Polls 2019-20

Thanks.For a while I feared that C.U. hockey fans had lost touch with reality - the best part of it!

Jeff: Speaking of "Wholes" I am pleased to see another Cornell hockey fan whose interests go beyond statistics.I was worried the dweebs had completed their conquest.

jkahn
I sat right by the Cornell bench my senior year. If a player made a mistake, Ned would immediately address it with the player very directly explaining what he should have done, then pat in on the back and send him back out for his next shift. How things were handled between games I can't address.

THIS is how a good coach deals with a player who screws up. Publicly blaming an individual player is not. But during a game, or even during the season, the instruction needs to be something the player can learn and implement: e.g., "don't cross your feet while playing defense" (in lacrosse) or (I would guess) "keep your stick on the ice when defending." Saying something like "you have to be a faster skater (runner)" is not helpful. OTOH, at the end of a season saying to a player, "you need to run stairs and work on your technique over the summer to pick up a couple of steps with your speed" is perfectly appropriate. And for the player who habitually repeats certain mistakes, the bench may get their attention. And if, during practices or stints in games against weaker opponents, the player eliminates the mistakes, then that may be their ticket off the bench. But I think the hardest thing must be the player who simply doesn't have the size, speed, quickness, skill, or whatever to stand against the other team's best, but who nonetheless is the best player you have to fill the role. In this case, encouragement and teaching may be all a coach can do.

osorojo
I have worked for people who criticized everyone involved when one person's lack of effort/performance was the proximate cause of failure, and I suspect you have too. They were lousy leaders. I don't parse group leadership into separate styles: one for business, one for sports for example. People who mistake the whole for the part are seldom successful.

You are proving my point for me in a bunch of ways.

-this isnt related to my point precisely, but you are taking a personal example and generalizing it in unsound ways.

Further, take your example above where everyone in the room knows that Joe Smith is the precise weak link. If JS really is the weak link, predictably so, and not redeemable or trainable, etc, then the boss is a shitty leader for not firing the weak link in the first place, regardless of how he addresses the group.

(Just as any coach would be a shitty leader if they are putting players on the field or ice in situations where that player doesn't have what it takes to succeed). Replace them or double shift someone else, but don't sink the team because you don't have the balls to do the hard personnel stuff.

Case in point is Belicheck. He gets more out of players that other teams discard than probably any other coach I've ever heard of. Read interviews with any journeyman that stocks with the Pats. To a man they all say that things have worked out better with the Pats because Belicheck figures out what you're good at and then uses you in situations or positions where you have a chance to succeed.

He also cuts guys ruthlessly, and quickly. And if he can't bring in a replacement he figures out who already on the roster can learn a second position-and gets serious production.


Back to the original you versus we:

If the boss tells an assemblage of the entire team that "the X process sucks, it fails too damn much " and as he points and shakes a finger in everyones general direction says "you guys all suck, you fucked up and you're all fuckups, it's your responsibility, get this shit fixed." That boss is an asshole, it'll never get fixed, and noone is going to lift a finger to help the weak link (assuming they don't quit immediately)

However, in the same situation, if the boss says "the X process sucks, it fails too damn much " and then continues by saying "we've got to get better at this. It starts here (pointing to self). You can't just blame this on the players, were all responsible for it, to a man. The coaches are gonna have to coach better, game plan better etc. I'm gonna have to dig deeper b cause at the end of the day I'm responsible for this team. And each of you out there (players) need to look inside yourselves and figure out what you can do to make *this team* better."

Well if he gives that speech, the fucking Marines will charge up over the hill.

Again, Belicheck. The speech I used as an example is, as closely as I can remember, one ive heard him give to the press as well as the team a number of times in recent years. Love or hate the guy as a fan, the results speak for themselves.

If Belicheck is a paragon of coaches Carlo Ponzi is a paragon of investors.

