Bracketology, '07 edition

Overall seedings with .0030 bonus:
-> This assumes that UMass wins the 3 way tie because they beat Maine & SLU head-to-head. If you break on straight RPI, those 3 are rearranged, and you get Adam's answer here: [www.collegehockeynews.com]
1) Minn
2) Notre Dame
3) Clarkson
4) UNH
5) BC
6) SCSU
7) Bu
8) Mich
9) Mich St
10) UND
11) UMass
12) SLU
13) Maine
14) Miami
15) Air Force (AQ)
16) UAH (AQ)

Seed the 4 #1s by geography (and UNH is host anyway):
Minn -> Denver (W)
Notre Dame -> Grand Rapids (MW)
Clarkson --> Rochester
UNH --> Manchester
(you could argue Minn should go to GR, that would probably change things, but this would be my guess)

No other hosts to deal with. Denver, WMU, and RPI didn't make it (neither did the ECAC as a conference )

Then doing the 1-16, 2-15 matches means:
NE:
1) UNH, 2) BC, 3) SLU, 4) Maine
E:
1) Clk, 2) SCSU, 3) UMass, 4) Miami
MW:
1) NotreD, 2) BU, 3) UND, 4) Air Force
W:
1) Minn, 2) Mich, 3) Mich St, 4) UAH

Problems: UNH/Maine, Mich/Mich St

Solution: Flip #13 Maine w/ #14 Miami & #9 Mich St w/ #10 UND

New brackets:
NE:
1) UNH
2) BC
3) SLU
4) Miami
E:
1) Clk
2) SCSU
3) UMass
4) Maine
MW:
1) Notre Dame
2) BU
3) Mich St
4) Air Force
W:
1) Minn
2) Mich
3) UND
4) UAH

Three WCHA teams make the dance. Crazy.

On the bright side, though, Cornell is 2-0-1 against 1-seeds this year.

They appear to have broken the tie via straight RPI - i.e. Adam W's guess.

In my opinion, that's very wrong. But, they can do what they wish I suppose.

An interesting, but mostly-meaningless twist by the committee.

They did 15/16 backwards, I suppose on the logic that neither was a TUC anyway, they decided to keep Air Force close to home in Denver & play Minn (assumingly) even though they should have gotten Grand Rapids & Notre Dame.

DeltaOne81
An interesting, but mostly-meaningless twist by the committee.

They did 15/16 backwards, I suppose on the logic that neither was a TUC anyway, they decided to keep Air Force close to home in Denver & play Minn (assumingly) even though they should have gotten Grand Rapids & Notre Dame.

Here's hoping for another upset, Go Air Force!

I'm not too surprised at this since neither CC or Denver made the tourney and Denver is a bit of a long haul with respect to fans from Michigan and Minnesota (and probably ND) to travel to. Probably a bit unfair to Minnesota but I have no sympathy for the gophers.

Rita

DeltaOne81
I'm not too surprised at this since neither CC or Denver made the tourney and Denver is a bit of a long haul with respect to fans from Michigan and Minnesota (and probably ND) to travel to. Probably a bit unfair to Minnesota but I have no sympathy for the gophers.

True, I forgot about the attendance factor. Which has mostly been a non-factor in recent years.

Actually, Adam addressed this:

The committee can do some other things if it decides to care about attendance, but since switching to a 16-team tournament in 2003, the committee has gone Straight Pairwise every season, without fail, other than just switching to avoid first-round intra-conference matchups. The attendance issue has not been used as a factor whatsoever.

Darn good catch, Rita

DeltaOne81

Rita

DeltaOne81
I'm not too surprised at this since neither CC or Denver made the tourney and Denver is a bit of a long haul with respect to fans from Michigan and Minnesota (and probably ND) to travel to. Probably a bit unfair to Minnesota but I have no sympathy for the gophers.

True, I forgot about the attendance factor. Which has mostly been a non-factor in recent years.

Actually, Adam addressed this:

The committee can do some other things if it decides to care about attendance, but since switching to a 16-team tournament in 2003, the committee has gone Straight Pairwise every season, without fail, other than just switching to avoid first-round intra-conference matchups. The attendance issue has not been used as a factor whatsoever.

Darn good catch, Rita

Thanks .

Adam mentions that in 2003, they went straight to the pairwise (except to avoid 1st round matchup issues). Isn't 2003 the year we got Mankato State (a #14 seed?) in Providence when our seeding indicated we should have gotten an "easier" (15/16 seed) opponent?

