NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

[TovarishchLisa]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Scheduling a cream puff non conference is the way to go

Michigan's best win outside the Big Ten was *48th* in the PWR

[Sean Pickett]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

For the weaker conferences, hard to get quality OOC, and the conferences are weak enough, the teams would NEVER make the tourney if the autobid didn't exist.

As for conferences like HE, B1G, and Nacho, conference tourneys are just money grabs.

Maybe, but the first league tournaments, the WCHA and the ECAC tournaments, were created to have the teams under consideration for the NCAA tournament to win their way in. For the ECAC the tournament champion was given automatic selection with the second team being selected by committee, and for the WCHA they had playoffs to determine which 2 teams would make the NCAA tournament 17 out of 22 years (1960-61, 1966-76 and 1978-81), with a single champion 5 years (1962-65 and 1977) with the runner-up being selected along with the winner each year.

While it is OK for tournament winners to go to NCAA’s, the next in line should be the conference seasonal top finisher, not skipped over for conference teams further down. This happened to BC twice now. And BC is A proven tough NCAA tournament competitor. Bemidji got robbed last year.

For an autobid, it does make more sense to reward a regular season champion. Much larger sample than a conference tournament. Leagues can set their tiebreakers to determine who gets autobid in the event of a tie.

But i realize there are unbalanced league schedules and also the drama/chance to bring in some money for the league with a tournament. But in theory it makes more sense to reward a RS champion.

Each league with an autobid is allowed to award it as they see fit and all see fit to award it to their tournament champion. There is a lot of discussion about this issue on the Power rankings making conference play irrelevant thread, including several post by me including:

Back in 1994 Colorado College rose from last place the the previous season to win the WCHA regular season, but after being upset in the WCHA quarterfinals 2 games to 1, they were not selected for the NCAA tournament. There was much complaining about how autobids were awarded and how the regular season champion deserved an autobid. Supposedly the committee then added a "CC Rule" that the RS champion of each league would always be selected until the NCAA learned of the rule and let it be known that each league was to get only one autobid, determined by each league. I have no idea if such a rule was ever invoked, but no regular season champion missed the tournament until the formation of the MAAC in 1998-99, when no MAAC team made the NCAA tournament. The following season the CHA was formed and Niagara won the regular season and tournament titles and made the NCAA field as an at-large team. Then in 2001 Clarkson won the ECAC regular season, was upset in the quarterfinals 2 games to 1 and missed the NCAA tournament.

As for byes, the NCAA tournament had them from 1988 through 2002. In 1988 no teams won both league titles, in 1989 only one did, in 1990 all four did and in 1991 three teams did. Of the 8 teams only one, Clarkson in 1991, failed to get a bye. Again there was much complaining about how a regular season and tournament champion deserved a bye, with many calling for a "Clarkson Rule" to insure that would happen. To my knowledge no such rule was ever invoked by the committee, but no other double champion from Hockey East, ECAC, CCHA or WCHA missed the bye until Michigan in 2002. Niagara (CHA, 2000) and Mercyhurst (MAAC, 2001) also won both leagues titles, but did not receive byes.

and

Since the NCAA Tournament expanded to 8 teams 34 regular season champions have not made the tournament. Three in the 8 team field, 2 coming from the ECAC as it split into three division each with its own regular season champion, eight in the 12 team field, and twenty-three in the 16 team field.
Eight Teams
1981 – ECAC East – Boston College
1983 – CCHA – Bowling Green
1984 – ECAC Ivy – Harvard
Twelve Teams
1992 – ECAC – Harvard
1994 – WCHA – Colorado College
1999 – MAAC – Quinnipiac
2000 – MAAC – Quinnipiac
2001 – ECAC – Clarkson
2001 – CHA – Alabama Huntsville
2002 – MAAC – Mercyhurst
2002 – CHA – Wayne State*
Sixteen Teams
2003 – CHA – Alabama Huntsville
2004 – ECAC – Colgate
2004 – CHA – Bemidji State
2005 – AH – Quinnipiac
2006 – ECAC – Dartmouth (tie)
2006 – ECAC – Colgate (tie)
2006 – CHA – Niagara
2007 – AH – RIT
2007 – CHA – Niagara
2008 – AH – Army
2008 – CHA – Bemidji State
2009 – AH – RIT (tie)
2011 – AH – RIT
2014 – AH – Mercyhurst
2015 – AH – Robert Morris
2016 – B1G – Minnesota
2016 – WCHA – Michigan Tech
2016 – AH – Robert Morris
2017 – HEA – Boston College (tie)
2017 – WCHA – Bemidji State
2017 – AH – Canisius
2018 – HEA – Boston College
2018 – AH - Mercyhurst

* also won league tournament, but league had no autobid

By conference the MAAC/Atlantic Hockey has 13; the CHA had 7; the ECAC has 7; the WCHA has 3; Hockey East has 2; the B1G has 1; and the CCHA had 1.

I also posted the 1974 NCAA selection criteria in its own thread:

In looking up some information on the National Invitational Hockey Tournament I came across the following information in the 12 February 1974 issue of TIHN (The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter):

SELECTION FOR THE NCAA's
The information below has been extracted from the 1974 NCAA Ice Hockey Championship Handbook
The National Collegiate Ice Hockey Championship provides for a single-elimination tournament comprised of two teams selected from the East and two from the West. The NCAA Ice Hockey Rules and Tournament Committee will seed the teams prior to the start of the tournament. In even numbered years, East #1 will meet West #2 on Thursday and Friday's game will match West #1 and East #2. In odd-numbered years, Thursday's opener will be West #1 against East #2, and East #1 will play West #2 on Friday.
The NCAA Ice Hockey Rules and Tournament Committee shall make the final selections for the Championship. The chairman of that Committee will appoint an eastern and western advisory committee no later than January 15. Each advisory committee shall consist of a chairman, appointed from among the members of the Rules and Tournament Committee, and two members. There will also be two alternates designated to replace one of the three members should his team be under consideration for selection.
The chairman of each advisory committee will contact all NCAA member institutions in his area which sponsor intercollegiate ice hockey to determine which colleges would compete in the championship if selected. If a college states that it will not compete, or if no reply is received, that institution will no longer be considered by the advisory committee.
Each advisory committee shall rank the top five teams in its area (without an NCAA playoff) and submit its recommendation to the Rules and Tournament Committee not later than Friday, March 8. The final selection will then be made on a conference call among the members of the Rules and Tournament Committee not later than Sunday, March 10. Announcement of the four teams selected will be made by the NCAA national office.

The following principles are adhered to by the advisory committees:
1. All NCAA members which sponsor intercollegiate ice hockey will be considered.
2. The winner of the ECAC Tournament shall be one of the teams representing the East.
3 The winners of the two sectional tournaments in the western region (WCHA Playoffs) should not be regarded as automatic selections, but the playoff games should be considered in the selection process.
4. A minimum of 15 games against college opponents should be played by each team under consideration.
5. The advisory committee should consider all games played.
6. The strength of each team's schedule should be given serious consideration.
7. Depth of material should be considered only if other factors are equal.

Nowhere in the criteria is being the regular season champion mentioned, although strength of schedule is mentioned.

Sean

[freedomfighter]

Thin skinned much? His argument is misleading and I was pointing out that BC finished 3rd on tiebreakers. What happens if there's a 3 way tie in the AHA or WCHA, should all three make it? You need to draw a line somewhere.

BC finished in a 3 way tie for first last year. The other 2 teams went and 2 other teams below BC went. In 2018 BC was #1 alone by 3 pts. The tournament winner went rightfully and 2 other teams Below BC in conference.

[freedomfighter]

Michigan's best win outside the Big Ten was *48th* in the PWR

Absolutely, that’s what Northeastern and Providence did.

[freedomfighter]

Michigan's best win outside the Big Ten was *48th* in the PWR

What was Penn State non tournament winner and 4th place in conference with losing conference record.

[freedomfighter]

Michigan's best win outside the Big Ten was *48th* in the PWR

Penn St finished 4th in conference with a LOSING conference record and did not win the league tournament. What the heck?

[freedomfighter]

So you would be OK with both Mercyhurst and Air Force making the NCAA from Atlantic Hockey?

Yes ... over 4th losing league record Penn St.

[freedomfighter]

A strong OOC is a major key to getting in the tourney. Let's break it down for everyone: 2 + 2 = 4. This is called simple math. This is what gets you into the tourney.

Not that simple .. see weak non-conference wins by Hockey East NE and PC. They finished 2nd and 3rd behind BC and Did not win tourney.

[UncleRay]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

While it is OK for tournament winners to go to NCAA’s, the next in line should be the conference seasonal top finisher, not skipped over for conference teams further down. This happened to BC twice now. And BC is A proven tough NCAA tournament competitor. Bemidji got robbed last year. This year Providence and Northeastern had weak Nonconference opponents. Also what’s up with selecting Penn State? They had a losing conference record. A Big Ten team last won the NCAA Championship in 2007. The apparent reason for their conference was to get more teams in the NCAAs.

As others have said: Simple math. Every school has math geeks who can demonstrate all kinds of scenarios about the "best" way to get to the NCAA's based on the published and followed rules. It is up to each team to decide which scenario makes the most sense to them.

[MissThundercat]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Ah, so this is the "BC GOT SCREWED!" thread.

[freedomfighter]

A strong OOC is a major key to getting in the tourney. Let's break it down for everyone: 2 + 2 = 4. This is called simple math. This is what gets you into the tourney.

But make sure the OOC games are weaker opponents like Northeastern and Providence did. BC must schedule AC

[freedomfighter]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Let’s make this clear. The beef is not the tournament winner. It’s letting teams not the winner and below #1 conference winner going instead. Also a team with a losing conference record and not the tournament winner. Should not get selected.

[MissThundercat]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Yawn. Try again next season.

[UncleRay]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

Let’s make this clear. The beef is not the tournament winner. It’s letting teams not the winner and below #1 conference winner going instead. Also a team with a losing conference record and not the tournament winner. Should not get selected.

The mental gymnastics you go through must be exhausting. Not to mention the math gymnastics!

[MissThundercat]

Re: NonConference games matter more than conference ones..RPI needs changes

The mental gymnastics you go through must be exhausting. Not to mention the math gymnastics!

Uncle, would you like a margarita? I'll get some popcorn...