I hate it when a bunch of sissies/socialists say "Everyone gets equal credit and everyone takes equal blame." Heroes and villains, not consortiums and conglomerates, are what make sports and life interesting.

osorojo
I hate it when a bunch of sissies/socialists say "Everyone gets equal credit and everyone takes equal blame." Heroes and villains, not consortiums and conglomerates, are what make sports and life interesting.

I suspect that, even when a coach says "we", he has, in his mind, players who are more/less problematic. That's why we fans see players come/go from the lineup. It's still a "we" thing in his mind because, if he doesn't make the right lineup changes, in addition to the proper coaching, he's part of that "we" thing. He's part of the problem..

osorojo
sissies/socialists

Do go on.

Nm

Trotsky

osorojo
sissies/socialists

Do go on.

Be nice or he'll threaten to stop compiling spreadsheets.

Christ, I've been out of contact for a couple of days and this is what we've degenerated to?

I have no f 'ing idea how Schafer talks to his team in private. I do know that I've not seen him go after a player in public, but he has sat down prominent players when he felt it was necessary. I also know that we've had coaches that players did not like working under, and Schafer is not one of them.

No one will ever be Harkness again, the time is different and players are different.

I also know that the poor PK must be driving Schafer crazy and it must be something that he thinks about and works with all the time.

I don't know if he'll get it to improve, but I'm sure that he's trying 100+% and that's good enough for me.

I complain about the PK to my friends all the time, but never do I think that the team isn't trying to better it.

Maybe it's bad karma and we won't correct it this season. If so, it will probably will doom our post-season chances and I'll be unhappy again. However I'm sure that Schafer is going to be bothered 10 times more than I am.

As for some of the other things that have been said on this thread, well I'm glad I could read through it once and hopefully now completely forget about it.

I expect Coach Schafer spends more time coaching individual team members about their duties and responsibilities on penalty kills than he devotes to lecturing the entire team, gathered in a circle, about group penalty kills.

osorojo
I expect Coach Schafer spends more time coaching individual team members about their duties and responsibilities on penalty kills than he devotes to lecturing the entire team, gathered in a circle, about group penalty kills.

everything you say manages to be stupider than the thing you said before. it is impressive.

ugarte

osorojo
I expect Coach Schafer spends more time coaching individual team members about their duties and responsibilities on penalty kills than he devotes to lecturing the entire team, gathered in a circle, about group penalty kills.

everything you say manages to be stupider than the thing you said before. it is impressive.

Thanks ugarte, saved me from the effort.

He’s trolling you guys. You are all biting for it.

osorojo
If Belicheck is a paragon of coaches Carlo Ponzi is a paragon of investors.

This used to be so quaint, an outlier of Usonian Kulture.

But not anymore! Now it's mainstream.

+ infinity.

USCHO has the women at #1 and men at #2.

I'll post the whole polling data later.

Jim Hyla
USCHO has the women at #1 and men at #2.

I'll post the whole polling data later.

We lost our 1st place vote, and Mankato keeps theirs, preventing ND from being unanimous.

USCHO Division I Men's Poll - February 17, 2020
Rnk	Team	     (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll

1	North Dakota	(49)	23-3-3	999	1
2	Cornell		        19-2-4	929	2
3	Minnesota State	(1)	26-4-2	910	3
4	Minnesota Duluth	17-9-2	833	4
5	Clarkson		22-6-2	786	5
6	Boston College		19-8-1	754	7
7	Denver	        	17-8-5	684	6
8	Massachusetts		18-9-2	664	8
9	Arizona State		22-9-3	545	10
10	Northeastern		17-8-3	543	12
11	Penn State		19-10-3	528	9
12	Ohio State		16-10-4	396	13
13	Bemidji State		18-8-4	374	16
14	UMass Lowell		15-9-5	342	11
15	Providence		15-9-6	327	14
16	Quinnipiac		18-10-2	259	15
17	Maine		        16-10-4	190	17
18	Minnesota		14-11-5	123	NR
19	Western Michigan	15-10-5	103	NR
20	Harvard		        11-8-6	53	18

