tie)
    2011 – AH – RIT
    2014 – AH – Mercyhurst
    2015 – AH – Robert Morris
    2016 – B1G – Minnesota
    2016 – WCHA – Michigan Tech
    2016 – AH – Robert Morris
    2017 – HEA – Boston College (tie)
    2017 – WCHA – Bemidji State
    2017 – AH – Canisius
    2018 – HEA – Boston College
    2018 – AH - Mercyhurst

    * also won league tournament, but league had no autobid

    By conference the MAAC/Atlantic Hockey has 13; the CHA had 7; the ECAC has 7; the WCHA has 3; Hockey East has 2; the B1G has 1; and the CCHA had 1.
    I also posted the 1974 NCAA selection criteria in its own thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Pickett View Post
    In looking up some information on the National Invitational Hockey Tournament I came across the following information in the 12 February 1974 issue of TIHN (The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter):

    SELECTION FOR THE NCAA's
    The information below has been extracted from the 1974 NCAA Ice Hockey Championship Handbook
    The National Collegiate Ice Hockey Championship provides for a single-elimination tournament comprised of two teams selected from the East and two from the West. The NCAA Ice Hockey Rules and Tournament Committee will seed the teams prior to the start of the tournament. In even numbered years, East #1 will meet West #2 on Thursday and Friday's game will match West #1 and East #2. In odd-numbered years, Thursday's opener will be West #1 against East #2, and East #1 will play West #2 on Friday.
    The NCAA Ice Hockey Rules and Tournament Committee shall make the final selections for the Championship. The chairman of that Committee will appoint an eastern and western advisory committee no later than January 15. Each advisory committee shall consist of a chairman, appointed from among the members of the Rules and Tournament Committee, and two members. There will also be two alternates designated to replace one of the three members should his team be under consideration for selection.
    The chairman of each advisory committee will contact all NCAA member institutions in his area which sponsor intercollegiate ice hockey to determine which colleges would compete in the championship if selected. If a college states that it will not compete, or if no reply is received, that institution will no longer be considered by the advisory committee.
    Each advisory committee shall rank the top five teams in its area (without an NCAA playoff) and submit its recommendation to the Rules and Tournament Committee not later than Friday, March 8. The final selection will then be made on a conference call among the members of the Rules and Tournament Committee not later than Sunday, March 10. Announcement of the four teams selected will be made by the NCAA national office.

    The following principles are adhered to by the advisory committees:
    1. All NCAA members which sponsor intercollegiate ice hockey will be considered.
    2. The winner of the ECAC Tournament shall be one of the teams representing the East.
    3 The winners of the two sectional tournaments in the western region (WCHA Playoffs) should not be regarded as automatic selections, but the playoff games should be considered in the selection process.
    4. A minimum of 15 games against college opponents should be played by each team under consideration.
    5. The advisory committee should consider all games played.
    6. The strength of each team's schedule should be given serious consideration.
    7. Depth of material should be considered only if other factors are equal.
    Nowhere in the criteria is being the regular season champion mentioned, although strength of schedule is mentioned.

    Sean
    Last edited by Sean Pickett; 04-08-2018 at 06:54 PM.
    Women's Hockey East Champions 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2010
    Men's NCAA Champions 2009, 1995, 1978, 1972, 1971

    Watch BU Hockey highlights
    NCAA Hockey Financials
    Women's Division I Longest Hockey Games

  18. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by Middle Street View Post
    Thin skinned much? His argument is misleading and I was pointing out that BC finished 3rd on tiebreakers. What happens if there's a 3 way tie in the AHA or WCHA, should all three make it? You need to draw a line somewhere.
    BC finished in a 3 way tie for first last year. The other 2 teams went and 2 other teams below BC went. In 2018 BC was #1 alone by 3 pts. The tournament winner went rightfully and 2 other teams Below BC in conference.

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by TovarishchLisa View Post
    Michigan's best win outside the Big Ten was *48th* in the PWR
    Absolutely, that’s what Northeastern and Providence did.

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by TovarishchLisa View Post
    Michigan's best win outside the Big Ten was *48th* in the PWR
    What was Penn State non tournament winner and 4th place in conference with losing conference record.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •