Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

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

  • #16
    Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

    Then take Minnesota with the best SOS who will likely miss unless OSU wins.
    Code:
    As of 9/21/10:         As of 9/13/10:
    College Hockey 6       College Football 0
    BTHC 4                 WCHA FC:  1
    Originally posted by SanTropez
    May your paint thinner run dry and the fleas of a thousand camels infest your dead deer.
    Originally posted by bigblue_dl
    I don't even know how to classify magic vagina smoke babies..
    Originally posted by Kepler
    When the giraffes start building radio telescopes they can join too.
    He's probably going to be a superstar but that man has more baggage than North West

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Jon View Post
      No justice until the computers stop screwing over UML.
      Indeed.

      Jon, you are a bad bad man. You’re a legend even if I haven’t met you
      BS UML '04, PhD UConn '09

      Jerseys I would like to have:
      Skating Friar Jersey
      AIC Yellowjacket Jersey w/ Yellowjacket logo on front
      UAF Jersey w/ Polar Bear on Front
      Army Black Knight logo jersey


      NCAA Men's Division 1 Simulation Primer

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

        Originally posted by Happy View Post
        You know, all a team has to do is win. 16 teams make it, if your team can't qualify, then they weren't all that good to begin with.
        I guess Minnesota wasn't that good.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

          Originally posted by ticapnews View Post
          I guess Minnesota wasn't that good.
          maybe they will work on getting easier games on the schedule going forward...
          a legend and an out of work bum look a lot alike, daddy.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by mookie1995 View Post
            maybe they will work on getting easier games on the schedule going forward...
            Bring in Navy, Kentucky, Phoenix University and Trump U for two apiece.

            That's at least five wins right there.
            Last edited by ticapnews; 03-18-2018, 09:54 AM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

              I'll disagree with OP, because the amount of OOC are unevenly distributed. Yes, a Bradley-Terry method (e.g., KRACH) can work to help even that out, but it's still working with an uneven distribution.

              You could construct a scenario (whether it's a good one matters about how you feel about the leagues of smaller schools) where each league gets two bids: one for the regular season champion, one for the conference tournament champion, with two potential twists:

              1. If the RS champ wins the tournament, they get a first-round bye.
              2. If the RS champ wins the tournament, another at-large team can be added to the tournament.

              Is starting a tournament with four at-large bids and four teams from AHC and WCHA likely to fly? Prooooobably not, but it's an interesting thought experiment.

              GFM
              Geof F. Morris
              UAH BSE MAE 2002
              UAHHockey.com

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

                Originally posted by FredsDeadFriend View Post
                I think its ridiculous that Regular Season Champs are ever excluded from the NCAA tourney. But I also understand that the conf tourney's need incentives for teams to want to win and fans to want to care about going to those tourney's, so the conf tourney champs should also get into the NCAA tourney.

                There are what now, 6 conferences? How often do all 6 regular season champs lose in the conf tourney's? Maybe the tourney should be expanded to 18 or 20 teams? Let in both the regular season and conf tourney champs, and that would allow for at least 6 non champs in the tourney every season, if not more. There could literally be 12 non champs get in, although unlikely. On average I would guess 9. How many get in now? 10 non conf tourney champs get in, but how many of those 10 didn't win their conf regular season?

                I think expansion to 18 teams is the only way to do things just right. But I doubt the NCAA cares about such things. Everything is about the money these days.
                The entire AQ-travesty seems to be about aping the NC$$ hoops model... Problem is, college hockey isn't a cash-cow at any level, and it's seriously moronic to apply that model here. There is absolutely no justification for that, no matter how you care to slice it.

                (And, lest anyone think that I have an ax to grind, I literally grew-up in the Air Force, but the Air Force simply didn't deserve a berth this year... I just want objective metrics from top to bottom, and no free passes.)
                Last edited by Fishman'81; 03-20-2018, 08:14 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

                  Originally posted by ticapnews View Post
                  I guess Minnesota wasn't that good.
                  Well it looks like they were 9th in Krach. I don't get into the intricacies of the models, but a lot of people think Krach is more accurate indicator of a team the RPI.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by gfmorris View Post
                    I'll disagree with OP, because the amount of OOC are unevenly distributed. Yes, a Bradley-Terry method (e.g., KRACH) can work to help even that out, but it's still working with an uneven distribution.

                    You could construct a scenario (whether it's a good one matters about how you feel about the leagues of smaller schools) where each league gets two bids: one for the regular season champion, one for the conference tournament champion, with two potential twists:

                    1. If the RS champ wins the tournament, they get a first-round bye.
                    2. If the RS champ wins the tournament, another at-large team can be added to the tournament.

                    Is starting a tournament with four at-large bids and four teams from AHC and WCHA likely to fly? Prooooobably not, but it's an interesting thought experiment.

                    GFM
                    I like the idea of RS and Playoff Champ getting auto-bids. But I'd change your twists. If the RS Champ wins is also the Playoff Champ, the Playoff Runner-up gets the other bid.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

                      Originally posted by Koho View Post
                      Well it looks like they were 9th in Krach. I don't get into the intricacies of the models, but a lot of people think Krach is more accurate indicator of a team the RPI.
                      AIC was #1 in the BUTTITCH which many people are saying is the most accurate of them all. They have received exactly as many invitations to the 2018 NCAA Tournament as Minnesota.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

                        Originally posted by Happy View Post
                        You know, all a team has to do is win. 16 teams make it, if your team can't qualify, then they weren't all that good to begin with.
                        I love it when people have the balls to sling poo that could end up on their face and not care.
                        bigmrg74: "You can't drink the day away if you don't start early!"
                        SledDog: "UncleRay seems to be the most sensible one here tonight."
                        All great men are dead and I'm not feeling well.
                        A Margarita! in every hand and another Margarita! in the other hand!

                        And stay off the lawn!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

                          Originally posted by Fishman'81 View Post
                          The entire AQ-travesty seems to be about aping the NC$$ hoops model... Problem is, college hockey isn't a cash-cow at any level, and it's seriously moronic to apply that model here. There is absolutely no justification for that, no matter how you care to slice it.
                          I'll present a counter-argument: if the NCAA's goal is to have more schools at varying sizes and in varying geographies make the men's D-I tournament, they have a vested interest in propping up smaller conferences to provide new and smaller schools with a way to prove their mettle. Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference/Atlantic Hockey and College Hockey America would not have come into being without the opportunity to get automatic qualifiers (or, in the CHA's case, a promise of it if they could hold on for five years to get approval). Who does that affect?

                          Alabama-Huntsville: CHA > WCHA
                          Bemidji State: CHA > WCHA (before realignment)
                          Connecticut: MAAC/AHC > HE
                          Quinnipiac: MAAC/AHC > ECAC

                          This also doesn't fully consider that schools from those two small conferences have done well in the NCAAs:

                          BSU: Third-place finish in their penultimate CHA season; they won three of the last six tournament titles and made the NCAAs as an at-large bid in 2009-2010
                          Niagara: Defeated UNH in 1999-2000 after winning the CHA regular season and conference tournament titles and making the NCAAs as an at-large bid
                          RIT: Third-place team in 2009-2010 in just their fifth Division I season

                          Of the 15 teams (25%) who are or were in one of these two leagues, only Air Force, AIC, Army, Holy Cross, and Sacred Heart were Division I independents for any length of time immediately prior to the formation of those leagues. Alabama-Huntsville, Bemidji State, Bentley, Mercyhurst, and Quinnipiac were all in Division II (as was Minnesota State!); Canisius, Connecticut, and RIT were in Division III; and Robert Morris and Niagara was created from whole cloth. (Note that Arizona State and Penn State are not in this list as they weren't even in one of these conferences.)

                          Simply put, more AQs = more teams in D-I. More teams mean more scholarships and more opportunities for young men to get an education and maybe make the NHL. While it is true that the top talent still goes to the higher-profile leagues, there is an increasing amount of AHL-and-higher talent coming out of these schools.

                          I believe that removal of the AQ would cause as many as 10 teams to drop the sport.

                          GFM
                          Geof F. Morris
                          UAH BSE MAE 2002
                          UAHHockey.com

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

                            Originally posted by pdt1081 View Post
                            I like the idea of RS and Playoff Champ getting auto-bids. But I'd change your twists. If the RS Champ wins is also the Playoff Champ, the Playoff Runner-up gets the other bid.
                            I wouldn't want to reward the runner-up above a potential at-large. Second place is the first loser.

                            GFM
                            Geof F. Morris
                            UAH BSE MAE 2002
                            UAHHockey.com

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

                              Originally posted by ticapnews View Post
                              I guess Minnesota wasn't that good.
                              Did he suggest otherwise?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Power rankings making conference play irrelevant

                                Originally posted by FredsDeadFriend View Post
                                Maybe the tourney should be expanded to 18 or 20 teams?
                                I think expansion to 18 teams is the only way to do things just right. But I doubt the NCAA cares about such things. Everything is about the money these days.
                                The NCAA Men's Hockey Tournament already has more teams in it than they would be allowed by usual NCAA minimum guidelines of approximately 1 tournament team for every 7 teams in the sport. By that, hockey should only get 8 or 9 (8.6, exactly) teams in the tournament. So increasing the tournament size even more beyond 16 is probably unlikely.
                                Can't we all just get along?
                                Always remember... This is just a game we're talking about here. Let's not take it all too seriously.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X