PDA

View Full Version : The definitive tournament selection thread



Pages : [1] 2 3

Josh Carey
03-08-2010, 07:29 AM
Yay symmetry in thread titles! Since we're within locking range in the tournament speculation thread, I figured I'd create this separate discussion. I've seen a lot of questions over why did X happen from good intentioned people who just want information (and don't have the time to scroll through 20 pages of new posts in the last 48 hours in the other thread to get it), I wanted to have everything clearly identified in the first post of a new thread.

So let's answer some common questions.

1) Why is St. Norbert playing on Wednesday?

Geographic proximity and an oddly shaped bracket.

Because the NCAA is a bunch of cheap ********, they don't want to spend any more money on D3 athletics than they have to. So they have created a rule that teams can not fly for the quarterfinals or opening round game. Except they've arbitrarily set the number of miles a team can travel without flying at 500 miles.

This creates a problem in the case of Adrian, who is only within 500 miles of two western teams outside of the MCHA: St. Norbert and Stevens Point. And now you should be seeing where this is going. By putting St. Norbert against Adrian, the NCAA assures what might be the only way to not fly Adrian this tournament. If the Bulldogs lose to the Green Knights, the NCAA only needs to fly one team for the entire tournament.

2) Why is this a crock?

Well several reasons.

A) The 500 mile rule is arbitrary. The NCAA could just as easily say the allowable radius is 531 miles. Or 427. All which would have different effects on the bracket.

B) The NCAA calculation might be screwy. Google Maps says Adrian could drive to Oswego, the NCAa calculation disagrees.

C) The NCAA could have sent Adrian to Elmira and had the winner play Norwich and had the same flight possibilities while getting St. Norbert - the #3 overall seed in the tournament - a bye to the quarterfinals.

C.ii) The corollary to this is that maybe the NCAA calculation is flawed or ignored, or rounded and that the 499.0 miles listed from Adrian to Elmira (seriously) eliminated that option. Likewise, that might be campus-to-campus distances (I think they are) and Elmira's off-campus rink might have required that have a flight as a result.

C.iii) The NCAA has a rule saying one team gets into the postseason tournament for every 6.5 that play the sport. This "access ratio" is arbitrary and results in an awkward 11 team tournament. With 3 automatic qualifiers in the west and 5 in the east, it makes a 7-4 split likely (2 eastern pool C teams and 1 western Pool C team mirrors the ratio of teams in those regions). Without cross-regionalizing any teams, that means, with the NCAA's flight rules, either all four western teams get a bye to the quarterfinals (last year) or all four play down to one team in the opening round (this year). That screws either the W1 seed or the E2 seed, depending on how you slice it. This year it was the western seed's turn.

C.iv) What makes this most ironic is that next year, when the tournament is held out west, three teams could fly from the east. This happened in 2007 and is happening with the women's tournament.

3) Why did Elmira get in over Manhattanville?

Ironically, because the committee did something right for a change.

The criteria for Pool B states that the best team from a conference without an automatic qualifier gets a bid. "Best" is defined as having the best comparisons in the NCAA selection criteria.

In the past, this bid has gone to the ECAC-West tournament champion, seemingly independently of what the criteria stated. So when Manhattanville won the ECAC-West tournament on Saturday, most prognosticators moved the Valiants into the tournament. However, here is the final comparison between Elmira and Manhattanville (based on the last publised ranked teams).


Elmira vs Manhattanville
WIN 0.6731 0 0.7500 1
OWP 0.5548 1 0.4795 0
OOP 0.5064 0 0.5109 1
H2H 2- 2- 0 0 2- 2- 0 0
COP 12- 4- 0 0 12- 2- 1 1
RNK 5- 6- 1 1 3- 5- 1 0

Remember, SOS is actually one comparison. When weighing WIN against SOS, the only real difference is in RNK, where Elmira holds a steady advantage. Based on how the criteria has been weighted in the past, Elmira should have been a clear winner, even after the championship loss. The fact this may be the first time the committee did this correctly is what threw people off. But again, I was pointing out to not discount Elmira as of yesterday afternoon.

4) How does the NCAA justify all this?

New article on the vision of Division-III at NCAA.org (http://ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/ncaa+news/ncaa+news+online/2010/division+iii/new+diii+logo%2C+imagery+symbolize+strategic+posit ioning_03_05_10_ncaa_news)

5) How can I complain productively?

Post on the USCHO.com message board. Wait, no, that's the opposite of productive.

You could Call the NCAA (http://ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/about+the+ncaa/overview/contacting+the+ncaa).

