PDA

View Full Version : What happens to the tournament ratio?



cooperalls
03-11-2010, 02:44 AM
What will happen to the tournament ratio now that LVC has dropped its program and has gone to ACHA?

Scranton is still considered a Div. III Independent do they count towards that ratio of teams and since Lebanon Valley is still being funded by the Athletic department I assume that it will also be considered an Independent. Help me to understand this process as Alvernia University also funds there program under the athletic department but I wonder if they have to follow and report them to the NCAA, because if they do then they also should be considered an NCAA Div. III Independent.

NUProf
03-11-2010, 05:59 AM
What will happen to the tournament ratio now that LVC has dropped its program and has gone to ACHA?

Scranton is still considered a Div. III Independent do they count towards that ratio of teams and since Lebanon Valley is still being funded by the Athletic department I assume that it will also be considered an Independent. Help me to understand this process as Alvernia University also funds there program under the athletic department but I wonder if they have to follow and report them to the NCAA, because if they do then they also should be considered an NCAA Div. III Independent.
To count as an NCAA D3 program, you must play a majority of your games against NCAA D3 competition.

The ratio is on the cusp. 71.5 programs are required for an 11 team tournament. Dropping LVC leaves it at 71. We went from 10 to 11 teams when the number of programs went from 70 to 71 with the addition of Westfield last year. UNE was added this year to make 72.

Josh Carey
03-11-2010, 10:36 AM
What Prof is saying is that the NCAA kind of "gave" us that half a team a year early, and the hope is that they'll continue to maintain an 11 team tournament even with 71 teams.

Where things get interesting is if we drop back to 70 when the MASCAC gets its AQ. That could give us 8 AQs in a 10 team field and no ECAC-West teams guaranteed a bid. In that scenario, it almost becomes incredibly likely the ECAC-West doesn't have a team in the tournament in any given year, since it would take somebody beating up on the rest of the conference to get into at-large consideration. It may be that the ECAC-West needs to look less at realignment to get an AQ, but recruitment of new programs entirely to keep the tournament size at 11 teams.

PrezdeJohnson09
03-11-2010, 10:53 AM
What Prof is saying is that the NCAA kind of "gave" us that half a team a year early, and the hope is that they'll continue to maintain an 11 team tournament even with 71 teams.

Where things get interesting is if we drop back to 70 when the MASCAC gets its AQ. That could give us 8 AQs in a 10 team field and no ECAC-West teams guaranteed a bid. In that scenario, it almost becomes incredibly likely the ECAC-West doesn't have a team in the tournament in any given year, since it would take somebody beating up on the rest of the conference to get into at-large consideration. It may be that the ECAC-West needs to look less at realignment to get an AQ, but recruitment of new programs entirely to keep the tournament size at 11 teams.

Josh,

The Pool B will definitely still exist next season right?

It's the following season when its in trouble if nothing changes?

CARDS_rule_the_Burgh
03-11-2010, 11:56 AM
Josh,

The Pool B will definitely still exist next season right?

It's the following season when its in trouble if nothing changes?

AFAIK, This is correct. MASCAC is still Pool B, thus there are more than 7, thus there is a Pool B.

jim32
03-11-2010, 11:58 AM
The possibility of this:


...
Where things get interesting is if we drop back to 70 when the MASCAC gets its AQ. That could give us 8 AQs in a 10 team field and no ECAC-West teams guaranteed a bid. In that scenario, it almost becomes incredibly likely the ECAC-West doesn't have a team in the tournament in any given year, since it would take somebody beating up on the rest of the conference to get into at-large consideration. It may be that the ECAC-West needs to look less at realignment to get an AQ, but recruitment of new programs entirely to keep the tournament size at 11 teams.

Caused me to post this:


...
A 5 team league + no pool B = an irrelevant ECACW.:(

Josh Carey
03-11-2010, 12:35 PM
Josh,

The Pool B will definitely still exist next season right?