Rita
Adam mentions that in 2003, they went straight to the pairwise (except to avoid 1st round matchup issues). Isn't 2003 the year we got Mankato State (a #14 seed?) in Providence when our seeding indicated we should have gotten an "easier" (15/16 seed) opponent?

It got switched around so that the other 1-seeds wouldn't have to face first-round intra-conference matchups.

Rita
Adam mentions that in 2003, they went straight to the pairwise (except to avoid 1st round matchup issues). Isn't 2003 the year we got Mankato State (a #14 seed?) in Providence when our seeding indicated we should have gotten an "easier" (15/16 seed) opponent?

Yes, that was for intra-conference issues. Two #1s were WCHA and both other #4s (other than CHA/AHA) were WCHA.

So the WCHA #1s had to play the CHA/AHA, cause they couldn't play their conference breathen. Hence, the other two #1s needed to play the WCHA teams.

No, this wasn't all from memory - wiki rocks:
[en.wikipedia.org]

DeltaOne81

Rita
Adam mentions that in 2003, they went straight to the pairwise (except to avoid 1st round matchup issues). Isn't 2003 the year we got Mankato State (a #14 seed?) in Providence when our seeding indicated we should have gotten an "easier" (15/16 seed) opponent?

Yes, that was for intra-conference issues. Two #1s were WCHA and both other #4s (other than CHA/AHA) were WCHA.

So the WCHA #1s had to play the CHA/AHA, cause they couldn't play their conference breathen. Hence, the other two #1s needed to play the WCHA teams.

No, this wasn't all from memory - wiki rocks:
[en.wikipedia.org]

Yes, Wiki is great. Since 2003 the number of WCHA teams in the tourney were:
2003, 5
2004, 5
2005, 5
2006, 4
2007, 3

Gee, is this a sign of the WCHA is getting off its lofty perch and becoming a "mediocre" league? Do the past 2 years suggest a demise?

USCHO is starting to boil with Minnesota fans worried about "the regional of death."

Simple math tells us that #8 Michigan and #10 NoDak (because of intra-conference match up issues) is actually an "easier" route to St. Louis.

oceanst41
USCHO is starting to boil with Minnesota fans worried about "the regional of death."

Simple math tells us that #8 Michigan and #10 NoDak (because of intra-conference match up issues) is actually an "easier" route to St. Louis.

Remember, UND going to West Regional is the NCAA punishing them!

French Rage

oceanst41
USCHO is starting to boil with Minnesota fans worried about "the regional of death."

Simple math tells us that #8 Michigan and #10 NoDak (because of intra-conference match up issues) is actually an "easier" route to St. Louis.

Remember, UND going to West Regional is the NCAA punishing them!

So the NCAA manages to screw two WCHA teams with the same move!

Now if only the teams were this upset and Michigan could use that to take the regional. Then we'd only have one potential WCHA team in the Frozen Four.

oceanst41
USCHO is starting to boil with Minnesota fans worried about "the regional of death."

Simple math tells us that #8 Michigan and #10 NoDak (because of intra-conference match up issues) is actually an "easier" route to St. Louis.

I haven't posted on USCHO in ages, but you can tell them that KRACH tells them they're full of shit

Minnesota has a 60.7% chance to advance to the Frozen Four according to KRACH (which is the only rating system we can get these numbers from). The odds are so high, primarily because Minn has a 94.7% chance to beat Air Force.

Meanwhile, Clarkson has only a 57.7% chance to win their first game. And well less than 50% to advance.

Yes, Minn's second round may be tougher, but being given a nearly free pass (of course, Minn last year reminded us that its never entirely free) through the first round is a *major* boon.

If anyone got a very tough draw its Michigan, and maybe UND, but *not* Minnesota. By the system, Minn got the easiest #2. Tell them they can start whining when, as the overall #1 they don't get the AHA/CHA team in the first round, and then get the toughest #2

Well how do you reply when they say they already played Michigan and UND this year and they want to see fresh faces?

Tell them to play fresh faces during the regular season.

ursusminor
Tell them to play fresh faces during the regular season.

But then Denver loses to RPI and misses the tournament. It's much easier to complain about lack of fresh faces than lose to them. u

Shrug. Win your games and get seeded #1 overall closest to home. Anyway, that's what Cornell was told the last couple seasons.