Contacting your favorite school's Sports Information Department and asking if there are any avenues you could pursue is an option. Also, if you are at a (western school) without a hockey program, you could lobby to have hockey added, which in the long run could alleviate some of the issues that happen with the current system.

joecct
03-08-2010, 08:38 AM
Josh

You should have compared Elmira to Manhattanville to Salem St to Fitchburg St.

This would have been a much fairer implementation of Pool B instead of "Adrianizing" the MASCAC.

ColdInRomney
03-08-2010, 08:46 AM
3) Why did Manhattanville get in over Elmira?

They did???

Josh Carey
03-08-2010, 08:46 AM
Josh

You should have compared Elmira to Manhattanville to Salem St to Fitchburg St.

This would have been a much fairer implementation of Pool B instead of "Adrianizing" the MASCAC.

Sure.


Fitchburg State vs Salem State
WIN 0.7400 1 0.6250 0
OWP 0.4654 0 0.4990 1
OOP 0.4752 0 0.4760 1
H2H 1- 3- 0 0 3- 1- 0 1
COP 15- 2- 0 1 10- 3- 4 0
RNK 0- 1- 1 0 0- 1- 0 0
============================================
PTS 2 3

Not that I know who wins that. Salem based on H2H, I guess?


Fitchburg State vs Manhattanville
WIN 0.7400 0 0.7500 1
OWP 0.4654 0 0.4795 1
OOP 0.4752 0 0.5109 1
H2H 0- 0- 0 0 0- 0- 0 0
COP 1- 0- 0 0 1- 0- 0 0
RNK 0- 1- 1 0 3- 5- 1 1
============================================
PTS 0 4

That is clearly M'ville though.


Elmira vs Fitchburg State
WIN 0.6731 0 0.7400 1
OWP 0.5548 1 0.4654 0
OOP 0.5064 1 0.4752 0
H2H 0- 0- 0 0 0- 0- 0 0
COP 0- 0- 0 0 0- 0- 0 0
RNK 5- 6- 1 1 0- 1- 1 0
============================================
PTS 3 1

Clearly Elmira based on SOS and RNK.


Elmira vs Salem State
WIN 0.6731 1 0.6250 0
OWP 0.5548 1 0.4990 0
OOP 0.5064 1 0.4760 0
H2H 0- 0- 0 0 0- 0- 0 0
COP 0- 0- 0 0 0- 0- 0 0
RNK 5- 6- 1 0 0- 1- 0 0
============================================
PTS 3 0

Again, clearly Elmira.


Manhattanville vs Salem State
WIN 0.7500 1 0.6250 0
OWP 0.4795 0 0.4990 1
OOP 0.5109 1 0.4760 0
H2H 0- 0- 0 0 0- 0- 0 0
COP 0- 0- 0 0 0- 0- 0 0
RNK 3- 5- 1 0 0- 1- 0 0
============================================
PTS 2 1

And probably M'ville.

So there, the MASCAC not seriously being considered for Pool B is based in the criteria as well.

Josh Carey
03-08-2010, 08:47 AM
They did???

I have no idea what you're talking about.

ColdInRomney
03-08-2010, 08:50 AM
I have no idea what you're talking about.

The "quote" feature doesn't lie! ;)



Last edited by Josh Carey : Today at 09:47 AM.

joecct
03-08-2010, 08:51 AM
All I want is it out in the open that the MASCAC did not deserve a Pool B bid. Thanks for the comparisons.

EC809
03-08-2010, 11:08 AM
Thanks Josh. Nice explained very well

norm1909
03-08-2010, 12:56 PM
I'll second the good job, while they all aren't "answers" it is well written and honest attempt to plausible "reasons"/"excuses", BTW - IMO - many ARE answers.

Also, the bracket (http://www.ncaa.com/brackets/2010/ncaa_bracket_DIII_hockey_men.html) is now up on the NCAA site.

The championship game will be televised live on CBS College Sports Network Saturday, March 20, at 5 p.m. Eastern. (http://www.ncaa.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/030710aab.html)

BulldogProf
03-08-2010, 01:00 PM
3) Why did Elmira get in over Manhattanville?

Ironically, because the committee did something right for a change.

The criteria for Pool B...

I agree they followed the criteria, and I'm aware ECAC-W has no AQ, so I'm not critiquing your analysis. I just wanna say that as a fan--of the sport, not of either team--it galls me to see the team that got beat in their conference tournament get in over the team that beat them. Hate it, hate it, hate it, hate it.

MountieBoyOz
03-08-2010, 01:10 PM
I agree they followed the criteria, and I'm aware ECAC-W has no AQ, so I'm not critiquing your analysis. I just wanna say that as a fan--of the sport, not of either team--it galls me to see the team that got beat in their conference tournament get in over the team that beat them. Hate it, hate it, hate it, hate it.

