It's a legit question. They seem pretty adept at winning tournament games, and clearly do not.
Tech/SCSU was a valiant effort ****ed by the refs + a brutal broken stick.
Tech/ND was a broken stick that hurt me real bad
BGSU/UMD took a greasy goal, but it happened
Mankato... Well they just keep doing Mankato things.
Meanwhile 16s get upsets. Those easy wins. Obviously it's not as big of a gap in regionals as the shooty hoops, but it is interesting to compare and contrast their success.
Edit to add: Tech nerd through and through. Hard to watch the WCHA continuously fail like they do
Last edited by Crocodile Tears; 03-30-2019 at 07:39 PM.
Mankato whiffed two years in a row, there’s no doubt about that. However, BG had the defending national champs in to overtime...coulda woulda shoulda but they were one shot away from advancing. Tech was right on the doorstep a year ago, too.
Reality of it is, anything can happen in these one-off games. Just ask St. Cloud. I loved watching AIC win that game, but the reality is if those teams played 10 times, SCSU probably wins 8 or 9. AIC’s goalie also stood on his head both of those games against SCSU and Denver.
If the WCHA was getting trucked in these NCAA games I’d be more worried, but for the most part we’ve been right there, just snakebit. The conference needs to focus on getting better top to bottom and getting away from this have/have-not situation that we’ve had in the standings for the last few years.
The WCHA hasn't been a complete failure. So far Ferris State has been their best dancer. They've made the second round twice, and took North Dakota to double OT.
Never really developed a taste for tequila. Kind of hard to understand how you make a drink out of something that sharp, inhospitable. Now, bourbon is easy to understand.
Tastes like a warm summer day. -Raylan Givens
This is silly. Mankato went, what, 30-7 this year before running into a really good Providence team that underachieved a bit in the regular season and were a seed line or two (or three) below where they should’ve been based on talent. AIC is a great story and that conference has had some really great upsets lately, but Mankato has earned multiple 1 seeds in the tournament in recent years as well as a couple of at large bids. The AHA has never had a realistic shot at an at large berth.
It’s a short tournament. Flukes happen.
I don't get the point. Is the WCHA supposed to pack it in because other conferences have had more success? When all the conference re-alignment crap took place, the WCHA was left with a group of small market teams that were shoved to the side by all the elite schools. Given the situation, I think the WCHA has done fine. Anybody can see that other conferences will have more success than the the WCHA, heck, that was the whole point of the re-alignment, wasn't it?
“They are a **** site better than the U.S. Army, at least we know that they will be there in the morning.”
– Lewis B. Chesty Puller
when a journalist asked him about being surrounded by 22. enemy divisions
Secondly, it's not nearly as silly as you claim. There's a legitimate question to be asked here. A conference's strength is not just measured by the teams at the top, it's also measured by the team's in the middle and the bottom of the conference, and the latter is where Atlantic Hockey has made significant strides over the last few seasons, while certain teams in the WCHA seem to be hurting from the after effects of the realignment that happened a few years ago. Right now, I don't think there's any doubt whatsoever that the bottom of Atlantic Hockey is better than the bottom of the WCHA. And while yes, it's almost certainly true that Minnesota State is better than the top of Atlantic Hockey (NCAA failures notwithstanding, including, I might add, a loss to RIT), their overall record is also benefited from having to play teams like Alabama-Huntsville and Alaska twice a year each. Meanwhile, the team that finished in last place in the AHA this year swept North Dakota (one of the few times a big program has agreed to visit an AHA team's home barn for two).
The two conferences H2H records are fairly close over the last 3 seasons, with the AHA actually holding a 10-8-2 advantage, and the overall non-conference records are fairly similar over those 3 years combined:
AHA: 51-125-23 (.314)
WCHA: 56-122-17 (.331)
When you add in playoff games into those records, the records get even closer (the AHA is 3-3-0 over the past 3 years, while WCHA is 0-5-0), and the last matchup in the tournament between the conferences was the aforementioned RIT upset of Minnesota State.
TL;DR version: Yes, the top of the WCHA is almost certainly better than the top of Atlantic Hockey. But I see no evidence that as a whole conference that the WCHA is any better than Atlantic Hockey, and the AHA is clearly stronger at the bottom of the league now that teams that have long been cellar dwellers (*cough* *cough* AIC) have made a renewed commitment to their hockey program.