I'm bored on a Sunday with no hockey, so:

[spreadsheets.google.com]

Let the arguing commence.
(I didn't go any further because the equations become unwieldy and I'm not getting paid )

DeltaOne81
I'm bored on a Sunday with no hockey, so:

[spreadsheets.google.com]

Let the arguing commence.
(I didn't go any further because the equations become unwieldy and I'm not getting paid )

However, it does make it easier to prove that the KRACH says Minnesota is full of shit.

I let USCHO know that this was your gift to the **Official** Bracketology discussion.

Trotsky
Shrug. Win your games and get seeded #1 overall closest to home. Anyway, that's what Cornell was told the last couple seasons.

Well we got hosed in 2005 but I seem to remember losing a game in Albany last year.

oceanst41
Well how do you reply when they say they already played Michigan and UND this year and they want to see fresh faces?

That Moog used to whine as coach and now we get to hear him whine as a color man. Though I have to say he isn't as annoying a color man as I had anticipated he would be.

Trotsky
Shrug. Win your games and get seeded #1 overall closest to home. Anyway, that's what Cornell was told the last couple seasons.

At the risk of sounding like I'm whining, is nobody else troubled by the fact that Clksn & SLU get to stay in the east after Cornell seems destined to play in the west (for most regional games)? As a No. 1 seed, Clkson may have deserved it. But SLU in Manchester? Huh?

Redice,

Whine away!! I'm with you (!) on the obvious discrimination that the NCAA selection committees have AGAINST Cornell staying in the East. Yes... isn't it amazing that SLU, third in the ECACHL tourney no less gets to stay in the East, and Cornell, had to toe the road twice before in the midwest, even though we did better. When we did get to play the quarter games in the east (NH & BC), at least we were 1 - 1 and made it to the frozen four once of the two.

In the midwest, we got 0-2 (both OT) in front of hostile crowds.

I would have thought SLU would have been sent out west. Clarkson I can see staying in the east.

I hope we will have more offense next year.

Let's Go RED!!!! (07-08)

-- The Chief

the reason SLU gets to stay east is because they are the 11 seed and would play the 6 seed, SCSU. However, in the 6-12 game... BC would play maine... intraconference matchup which the committee hates. So they simply flip slu and maine to avoid this.

take it as the committee has a bias against cornell if you want to, but it is the same procedure that the committee has used for several years now.

-Devin

Holy shit... did I just defend SLU?

Dpperk29
the reason SLU gets to stay east is because they are the 11 seed and would play the 6 seed, SCSU. However, in the 6-12 game... BC would play maine... intraconference matchup which the committee hates. So they simply flip slu and maine to avoid this.

take it as the committee has a bias against cornell if you want to, but it is the same procedure that the committee has used for several years now.

-Devin

Holy shit... did I just defend SLU?

Yes, and now it's immortalized.

But seriously, it's just an unfortunate fluke of the numbers that Cornell got sent went in 2005 and 2006, while Clarkson and St. Lawrence get to stay east in 2007. The committee has gone by the numbers as much as they possibly can to maintain bracket integrity while avoiding first-round intraconference matchups. That's just the way the numbers broke down each year.

Will
But seriously, it's just an unfortunate fluke of the numbers that Cornell got sent went in 2005 and 2006, while Clarkson and St. Lawrence get to stay east in 2007. The committee has gone by the numbers as much as they possibly can to maintain bracket integrity while avoiding first-round intraconference matchups. That's just the way the numbers broke down each year.

Will is absolutely right, of course. While it's nice to see the Chief, our own version of Goldy Knight, back here, there is no bias (obvious or not) of CU in the selections. We've had low seedings and stayed east.

1996 - low seed, Albany (#6 East)
1997 - low seed, Grand Rapids (#6 West)
2002 - low seed, Worcester (#4 East + gift 1st round opponent in QU)
2003 - #1 seed, Providence (#1 East + missing a minor conf. team)
2005 - mid-seed, Minneapolis (#2 West)
2006 - mid-seed, Green Bay (#2 Midwest)

Fact is that the committee has to try and match several often-interlocking rules to place teams. They worry about that, not how they're going to "Screw Cornell." More often than not, it's been the recent strength of the WCHA that has forced their hands to distribute interconference teams around the country.

Personally, being from the area, I had Rochester circled as a regional I had wanted Cornell to hit. Instead, we had a bad half, and Clarkson gets to take advantage. Knowing several Clarkson grads in the Rochester area, I couldn't be happier for them. Frankly I got to go to most of the regionals listed above, and I'm glad that I did. Great experiences, all of them, and the only thing I would change is our finish in each of the tournaments.

