PDA

View Full Version : Future WCHA versus Big/Little THC ...



Pages : [1] 2

uaafanblog
10-15-2011, 12:32 AM
Someone should continuously track the results between future WCHA schools (the island of misfit toys) versus Big/Litte Ten conference teams. By my count there have been 9 such games so far this season. 6 wins for the future WCHA teams ... 3 wins for the BLT Conference.

Obviously it's early and no claims should be made as yet. If someone here who loves tracking such things decides to take that on then this thread would be a great place to do it.

The Rube
10-15-2011, 12:45 AM
Someone should continuously track the results between future WCHA schools (the island of misfit toys) versus Big/Litte Ten conference teams. By my count there have been 9 such games so far this season. 6 wins for the future WCHA teams ... 3 wins for the BLT Conference.

Obviously it's early and no claims should be made as yet. If someone here who loves tracking such things decides to take that on then this thread would be a great place to do it.

bbdl kept track last weekend. Dunno if he still is. He was rather proud of that fact.

uaafanblog
10-15-2011, 01:41 AM
bbdl kept track last weekend. Dunno if he still is. He was rather proud of that fact.

bbdl it is then. I'm happy he volunteered.

Tater
10-15-2011, 08:17 AM
Someone should continuously track the results between future WCHA schools (the island of misfit toys) versus Big/Litte Ten conference teams. By my count there have been 9 such games so far this season. 6 wins for the future WCHA teams ... 3 wins for the BLT Conference.

Obviously it's early and no claims should be made as yet. If someone here who loves tracking such things decides to take that on then this thread would be a great place to do it.

It is fun to compare now, but unfortunately reality will set in once the conferences divide. The "future WCHA" teams have gotten thier current players recruiting as a major conference and the chance to play the Minn., Wisc, NoDak, Denver every year. Now they don't have that recruiting advantage and the quality of the recruits will likely diminish.

Rich
10-15-2011, 08:38 AM
Once the ratings mean something, I plan to track the average KRACH rating for each league. It gives a better overall measure of the relative strengths than head-to-head, which ignores if you have the best team in one league playing the worst in another. If Air Force beats UML/MTU/Colgate/pick whoever's in last place, it doesn't mean that the AHA is better than HEA/WCHA/ECAC. Here are the average KRACH ratings from last year for the leagues:
Using league affiliations at the time:
WCHA - 39.8
CCHA - 28.2
HEA - 21.9
ECAC - 18.7
AHA - 6.7

Using the future league affiliations:
NCHC - 51.3
Big 10 - 31.7
HEA - 23.9
WCHA - 19.4
ECAC - 18.7
AHA - 6.1

EDIT: Forgot the Big 10 in the original post.

uaafanblog
10-15-2011, 10:07 AM
It is fun to compare now, but unfortunately reality will set in once the conferences divide. The "future WCHA" teams have gotten thier current players recruiting as a major conference and the chance to play the Minn., Wisc, NoDak, Denver every year. Now they don't have that recruiting advantage and the quality of the recruits will likely diminish.

I disagree. The comparison is wholly relevant for the next two years. After that it is much less relevant. The BT and BHHC teams formed as they did because it's members decided they were "better". Like I said ... no claims ... but after 9 games (very small sample size) the BHHC teams sure don't seem "better".

Tater
10-15-2011, 10:33 AM
Once the ratings mean something, I plan to track the average KRACH rating for each league. It gives a better overall measure of the relative strengths than head-to-head, which ignores if you have the best team in one league playing the worst in another. If Air Force beats UML/MTU/Colgate/pick whoever's in last place, it doesn't mean that the AHA is better than HEA/WCHA/ECAC. Here are the average KRACH ratings from last year for the leagues:
Using league affiliations at the time:
WCHA - 39.8
CCHA - 28.2
HEA - 21.9
ECAC - 18.7
AHA - 6.7

Using the future league affiliations:
NCHC - 51.3
HEA - 23.9
WCHA - 19.4
ECAC - 18.7
AHA - 6.1

Where's Big Ten?

Fighting Sioux 23
10-15-2011, 10:34 AM
I disagree. The comparison is wholly relevant for the next two years. After that it is much less relevant. The BT and BHHC teams formed as they did because it's members decided they were "better". Like I said ... no claims ... but after 9 games (very small sample size) the BHHC teams sure don't seem "better".

I see 11 games thus far.