Last edited by jflory81; 04-01-2019 at 11:49 PM.
Since the realignment (2014 tournament onwards):
Total Apps 1s FFs NCs W L % Conference 6 0 0 0 4 6 40.0% AHA 21 4 6 1 22 18 55.0% HE 19 4 3 1 11 18 37.9% ECAC 10 2 0 0 2 10 16.7% WCHA 16 5 5 0 15 16 48.4% B1G 23 9 10 3 33 18 64.7% NCHC 1 0 0 0 0 1 0.0% Ind
Two one seeds, four more at large bids, and waaaaaaaay fewer wins.
This argument has some merit. It’s been pretty close for regular season Inter-conference records between the two conferences since the conference shakeup as well. (WCHA was 9-0-1 in the first seasons, it’s been close since).
WCHA is definitely a better conference overall (by overall Intra-Conference regular season records), though, so the at-large bids for the WCHA and none for the AHA are justified.
Last edited by jflory81; 04-01-2019 at 06:10 PM.
Ah yes, the "How do you measure your conference 'members' relative to the 'members' of other conferences" discussion. Can we save time and carpal tunnel by referring everyone to this incredibly conclusive thread?
Big Ten > NCHC
Correct, I was pulling from “current” conference alignment for that table.
Since ND To B1G was the only change since realignment, just take 3 appearances, a FF, two wins, and three losses from the B1G ledger and add it to the HE one.
I have no dog in this fight; I’m an ECAC fan. But I will continue to think it’s silly to try to equate the AHA with the WCHA on the basis of fluky NCAA tournament wins.
If you want to measure an entire conference's strength against another, I can think of no better metric than H2H results and inter-conference records, and those two methods provide a snapshot that the conferences are almost dead even at this point. (AHA with a slight small-sample size lead H2H over the last 3 years, and WCHA with an extremely slight lead in inter-conference record). That's not using "fluky" NCAA tournament wins to prove a point (although at some point 7-7 against mostly top seeds over the past 14 years is less fluke and more evidence that the team playing the best in the AHA at the end of the year can play with anyone), that's using regular season results to show that the results on the ice throughout the two conferences have not been much different over the last 3 years.
Last edited by jflory81; 04-03-2019 at 02:42 PM.
Apologies, I missed the sweep of Minnesota somehow when I went through the schedule. Most teams only play 6 non-conference games. And again, I'm not saying that anyone is better than Minnseota State in Atlantic Hockey, but they're not some behemoth that clearly makes the entire conference superior to the AHA because of their presence. The bottom is just as important as the top when defining the overall strength of a conference, and the advantages at the top for the WCHA are not so significant that they clearly overcome the weakness at the bottom - as evidenced when you compare overall H2H records and inter-conference records of the two conferences.
As for "not an AHA school playing a non-conference schedule like that and coming out with a winning record"....I'd say Canisius (the last placed school in the AHA's regular season) came pretty close: they swept NoDok, split with Clarkson in a home and home, and went 0-1-1 at a Union team that was ranked at the time. That's a winning record (3-2-1) against a pretty comparable schedule - their opponents ended 8, 18, and 19 in the pairwise (all for 2 game series), while the Minn State opponents were 2 (1 game), 11 (1 game), 19 (2), 21(2), and 24(2).
Canisius's non-conference opponent's RPI averaged .5388, while MnState's averaged .5332. So yeah, comparable non-conference schedule, and Canisius factually did play it over .500 (albeit not as strong a record as MnState).
I think some posters are overlooking just how much better the bottom of the AHA has gotten over the last few years (which makes it extremely hard for any team to run away with the regular season title, which in a below average conference makes it difficult to get at large bids / high rankings)
Last edited by jflory81; 04-03-2019 at 10:30 PM.
Alaska Dispatch .... Doyle Woody
UAF made the kind of hockey history on October 10th 2015 that no team wants to claim – the Nanooks became the first NCAA Division I victim of Arizona State.
Originally Posted by WeWantMore At least you guys have Packers colors.
I Must be Famous ....a School named their program after me
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)