I have to agree with Bulldog. M'Ville did everything right and won. I know the conference didn't have an AQ, but I'm sure the Valiants were motivated by the fact that winning would get them a ticket to the tourney.

PrezdeJohnson09
03-08-2010, 01:12 PM
I have to agree with Bulldog. M'Ville did everything right and won. I know the conference didn't have an AQ, but I'm sure the Valiants were motivated by the fact that winning would get them a ticket to the tourney.

I think it should have too.

But their patsy cake OOC schedule bit them in the arse.

Your reap what you sew and Elmira played a very difficult OOC and picked up some nice results to boot in it.

MountieBoyOz
03-08-2010, 01:17 PM
I think it should have too.

But their patsy cake OOC schedule bit them in the arse.

Your reap what you sew and Elmira played a very difficult OOC and picked up some nice results to boot in it.

I do agree with you on that fact, Prez. I hope they learn from it. Maybe they will decide to go to Oswego or Plattsburgh.

Russell Jaslow
03-08-2010, 01:27 PM
I agree they followed the criteria, and I'm aware ECAC-W has no AQ, so I'm not critiquing your analysis. I just wanna say that as a fan--of the sport, not of either team--it galls me to see the team that got beat in their conference tournament get in over the team that beat them. Hate it, hate it, hate it, hate it.

Looking it as just as a fan of the sport, I agree with you and was hoping Manhattanville would get in.

However, what would you have said if say Lebanon Valley turned their season around with their new coach, ran the table, and miraculously won the ECAC West tournament? Sure, if this was an AQ conference they would get in, but since it's not, could you accept them getting the Pool B bid based on what you wrote above? (And let's not complicate matters by bringing in the MASCAC, okay Joe? :) )

PrezdeJohnson09
03-08-2010, 01:30 PM
I do agree with you on that fact, Prez. I hope they learn from it. Maybe they will decide to go to Oswego or Plattsburgh.

Like i said in another thread.

It is to my understanding that Oswego has no desire to schedule Manhattanville.

norm1909
03-08-2010, 01:33 PM
Like i said in another thread.

It is to my understanding that Oswego has no desire to schedule Manhattanville.

I thought he was referring to the players transferring :eek:

GoBullDogsGo
03-08-2010, 02:01 PM
I agree they followed the criteria, and I'm aware ECAC-W has no AQ, so I'm not critiquing your analysis. I just wanna say that as a fan--of the sport, not of either team--it galls me to see the team that got beat in their conference tournament get in over the team that beat them. Hate it, hate it, hate it, hate it.

I understand Josh's analysis, and he is certainly is one of the more rational thinkers on this message board, but I also agree with BullDogProf, the optics of Manhattanville winning their conference by beating Elmira twice, and playing better down the home stretch, just leaves a really bad taste in your mouth about the choices for the Pool B bid.

Josh I really enjoy your comments & analysis on these threads.

collegehcky2
03-08-2010, 02:49 PM
I understand Josh's analysis, and he is certainly is one of the more rational thinkers on this message board, but I also agree with BullDogProf, the optics of Manhattanville winning their conference by beating Elmira twice, and playing better down the home stretch, just leaves a really bad taste in your mouth about the choices for the Pool B bid.

Josh I really enjoy your comments & analysis on these threads.

I'm of the belief Manhattanville should have been in before Elmira, but it gets me riled up when people use this argument. Elmira beat Manhattanville twice this year too.

The ECAC West Tournament winner is not guaranteed a bid, the tradition is that this has occurred. If I'm a Manhattanville supporter, I'm more ****ed at the conference dynamics this year, where Hobart and Neumann struggled at times, thus causing the SOS to take a big hit.

Thinking about it more now, when you have a conference that has been as strong as the ECAC West the last few years, having a weak OOC schedule really wouldn't be that big of an issue. Yet when you have teams that are less successful out of conference, you lose out.

spwood
03-08-2010, 03:02 PM
Like i said in another thread.

It is to my understanding that Oswego has no desire to schedule Manhattanville.

Nor does Plattsburgh....in fact, talk is that they are breaking with Elmira on the schedule because they don't like the travel. They won't pick up Manhattanville for the same reason.....

MountieBoyOz
03-08-2010, 03:15 PM
Nor does Plattsburgh....in fact, talk is that they are breaking with Elmira on the schedule because they don't like the travel. They won't pick up Manhattanville for the same reason.....

I know money is the overriding (Sp?) cost, but I think teams are hurting each other in not trying to strengthen their schedule.

Plus, it would stink that one of the best matchups in Platty-Elmira has to end.