Congrats to the Knights and the Saints. Let's Go North Country!!

Dpperk29
the reason SLU gets to stay east is because they are the 11 seed and would play the 6 seed, SCSU. However, in the 6-12 game... BC would play maine... intraconference matchup which the committee hates. So they simply flip slu and maine to avoid this.

take it as the committee has a bias against cornell if you want to, but it is the same procedure that the committee has used for several years now.

-Devin

Holy shit... did I just defend SLU?

No, you defended the committee!! You're off the hook.

BTW, I fully understand that the committee doesn't have a screw-Cornell agenda. The results just sometimes leave a bad taste (end of whine <lol>!!!

redice

Trotsky
Shrug. Win your games and get seeded #1 overall closest to home. Anyway, that's what Cornell was told the last couple seasons.

At the risk of sounding like I'm whining, is nobody else troubled by the fact that Clksn & SLU get to stay in the east after Cornell seems destined to play in the west (for most regional games)? As a No. 1 seed, Clkson may have deserved it. But SLU in Manchester? Huh?

As already pointed out in this thread, that's the way the numbers worked out. They have a procedure and they stuck with it. If you're not a #1, then its luck where you end up based on the matchups.

We were unlucky. SLU was lucky. Over the long haul it'll even out. There's no agenda pro or con for anyone. If they *didn't* follow the process, that would be wrong. They had to send us west in 05 and 06, and as much as I hated it, it would've been even more wrong if they'd broken the process to quiet the ignorant like CAAB.

RichH
Congrats to the Knights and the Saints. Let's Go North Country!!

I know we're supposed to fall back on conference loyalty and all that, but why'd it have to be the North Country? I think I'd even rather P-ton make it, and their license plate has a turd on it. *grumble*

ftyuv

RichH
Congrats to the Knights and the Saints. Let's Go North Country!!

I know we're supposed to fall back on conference loyalty and all that, but why'd it have to be the North Country? I think I'd even rather P-ton make it, and their license plate has a turd on it. *grumble*

It was bound to happen sooner or later, as Clarkson and St. Lawrence have both been historically strong programs who have suffered a few weak seasons lately, until now. Princeton, on the other hand, has never been all that committed to hockey as far as I can tell (if I'm counting correctly, they've had a grand total of one NCAA appearance and five winning seasons since the ECAC was formed). From all appearances, Princeton is really just a step or two above Union. Maybe that's changing with Gadowsky behind the bench; we'll just have to wait and see. Until then, though, I want to see ECAC programs seriously committed to hockey succeeding (except at Cornell's expense), and that includes Clarkson and St. Lawrence.

CAAB
I'm with you (!) on the obvious discrimination that the NCAA selection committees have AGAINST Cornell staying in the East. Yes... isn't it amazing that SLU, third in the ECACHL tourney no less gets to stay in the East, and Cornell, had to toe the road twice before in the midwest, even though we did better. When we did get to play the quarter games in the east (NH & BC), at least we were 1 - 1 and made it to the frozen four once of the two.

There's been some discussion here and elsewhere that the committee went strictly by the numbers in 2005 and 2006, but that isn't true for 2005. CC was #2 in PWR and Denver #3. However they made Denver #2 overall seed, yet sent them east. Then CC, as the #3, went to Grand Rapids.
Regardless of the CC-Denver flipping, normally #2 would've gone to Grand Rapids. However, conveniently having #3 there also allowed for placing #6 Michigan in Grand Rapids, instead of shipping them east vs. #3.
Also, #5 Cornell played #10 Ohio State. It would've been impossible to place us in a 4-5-12 region, as #4 Minn. and #12 BU were both hosts, but a 5-11 matchup (would've been Wisconsin) was possible, but Wisconsin went to Grand Rapids in a 6-11 matchup, thus leaving a 7-12 matchup in BU's region.
Prior to the placement of teams, there was some speculation that the committee could simply flip the 5-12 matchup east in the region with #3 and have the 6-11 matchup go to Minnesota. While the committee didn't violate the sanctity of the 4-5 matchup, they did use some creativity of their own.

The funniest part is WCHA people pissed because
a) SCSU had to go east
b) multiple WCHA teams were placed in the same bracket

Now, with 3 teams and 2 western regionals, I think we can see the logical problem here.

If anyone's interested in entering this...

[www.bracketmaker.com]

You'll have to register, confirm your email, and then make your predictions.