It's the following season when its in trouble if nothing changes?

Correct. You'd need some kind of magical MASCAC waiver saying the NCAA rules don't apply to them and they can get an AQ in only one year for Pool B to disappear next year.

(And since I brought that up in jest: the MCHA waiver was granted because the teams had played together for two years, but didn't file the paperwork in a manner to have the first year counted. The NCAA ruled the spirit of the rule was followed, if not the letter of it, and granted the conference its bid this year. Of course all that did was screw SNC out of a bye and make them unjustly play on Wednesday, but who's paying attention to that?)

norm1909
03-11-2010, 01:26 PM
With any luck (and a lot of hope), there will be avote that allows the DII schools to be considered DII for hockey, not only solving this problem, but might allow an expansion to 12 playoff slots.

to be considered DII for hockey :confused:

Do you mean DIII for hockey?

NUProf
03-11-2010, 05:07 PM
to be considered DII for hockey :confused:

Do you mean DIII for hockey?

He left out an I :)

The problem is now that that would leave us at 77 with 78 required to make 12 teams (12*6.5 = 78) If LVC hadn't disappeared it would have made 78.

joeyc3402
03-12-2010, 07:22 AM
He left out an I :)

The problem is now that that would leave us at 77 with 78 required to make 12 teams (12*6.5 = 78) If LVC hadn't disappeared it would have made 78.

...wonder if Crookston would consider resurrecting their program....

Matthew Webb
03-12-2010, 07:19 PM
...wonder if Crookston would consider resurrecting their program....

That's a good question. I bet they'd at least look at it, but then the question is what conference do they play in? The MIAC is out, the MCHA is balanced as is and I doubt they'd be so fond of breaking the balance and adding that travel. The NCHA could use an 8th but I have no idea how open the league would be to taking a look at Crookston.

NUProf
03-12-2010, 07:21 PM
...wonder if Crookston would consider resurrecting their program....

Didn't Crookston build a new rink just before they got kicked out of the MCHA? Are the playing ACHA?

joeyc3402
03-12-2010, 08:43 PM
That's a good question. I bet they'd at least look at it, but then the question is what conference do they play in? The MIAC is out, the MCHA is balanced as is and I doubt they'd be so fond of breaking the balance and adding that travel. The NCHA could use an 8th but I have no idea how open the league would be to taking a look at Crookston.

Maybe Lake Forest would be willing to jump ship....

Looks like Crookston's playing at the ACHA level though:

http://blog.lib.umn.edu/umcweb/news/2010/01/club-hockey-at-the-u-of-m-croo.html

joeyc3402
03-12-2010, 08:44 PM
Didn't Crookston build a new rink just before they got kicked out of the MCHA? Are the playing ACHA?

...and yes, they did just build a new rink. Their old one was a dump (though it was fun to play in when they packed the house).

norm1909
03-12-2010, 09:07 PM
...and yes, they did just build a new rink. Their old one was a dump (though it was fun to play in when they packed the house).

Sort of - it, the "Crookston Sports Center (http://www.protectingthelegacy.com/Plans/loc.htm)" really isn't "their" rink, it belongs to the city of Crookston (http://www.crookstontimes.com/sports/x370511934/Heads-butt-over-Crookston-Sports-Center-smoking-policy), though they did make - and keep - financial commitments to the new rink, including a 5yr lease (http://nhl.fanhouse.com/2009/03/24/minnesota-crookston-drops-hockey/), running from 2010-2015. As noted, they do field an ACHA Division II team (2009-10 ACHA roster here (http://www.achahockey.org/team_roster.php?team_id=101886&league_id=1061) - 2008-09 NCAA roster here (http://www.collegehockeystats.net/0809/rosters/mncm)). They had entertained an ACHA Division I team, but decided (http://www3.crk.umn.edu/newsarchive/umcnews/stories/story1613.html) it wasn't in their best interest.