Others receiving votes: AIC 43, Michigan 32, Sacred Heart 21, 
Northern Michigan 18, Boston University 15, 
Michigan State 14, Notre Dame 12, Bowling Green 3

USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Men's College Hockey Poll
February 17, 2020
	Team	                      Points  (First) Last Poll	Record	Weeks in Poll
	
1	University of North Dakota 	510	(34)	1	23-3-3	17
2	Cornell University 	        458		2	19-2-4	20
3	Minnesota State University 	452		3	26-4-2	20
4	University of Minnesota Duluth 	398		4	17-9-2	20
5	Boston College 	                352		6	19-8-1	18
6	Clarkson University 	        344		7	22-6-2	20
7	University of Denver 	        300		5	17-8-5	20
8	University of Massachusetts 	272		8	18-9-2	20
9	Arizona State University 	206		10	22-9-3	8
10	Northeastern University 	199		12	17-8-3	20
10	Penn State University 	        199		9	19-10-3	20
12	Ohio State University   	113		13	16-10-4	20
13	Bemidji State University 	 85		NR	18-8-4	1
14	Quinnipiac University 	         50		15	18-10-2	5
15	University Massachusetts Lowell  48		11	15-9-5	9

Others receiving votes: University of Maine 30, University of Minnesota 21, 
Providence College 20, Western Michigan University 17, Harvard University 4, 
American International University 2.

NCAA Tournament
Pairwise Comparison Ratings

Rk 	Team 	       PCWs 	RPI 	Rk 	QWB-† 	W-L-T 	Win % 	Wgtd Win % - ‡
1 	North Dakota 	59 	.6312 	1 	.0119 	23-3-3 	.8448 	.8519
2 	Minnesota State 58 	.6061 	2 	.0076 	26-4-2 	.8438 	.8375
3 	Cornell 	57 	.5946 	3 	.0030 	19-2-4 	.8400 	.8484
4 	Minnesota-Duluth56 	.5735 	4 	.0085 	17-9-2 	.6429 	.6377
5 	Denver 	        55 	.5685 	5 	.0064 	17-8-5 	.6500 	.6531
6 	Boston College 	54 	.5675 	6 	.0032 	19-8-1 	.6964 	.6952
7 	Clarkson 	53 	.5585 	7 	.0015 	22-6-2 	.7667 	.7632
8 	Massachusetts 	52 	.5569 	8 	.0052 	18-9-2 	.6552 	.6597
9 	Northeastern 	51 	.5520 	9 	.0026 	17-8-3 	.6607 	.6705
10 	Penn State 	50 	.5519 	10 	.0031 	19-10-3 .6406 	.6352
11 	Arizona State 	49 	.5499 	11 	.0031 	22-9-3 	.6912 	.6982
12 	Bemidji State 	47 	.5448 	12 	.0020 	18-8-4 	.6667 	.6783
13 	Ohio State 	47 	.5399 	13 	.0028 	16-10-4 .6000 	.5993
14 	Maine 	        46 	.5376 	14 	.0050 	16-10-4 .6000 	.6176
15 	Mass.-Lowell 	45 	.5371 	15 	.0050 	15-9-5 	.6034 	.5973
16 	Minnesota 	45 	.5366 	16 	.0022 	14-11-5 .5500 	.5364
17 	Western Michigan42 	.5366 	17 	.0028 	15-10-5 .5833 	.5856
18 	Quinnipiac 	42 	.5353 	18 	.0030 	18-10-2 .6333 	.6408
19 	Providence 	41 	.5343 	19 	.0050 	15-9-6 	.6000 	.5974
20 	Michigan 	39 	.5285 	20 	.0042 	14-12-3 .5345 	.5315
21 	Michigan State 	38 	.5256 	21 	.0040 	14-14-1 .5000 	.4965
22 	Boston Univer 	37 	.5239 	22 	.0039 	12-9-8 	.5517 	.5468
23 	Notre Dame 	37 	.5219 	23 	.0060 	12-12-6 .5000 	.4865
24 	Northrn Michigan36 	.5211 	24 	.0020 	16-12-4 .5625 	.5563
25 	Harvard 	35 	.5188 	25 	.0028 	11-8-6 	.5600 	.5586