10/7/11

Bemidji State 5 (WCHA 1-0 vs. BHHC)
Miami 3

Northern Michigan 3 (WCHA 1-0 vs. LTHC)
Wisconsin 2

St. Cloud State 4 (WCHA 1-1 vs. BHHC)
Alaska 1

10/8/11

Miami 3 (WCHA 1-2 vs. BHHC)
Bemidji State 2

Wisconsin 3 (WCHA 1-1 vs. LTHC)
Northern Michigan 2

Alaska Anchorage 4 (WCHA 2-2 vs. BHHC)
St. Cloud State 3

10/14/11

Lake Superior State 5 (WCHA 2-1 vs. LTHC)
Michigan State 4

Colorado College 3 (WCHA 2-3 vs. BHHC)
Bemidji State 1

Michigan Tech 2 (WCHA 3-1 vs. LTHC)
Wisconsin 1

Northern Michigan 5 (WCHA 3-3 vs. BHHC)
St. Cloud State 2

Alaska Anchorage 3 (WCHA 4-3 vs. BHHC)
Nebraska Omaha 0

Overall:
WCHA is 4-3 against BHHC
WCHA is 3-1 against LTHC
WCHA is 7-4 overall against BHHC + LTHC

I don't have time to keep this updated throughout the next two years, but this is where it stands now.

Rich
10-15-2011, 10:38 AM
Where's Big Ten?

I missed them when I typed it in from my spreadsheet. I edited my original post to include them.

Tater
10-15-2011, 10:38 AM
The BT and BHHC teams formed as they did because it's members decided they were "better". Like I said ... no claims ... but after 9 games (very small sample size) the BHHC teams sure don't seem "better".

Like you said, small sample size. We know what programs have had success nationally over the past decade. We can debate the rights and wrongs of them breaking away, but they are superior ("better") programs.

Tater
10-15-2011, 10:44 AM
Using the future league affiliations:
NCHC - 51.3
Big 10 - 31.7
HEA - 23.9
WCHA - 19.4
ECAC - 18.7
AHA - 6.1

EDIT: Forgot the Big 10 in the original post.

As a HEA fan, this is interesting since we are a far third. Now, there will be some divergence since these teams will now be beating up on each other instead of feasting on the doormats, but impressive nonetheless. HEA will be the last conference with a mix of big-name powers (BC, BU, UNH, Maine), long-time mediocre squads with success here and there (NU, UVM, PC UMASS), and D-II/III play-ups with limited success('Mack, UML).

Rich
10-15-2011, 03:50 PM
HEA will be the last conference with a mix of big-name powers (BC, BU, UNH, Maine), long-time mediocre squads with success here and there (NU, UVM, PC UMASS), and D-II/III play-ups with limited success('Mack, UML).

That's exactly what keeps the HEA down in third. The top teams in HEA were (as you know, these are based on last year's numbers) right there with the NCHC teams. But since this is an average teams like UML (3.7), UMass (5.6), Providence (7.5) and others brought the average for HEA down significantly. That actually should help the top HEA teams in the PWR, since the PWR undervalues strength of schedule. An ideal schedule for the PWR includes a significant number of cupcakes to bolster winning %, and HEA will have that built in with the bottom 1/3 of the league. NCHC and Big 10 teams, if they all trend towards being upper-tier teams, will need to schedule as many weaker teams as possible in their non-conference schedules to keep up.

Tipsy McStagger
10-15-2011, 07:03 PM
I disagree. The comparison is wholly relevant for the next two years. After that it is much less relevant. The BT and BHHC teams formed as they did because it's members decided they were "better". Like I said ... no claims ... but after 9 games (very small sample size) the BHHC teams sure don't seem "better".
"Crap, the future WCHA teams really fared well against us since we decided to form the NCHC. That proves this was a bad idea." - No one

uaafanblog
10-15-2011, 09:57 PM
"Crap, the future WCHA teams really fared well against us since we decided to form the NCHC. That proves this was a bad idea." - No one

Has nothing to do with proving it was a bad idea. It has to do with being labeled leftovers from the island of misfit toys by the twats that are posing as "better" hockey teams and getting some visceral satisfaction from knocking said team's dicks in the dirt. And after today's results my viscera is pretty satisfied ...

