PDA

View Full Version : 2012-2013 Conference Predictions



Pages : 1 2 [3]

mnstate0fhockey
09-10-2012, 08:41 PM
opinions vary

Indeed they do.

Flashy Man
09-10-2012, 08:43 PM
How about somebody who doesn't need or appreciate home ice for the playoffs, and can probably only put 3,000 butts in seats even if they get it. Tech comes to mind. ;)

That would be better than the other (http://www.uscho.com/box/mens-hockey/2012/03/09/nebraska-omaha-vs-st-cloud-state/) Huskies.

alysdare
12-05-2012, 12:06 AM
That would be better than the other (http://www.uscho.com/box/mens-hockey/2012/03/09/nebraska-omaha-vs-st-cloud-state/) Huskies.


yes of course..

Fighting Sioux 23
03-13-2013, 09:10 PM
For those interested, here was my ballot for standings:
1. Minnesota
2. North Dakota
3. SCSU
4. Wisconsin
5. Denver
6. Tech
7. Omaha
8. Duluth
9. CC
10. Mankato
11. Bemidji
12. Anchorage

Minnesota: -1
North Dakota: -1
SCSU: -2
Wisconsin - Correct
Denver - Correct
Tech: -4
Omaha - Correct
Duluth: -1
CC: -1
Mankato: -4
Bemidji - Correct
Anchorage - Correct

Combined: -14

Had I only switched Tech and Mankato! :p:D:D

It's always fun to see how those pre-season predictions panned out. :)

Driftryder
03-14-2013, 08:10 AM
Minnesota: -1
North Dakota: -1
SCSU: -2
Wisconsin - Correct
Denver - Correct
Tech: -4
Omaha - Correct
Duluth: -1
CC: -1
Mankato: -4
Bemidji - Correct
Anchorage - Correct

Combined: -14

Had I only switched Tech and Mankato! :p:D:D

It's always fun to see how those pre-season predictions panned out. :)

Technically didn't Minnesota finish tied for 1st in pts and North Dakota finish tied for 2nd in pts, so you would have had those correct?

FlagDUDE08
03-14-2013, 09:00 AM
Technically didn't Minnesota finish tied for 1st in pts and North Dakota finish tied for 2nd in pts, so you would have had those correct?

If two teams tie for 1st, a different team can't finish 2nd.

Fighting Sioux 23
03-14-2013, 09:03 AM
Technically didn't Minnesota finish tied for 1st in pts and North Dakota finish tied for 2nd in pts, so you would have had those correct?

Two things:

1) As FlagDude mentioned, North Dakota couldn't have tied for 2nd.

2) North Dakota didn't tie with anyone. The only team in the top half to mind their own business. :p:D:D

I suppose I could have given myself credit for Minnesota, but I went with how the teams were seeded. Considering that I don't think anyone really picks ties in the preseason, I think that's probably the fairest way to do it. Not that it really matters though. :)

Driftryder
03-14-2013, 09:08 AM
Two things:

1) As FlagDude mentioned, North Dakota couldn't have tied for 2nd.

2) North Dakota didn't tie with anyone. The only team in the top half to mind their own business. :p:D:D

I suppose I could have given myself credit for Minnesota, but I went with how the teams were seeded. Considering that I don't think anyone really picks ties in the preseason, I think that's probably the fairest way to do it. Not that it really matters though. :)

Yeah I was looking at just pts and not seeding I guess, but you are correct.

I also thought North Dakota had tied as well for some reason with Kato Sconny and Denver, hadn't looked closely. :)

LTsatch
03-14-2013, 09:09 AM
The ECAC panel on that site were so far off that it is almost laughable, unless Cornell goes on to win the ECAC playoffs. Quinnipiac was not even an afterthought.

Fighting Sioux 23
03-14-2013, 09:30 AM
The ECAC panel on that site were so far off that it is almost laughable, unless Cornell goes on to win the ECAC playoffs. Quinnipiac was not even an afterthought.

Yeah. I certainly wasn't close with my ECAC predictions. :) I had it being a three-way race between Union, Cornell, and Harvard. Perhaps I'm wrong, but didn't most people think Cornell and Harvard would be up there in the standings?

That being said, look at Alex's "Biggest Surprise" :eek:


RPI struggled last season, but look for the Engineers to finish top 4 and be a threat for an NCAA birth this year.

Not too bad.

EDIT: And in looking at their Hockey East predictions, they were pretty darn close.