KRACH: Division I Men

Rank	Team	       Rating	RRWP Win % Rk	W-L-T	Win % Win Ratio	SOS Rk	SOS

1	North Dakota	1182.	.8977	1	23-3-3	0.8448	5.444	3	217.2
2	Minnesota State	940.7	.8757	2	26-4-2	0.8438	5.400	8	174.2
3	Cornell         536.6	.8076	3	19-2-4	0.8400	5.250	33	102.2
4	Denver	        417.8	.7706	10	17-8-5	0.6500	1.857	1	225.0
5	Minnesota Duluth401.9	.7644	12	17-9-2	0.6429	1.800	2	223.3
6	Boston College	295.4	.7128	5	19-8-1	0.6964	2.294	20	128.7
7	Bemidji State	282.6	.7049	7	18-8-4	0.6667	2.000	17	141.3
8	Clarkson	279.7	.7030	4	22-6-2	0.7667	3.286	41	85.12
9	Penn State	253.1	.6849	13	19-10-3	0.6406	1.783	16	142.0
10	Ohio State	239.3	.6745	17	16-10-4	0.6000	1.500	13	159.6
11	Arizona State	237.8	.6733	6	22-9-3	0.6912	2.238	31	106.3
12	Massachusetts	235.6	.6716	9	18-9-2	0.6552	1.900	21	124.0
13	Minnesota	234.3	.6705	27	14-11-5	0.5500	1.222	5	191.7
14	Western Michigan225.4	.6632	22	15-10-5	0.5833	1.400	12	161.0
15	Northeastern	220.0	.6586	8	17-8-3	0.6607	1.947	26	113.0
16	Michigan	197.0	.6373	28	14-12-3	0.5345	1.148	10	171.6
17	Michigan State	189.5	.6297	33	14-14-1	0.5000	1.000	6	189.5
18	Northrn Michigan177.7	.6170	23	16-12-4	0.5625	1.286	18	138.2
19	Providence	170.0	.6082	17	15-9-6	0.6000	1.500	25	113.3
20	Notre Dame	169.9	.6081	33	12-12-6	0.5000	1.000	11	169.9
21	UMass Lowell	166.4	.6040	16	15-9-5	0.6034	1.522	28	109.4
22	Quinnipiac	164.7	.6019	14	18-10-2	0.6333	1.727	38	95.37

USCHO Division I Women's Poll - February 17, 2020
Rnk	Team	    (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll

1	Cornell	      (15)	23-1-3	150	1
2	Wisconsin		26-4-2	129	2
3	Northeastern		26-4-2	113	3
3	Minnesota		23-5-3	113	4
5	Ohio State		18-8-6	95	6
6	Princeton		20-5-1	67	5
7	Clarkson		21-5-6	61	6
8	Boston University	22-6-4	41	9
9	Minnesota Duluth	16-9-5	39	8
10	Quinnipiac		18-11-3	11	10