It was 7-4 ... right now it's 10-4 with just two such matchups to be decided. Bemidji is tied with CC 4-4 at the moment and If UA_ beats the fun-filled family card game it will be 12-4.

uaafanblog
10-16-2011, 02:38 PM
Future WCHA = 11
B/L 'tards = 5

komey1
10-16-2011, 04:56 PM
That's exactly what keeps the HEA down in third. The top teams in HEA were (as you know, these are based on last year's numbers) right there with the NCHC teams. But since this is an average teams like UML (3.7), UMass (5.6), Providence (7.5) and others brought the average for HEA down significantly. That actually should help the top HEA teams in the PWR, since the PWR undervalues strength of schedule. An ideal schedule for the PWR includes a significant number of cupcakes to bolster winning %, and HEA will have that built in with the bottom 1/3 of the league. NCHC and Big 10 teams, if they all trend towards being upper-tier teams, will need to schedule as many weaker teams as possible in their non-conference schedules to keep up.

That's a big IF for the teams trending to be upper-tier teams. Someone is going to be a bottom feeder in the conference. And if you are a recruit, do you want to play in those conferences to play your non-conference games against lower level teams?

magpie
10-16-2011, 07:52 PM
This thread is ridiculous. As was stated, recruiting will make a massive shift once the conferences realign. In Minnesota, for example, it's not unusual for someone to opt for a small state school knowing they will be playing essentially the same schedule as the Gophers a la WCHA. Come B1G, these kids will more than likely push for being a Gopher in order to play Michigan, Ohio St, Wisconsin, etc -- rather than playing Bowling Green, Ferris St, Alaska, or Omaha. The same will be true in Michigan and Ohio.

The dominant conferences will be the B1G & Hockey East. The new conference will have dominant schools, but considering most are pretty solid now, some will end up as doormats or the parity in general will bring the others to mediocrity. I would think No Dak and Denver will hang higher, but post-Dean Blais Omaha, SCSU, and Western Michigan will likely be doormats. Duluth, CC, and the rest will likely continue their roller-coaster like results with good years and bad. The W/C-CHA will be a hair better than the ECAC and I wouldn't be surprised if a handful of schools end their D-I statuses.

Bottom line? Quit whining about the B1G reforming. Those schools carried two conferences and now realize the secondary schools can carry themselves. Without the B1G schools revenue boosts, there wouldn't be a D-I Ferris St, Bemidji St, St Cloud St, etc. It's good for hockey to show major conferences. Maybe the Big East will be the next to form, which would really put hockey on the collegiate map.

magpie
10-16-2011, 07:56 PM
I see 11 games thus far.

10/7/11

Bemidji State 5 (WCHA 1-0 vs. BHHC)
Miami 3

Northern Michigan 3 (WCHA 1-0 vs. LTHC)
Wisconsin 2

St. Cloud State 4 (WCHA 1-1 vs. BHHC)
Alaska 1

10/8/11

Miami 3 (WCHA 1-2 vs. BHHC)
Bemidji State 2

Wisconsin 3 (WCHA 1-1 vs. LTHC)
Northern Michigan 2

Alaska Anchorage 4 (WCHA 2-2 vs. BHHC)
St. Cloud State 3

10/14/11

Lake Superior State 5 (WCHA 2-1 vs. LTHC)
Michigan State 4

Colorado College 3 (WCHA 2-3 vs. BHHC)
Bemidji State 1

Michigan Tech 2 (WCHA 3-1 vs. LTHC)
Wisconsin 1

Northern Michigan 5 (WCHA 3-3 vs. BHHC)
St. Cloud State 2

Alaska Anchorage 3 (WCHA 4-3 vs. BHHC)
Nebraska Omaha 0

Overall:
WCHA is 4-3 against BHHC
WCHA is 3-1 against LTHC
WCHA is 7-4 overall against BHHC + LTHC

I don't have time to keep this updated throughout the next two years, but this is where it stands now.

BTW, this is biased. Where's the Minnesota sweep of UMD? That would make the conference records 3-3, not 3-1. That's assuming the rest of the quoted post is accurate. Must be your epic No Dak edumacation.

Dirty
10-16-2011, 08:04 PM
BTW, this is biased. Where's the Minnesota sweep of UMD? That would make the conference records 3-3, not 3-1. That's assuming the rest of the quoted post is accurate. Must be your epic No Dak edumacation.

Congrats on remembering your password after registering three years ago. But on the downside, Minnesota's victories over UMD are irrelevant to this thread. I'll let you figure out why that is. Since you obviously don't have a No Dak edumacation, it shouldn't be too difficult for you.

darker98
10-16-2011, 08:08 PM
BTW, this is biased. Where's the Minnesota sweep of UMD? That would make the conference records 3-3, not 3-1. That's assuming the rest of the quoted post is accurate. Must be your epic No Dak edumacation.

You just proved you are an idiot.