2/1 POLL!

1	Miami	(43)	18-4-6	993	1
2	Denver	( 6)	16-6-4	950	3
3	Wisconsin( 1)	15-7-4	895	2
4	St. Cloud State	17-8-3	817	5
5	Cornell		12-5-3	718	8
6	Duluth		17-10-1	690	9
7	Bemidji State	18-6-2	635	7
8	Yale		12-6-3	603	6
9	North Dakota	13-10-5	581	4
10	Colorado College15-10-3	548	11
11	Ferris State	17-8-3	516	10
12	Michigan State	17-9-4	483	12
13	New Hampshire	13-8-4	443	13
14	Boston College	13-8-2	432	14
15	Massachusetts	16-10-0	347	15
16	Maine		12-9-3	212	19
17	Vermont		12-9-3	167	17
18	Mass.-Lowell	14-10-2	149	16
19	Michigan	15-12-1	137	20
20	Union		13-7-6	100	18

Now tied for 10th in USCHO's pairwise: [www.uscho.com]

Oat

5	Cornell		12-5-3	718	8
9	North Dakota	13-10-5	581	4

Okay, I'm just going to take a single example pairing here and wonder how the voters could possibly think Cornell is a better team that North Dakota. Based on what I saw at Lynah a week ago, NoDak was clearly the better team (which is scary considering how young they are). Now, of course any ranking is a total order that is going to in some cases violate a higher-ranked team's propensity for losing to a particular lower-ranked team because of style of play, individual matchups, etc., but I'm having a hard time thinking of even a single team that Cornell would have a higher probability of beating than NoDak. Okay, maybe Wisconsin.

Kyle Rose

Oat

5	Cornell		12-5-3	718	8
9	North Dakota	13-10-5	581	4

Okay, I'm just going to take a single example pairing here and wonder how the voters could possibly think Cornell is a better team that North Dakota. Based on what I saw at Lynah a week ago, NoDak was clearly the better team (which is scary considering how young they are). Now, of course any ranking is a total order that is going to in some cases violate a higher-ranked team's propensity for losing to a particular lower-ranked team because of style of play, individual matchups, etc., but I'm having a hard time thinking of even a single team that Cornell would have a higher probability of beating than NoDak. Okay, maybe Wisconsin.

Come on, it's easy to understand. ND was 4, we were 8 after our series. Then they lose twice to number 2 (Denver) and we beat two unranked teams. So we're obviously the better team. (meaning the polls, not you.)

Al DeFlorio
Now tied for 10th in USCHO's pairwise: [www.uscho.com]

And also in the pairwise of anyone else who knows how to calculate it:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]
[slack.net]
[siouxsports.com]

Jim Hyla

Kyle Rose

Oat

5	Cornell		12-5-3	718	8
9	North Dakota	13-10-5	581	4

Okay, I'm just going to take a single example pairing here and wonder how the voters could possibly think Cornell is a better team that North Dakota. Based on what I saw at Lynah a week ago, NoDak was clearly the better team (which is scary considering how young they are). Now, of course any ranking is a total order that is going to in some cases violate a higher-ranked team's propensity for losing to a particular lower-ranked team because of style of play, individual matchups, etc., but I'm having a hard time thinking of even a single team that Cornell would have a higher probability of beating than NoDak. Okay, maybe Wisconsin.

Come on, it's easy to understand. ND was 4, we were 8 after our series. Then they lose twice to number 2 (Denver) and we beat two unranked teams. So we're obviously the better team. (meaning the polls, not you.)

If you want to (over)analyze it, for poll purposes our games against NoDak were essentially a draw. The voters didn't see the games so the Sioux don't get any credit for how well they played or looked. They get a little extra credit for splitting on the road. But other than that it was just two one goal games. As for this past week, any team is going to drop in the rankings if they lose twice at home even if they were playing a top ranked opponent.

KeithK

Jim Hyla

Kyle Rose

Oat

5	Cornell		12-5-3	718	8
9	North Dakota	13-10-5	581	4

Okay, I'm just going to take a single example pairing here and wonder how the voters could possibly think Cornell is a better team that North Dakota. Based on what I saw at Lynah a week ago, NoDak was clearly the better team (which is scary considering how young they are). Now, of course any ranking is a total order that is going to in some cases violate a higher-ranked team's propensity for losing to a particular lower-ranked team because of style of play, individual matchups, etc., but I'm having a hard time thinking of even a single team that Cornell would have a higher probability of beating than NoDak. Okay, maybe Wisconsin.

Come on, it's easy to understand. ND was 4, we were 8 after our series. Then they lose twice to number 2 (Denver) and we beat two unranked teams. So we're obviously the better team. (meaning the polls, not you.)

If you want to (over)analyze it, for poll purposes our games against NoDak were essentially a draw. The voters didn't see the games so the Sioux don't get any credit for how well they played or looked. They get a little extra credit for splitting on the road. But other than that it was just two one goal games. As for this past week, any team is going to drop in the rankings if they lose twice at home even if they were playing a top ranked opponent.

I agree with everything you said, but you only give further proof to

Jim Hyla

KeithK

Jim Hyla

Kyle Rose

Oat

5	Cornell		12-5-3	718	8
9	North Dakota	13-10-5	581	4

Okay, I'm just going to take a single example pairing here and wonder how the voters could possibly think Cornell is a better team that North Dakota. Based on what I saw at Lynah a week ago, NoDak was clearly the better team (which is scary considering how young they are). Now, of course any ranking is a total order that is going to in some cases violate a higher-ranked team's propensity for losing to a particular lower-ranked team because of style of play, individual matchups, etc., but I'm having a hard time thinking of even a single team that Cornell would have a higher probability of beating than NoDak. Okay, maybe Wisconsin.

Come on, it's easy to understand. ND was 4, we were 8 after our series. Then they lose twice to number 2 (Denver) and we beat two unranked teams. So we're obviously the better team. (meaning the polls, not you.)

If you want to (over)analyze it, for poll purposes our games against NoDak were essentially a draw. The voters didn't see the games so the Sioux don't get any credit for how well they played or looked. They get a little extra credit for splitting on the road. But other than that it was just two one goal games. As for this past week, any team is going to drop in the rankings if they lose twice at home even if they were playing a top ranked opponent.

I agree with everything you said, but you only give further proof to

You know, my eyes totally glossed over the smiley without reading/recognizing it. I probably wouldn't have responded i I had since I'd previously resisted the urge to respond to Kyle's post.