Others receiving votes: Harvard 5, Providence 1

Women's National Collegiate PairWise Rankings

Rnk	Team	        PWR	W-L-T	W% W%  Rnk	RPI	RPI Rnk

1	Cornell	        40	23-1-3	0.9074	1	0.6657*	1
2	Wisconsin	39	26-4-2	0.8438	2	0.6520*	2
3	Minnesota	38	23-5-3	0.7903	4	0.6406*	3
4	Northeastern	37	26-4-2	0.8438	2	0.6289*	4
5	Ohio State	36	18-8-6	0.6562	8	0.6108	5
6	Princeton	35	20-5-1	0.7885	5	0.6064*	6
7	Clarkson	34	21-5-6	0.7500	6	0.5870*	7
8	Boston Univer   33	22-6-4	0.7500	6	0.5842*	8
9	Minnesota Duluth32	16-9-5	0.6167	10	0.5812	9
10	Quinnipiac	31	18-11-3	0.6094	12	0.5463*	10
11	Harvard	        30	15-11-1	0.5741	14	0.5426*	11
12	Colgate	        29	15-13-6	0.5294	20	0.5333*	12
13	Boston College	28	16-13-3	0.5469	18	0.5320	13
14	Providence	27	16-12-4	0.5625	16	0.5306	14
15	Mercyhurst	26	16-9-5	0.6167	10	0.5299	15
16	Robert Morris	25	16-10-4	0.6000	13	0.5287*	16

KRACH: National Collegiate Women

Rank	Team	       Rating	RRWP Win % Rk	W-L-T	Win % Win Ratio	SOS Rk	SOS

1	Cornell	        3018.	.9169	1	23-1-3	0.9074	9.800	7	308.0
2	Wisconsin	2950.	.9153	2	26-4-2	0.8438	5.400	4	546.2
3	Minnesota	2382.	.8996	4	23-5-3	0.7903	3.769	2	632.0
4	Ohio State	1486.	.8590	8	18-8-6	0.6562	1.909	1	778.1
5	Princeton	976.0	.8160	5	20-5-1	0.7885	3.727	9	261.9
6	Northeastern	939.2	.8117	2	26-4-2	0.8438	5.400	14	173.9
7	Minnesota Duluth886.2	.8051	10	16-9-5	0.6167	1.609	3	550.9
8	Clarkson	647.3	.7677	6	21-5-6	0.7500	3.000	12	215.8
9	Boston Univer	445.9	.7190	6	22-6-4	0.7500	3.000	17	148.6
10  	Bemidji State	360.6	.6896	24	15-16-3	0.4853	0.943	5	382.5
11	Harvard	        302.7	.6645	14	15-11-1	0.5741	1.348	11	224.6
12	Quinnipiac	277.7	.6519	12	18-11-3	0.6094	1.560	13	178.0
13	Colgate	        262.2	.6435	20	15-13-6	0.5294	1.125	10	233.1
14	Minnesota State	244.9	.6335	28	11-16-6	0.4242	0.737	6	332.4
15	Robert Morris	203.8	.6061	13	16-10-4	0.6000	1.500	19	135.9
16	Boston College	196.8	.6008	18	16-13-3	0.5469	1.207	15	163.0
17	Yale	        192.6	.5976	17	15-12-0	0.5556	1.250	16	154.1
18	Providence	185.1	.5916	16	16-12-4	0.5625	1.286	18	143.9
19	Mercyhurst	175.0	.5832	10	16-9-5	0.6167	1.609	23	108.8
20	St. Lawrence	125.5	.5334	25	12-13-7	0.4844	0.939	20	133.6

Nice to see the women pick up all first place votes. Go ladies!!

KenP
Nice to see the women pick up all first place votes. Go ladies!!

Interesting to look at the SOS numbers differentiated by East vs. West. Cornell has the highest SOS among Eastern schools in the KRACH top-20, but every Western team has a higher SOS than CU, most by a very large margin.

I'm reminded of the former 4-team ACC in lacrosse, where they could really pad the SOS metric by just playing each other so often.

RichH

KenP
Nice to see the women pick up all first place votes. Go ladies!!

Interesting to look at the SOS numbers differentiated by East vs. West. Cornell has the highest SOS among Eastern schools in the KRACH top-20, but every Western team has a higher SOS than CU, most by a very large margin.

I'm reminded of the former 4-team ACC in lacrosse, where they could really pad the SOS metric by just playing each other so often.

If you look at it, the NCHC, WCHA, and Big Ten play each other a lot. A significant portion of that is driven by geography. For the same reason, The Hockey East schools tend to play the ECAC a lot and on a limited basis AHA. So to some extent it is rather "inbred".

