Sunday, May 19th, 2024
 
 
 
Updates automatically
Twitter Link
CHN iOS App
 
NCAA
1967 1970

ECAC
1967 1968 1969 1970 1973 1980 1986 1996 1997 2003 2005 2010

IVY
1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1977 1978 1983 1984 1985 1996 1997 2002 2003 2004 2005 2012 2014

Cleary Bedpan
2002 2003 2005

Ned Harkness Cup
2003 2005 2008 2013
 
Brendon
Iles
Pokulok
Schafer
Syphilis

Rankings Dec. 1: #13

Posted by amerks127 
Rankings Dec. 1: #13
Posted by: amerks127 (128.253.118.---)
Date: December 01, 2008 04:28PM

[www.uscho.com]

Swapped down with Vermont, while Princeton fell to #9 and yet somehow picked up 2 first-place votes. Meanwhile Dartmouth improves to #16 and Yale garners more votes than Sucks.
 
Re: Rankings Dec. 1: #13
Posted by: Scersk '97 (---.dsl.chcgil.sbcglobal.net)
Date: December 01, 2008 06:25PM

I usually don't comment on the USCHO poll, mainly because it's not worth the paper it's not printed on, but this one is particularly instructive.

Compare to KRACH for giggles. (In this case, again, John's. banana )

Who exactly, for example, has BC beat? They beat Vermont, ranked below them (in the USCHO poll), and have been beaten by Northeastern (below), Maine (way below), and Notre Dame (more on that later). They've beaten, next up in the KRACH, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and Dartmouth. Whoopee!

Then take a look at Notre Dame, which has played a pretty damn weak schedule, whether you look at the USCHO poll or KRACH. They lost to Miami (twice!) and Denver, both ranked below them by USCHO, and beat BC (see above). Whoopee! Other than that, they've had a slightly successful time beating up on the Western Michigans of the world. So, beat BC, beat up on some weak teams, and lose to others. By those criteria, Northeastern should be #1.

Most of this seems to arise from a serious undervaluing of Vermont, which has clearly created something scary up there in Burlington. Their only real faults seem to be losing to undervalued Northeastern and BC (see above). Go figure.

There's very little question that the voters still have hardons for the underperforming CCHA and everso average WCHA and not quite enough of one for Hockey East, probably because the wrong teams are winning. I can't help but think that the EZAC stigma has followed Vermont to Hockey East, and it's also not helping Princeton or us.

All that being said, I'm more than happy for us to fly under the radar.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/2008 06:31PM by Scersk '97.
 
Re: Rankings Dec. 1: #13
Posted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: December 01, 2008 06:58PM

As always polls are based to a great degree on expectations. Some voters haven't looked hard enough to see the things that you point out. Others are simply convinced that BC will turn out to be that good because... well, they're BC! And Notre Dame looked so good last season they must still be good.

In the second half of the season the poll will trend towards the Pairwsie, both because data will start to overwhlem the data and consciously or unconsciously voters will take their cues from the rankings.
 
Re: Rankings Dec. 1: #13
Posted by: Cornell11 (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: December 01, 2008 08:04PM

and Princeton beat Northeastern 5-3 and outshot them 39-21. How good is this Princeton team?
 
Re: Rankings Dec. 1: #13
Posted by: TimV (---.nycap.res.rr.com)
Date: December 01, 2008 08:07PM

One goal less good than us?
 
Re: Rankings Dec. 1: #13
Posted by: Swampy (---.219.128.131.dhcp.uri.edu)
Date: December 02, 2008 05:49PM

TimV
One goal less good than us?

Than "we"? woot
 
Re: Rankings Dec. 1: #13
Posted by: TimV (---.nycap.res.rr.com)
Date: December 05, 2008 04:31PM

;-);-);-)flipa;-);-);-)
 
Re: Rankings Dec. 1: #13
Posted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.airproducts.com)
Date: December 05, 2008 07:40PM

Nice, Tim.
 

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login