Right, but it’s not the insularity that creates the disparity in SOS numbers. If you had two insular groups, their average records would both be .500 (within the group). Then, if a single game is played where a random team from group A beats a team from group B, then suddenly KRACH will tell you that every team in A is better than every team in B. There’s a little more east-west crossover than that in a hockey season, but the point is that Western teams did well in those crossover games. That makes the Western group look stronger top-to-bottom than the East. Want to reverse the trend? Do better. Win more.

KRACH 2003 vs. KRACH 2020

Is KRACH without SOS basically just winning percentage?

I used this data:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

The graphs may be misleading because although Krach & SOS are measured in similar orders of magnitude, their ranges are drastically different. So instead of a stacked bar chart, side-by-side bars with the SOS scale at the right would give a visual impression more reflective of the teams’ relative standing. Of course, the visual impression would reflect a tacit linearity in the two scales, but I’m not sure they’re linear.

I revised the graphs for Swampy.

I think the graphs show a few things. One, the ECAC teams had relatively low SOS's in 2003. Two, ND and Mankato appear to be especially strong right now. Three, in 2020 the difference between the 6th and 16th teams is a lot smaller now than it was in 2003.

With regard to Cornell's late period play this year, I think the team is playing to the level of its opponents and they are not trying to win 9-0. For Matt, he may be feeling out of the game when he doesn't face a lot of shots and isn't pumped for the entire 60 minutes. I am not part of the team so this is just speculation. In a close game with a strong opponent, I think they would play very differently. We will all see on February 29 and then in March.

The team only has two losses this season. That's impressive.

Robb
Right, but it’s not the insularity that creates the disparity in SOS numbers. If you had two insular groups, their average records would both be .500 (within the group). Then, if a single game is played where a random team from group A beats a team from group B, then suddenly KRACH will tell you that every team in A is better than every team in B. There’s a little more east-west crossover than that in a hockey season, but the point is that Western teams did well in those crossover games. That makes the Western group look stronger top-to-bottom than the East. Want to reverse the trend? Do better. Win more.

Agreed on all points. The issue is that the methodology over-emphasizes (IMO) that limited number of cross-over points.

Swampy
The graphs may be misleading because although Krach & SOS are measured in similar orders of magnitude, their ranges are drastically different. So instead of a stacked bar chart, side-by-side bars with the SOS scale at the right would give a visual impression more reflective of the teams’ relative standing. Of course, the visual impression would reflect a tacit linearity in the two scales, but I’m not sure they’re linear.

Agreed. I read the revised graphs and they are still misleading and/or confusing. It's hard to make any obvious visual generations due to the compressed scale of the SOS measure as well as having all schools with the same color.

Would love to see the crotch and SOS on separate graphs, and also perhaps color the bars by the team's league, or one color for each one color for West.

abmarks

Swampy
The graphs may be misleading because although Krach & SOS are measured in similar orders of magnitude, their ranges are drastically different. So instead of a stacked bar chart, side-by-side bars with the SOS scale at the right would give a visual impression more reflective of the teams’ relative standing. Of course, the visual impression would reflect a tacit linearity in the two scales, but I’m not sure they’re linear.

Agreed. I read the revised graphs and they are still misleading and/or confusing. It's hard to make any obvious visual generations due to the compressed scale of the SOS measure as well as having all schools with the same color.

Would love to see the crotch and SOS on separate graphs, and also perhaps color the bars by the team's league, or one color for each one color for West.

He said 'crotch' Heh, heh heh heh

abmarks

Swampy
The graphs may be misleading because although Krach & SOS are measured in similar orders of magnitude, their ranges are drastically different. So instead of a stacked bar chart, side-by-side bars with the SOS scale at the right would give a visual impression more reflective of the teams’ relative standing. Of course, the visual impression would reflect a tacit linearity in the two scales, but I’m not sure they’re linear.

Agreed. I read the revised graphs and they are still misleading and/or confusing. It's hard to make any obvious visual generations due to the compressed scale of the SOS measure as well as having all schools with the same color.

Would love to see the crotch and SOS on separate graphs, and also perhaps color the bars by the team's league, or one color for each one color for West.

Halftime show notwithstanding.

abmarks

Swampy
The graphs may be misleading because although Krach & SOS are measured in similar orders of magnitude, their ranges are drastically different. So instead of a stacked bar chart, side-by-side bars with the SOS scale at the right would give a visual impression more reflective of the teams’ relative standing. Of course, the visual impression would reflect a tacit linearity in the two scales, but I’m not sure they’re linear.

Agreed. I read the revised graphs and they are still misleading and/or confusing. It's hard to make any obvious visual generations due to the compressed scale of the SOS measure as well as having all schools with the same color.

Would love to see the crotch and SOS on separate graphs, and also perhaps color the bars by the team's league, or one color for each one color for West.

I had in mind having a left scale for Krach ranging from zero to 1200 and a scale on the right for SOS ranging from zero to about 230. Alternatively, and perhaps better, just use % of the maximum and normalize both metrics by converting everything to percentages.

Swampy
Alternatively, and perhaps better, just us % of the maximum and normalize both metrics by converting everything to percentages.

Thanks ic
From the twO graphs I take away two main points:

1. SOS is largely a function of the conference you play in,
2. and in 2003 we belonged to the elite top cluster of teams, but this year we are in the second cluster.

Swampy
Thanks ic
From the twO graphs I take away two main points:

1. SOS is largely a function of the conference you play in,

Exactly!

Moved this to Bracketology thread. Which is where it belongs.

Jim Hyla
USCHO: Bracketology: Which bubble teams have a shot at playing for an NCAA hockey national championship?

Jayson's

Worcester

1 North Dakota
7 Clarkson
9 Northeastern
16 AIC

Allentown

2 Minnesota State
8 Massachusetts
10 Penn State
15 Minnesota

Albany

3 Cornell
6 Boston College
11 Arizona State
14 Maine

Loveland

4 Minnesota Duluth
5 Denver
12 Bemidji State
13 Ohio State

Jim's

Albany

1 North Dakota
7 Clarkson
9 Northeastern
16 AIC

Allentown

2 Minnesota State
8 Massachusetts
10 Penn State
15 Minnesota

Worcester

3 Cornell
6 Boston College
11 Arizona State
14 Maine

Loveland

4 Minnesota Duluth
5 Denver
12 Bemidji State
13 Ohio State

North Dakota earned a west location - which this year is Loveland. ?

marty

Jim Hyla
USCHO: Bracketology: Which bubble teams have a shot at playing for an NCAA hockey national championship?

Jayson's

Worcester

1 North Dakota
7 Clarkson
9 Northeastern
16 AIC

Allentown

2 Minnesota State
8 Massachusetts
10 Penn State
15 Minnesota

Albany

3 Cornell
6 Boston College
11 Arizona State
14 Maine

Loveland

4 Minnesota Duluth
5 Denver
12 Bemidji State
13 Ohio State

Jim's

Albany

1 North Dakota
7 Clarkson
9 Northeastern
16 AIC

Allentown

2 Minnesota State
8 Massachusetts
10 Penn State
15 Minnesota

Worcester

3 Cornell
6 Boston College
11 Arizona State
14 Maine

Loveland

4 Minnesota Duluth
5 Denver
12 Bemidji State
13 Ohio State

North Dakota earned a west location - which this year is Loveland. ?

Moved my listing to Bracketology thread. Which is where it belongs.

Rankings roundup: How the top 20 NCAA hockey teams fared, Feb. 21-22 By USCHO Staff -

No. 1 North Dakota (23-4-4)
02/21/2020 – No. 1 North Dakota 3 at St. Cloud State 3 (OT)
02/22/2020 – No. 1 North Dakota 1 at St. Cloud State 2

No. 2 Cornell (21-2-4)
02/21/2020 – No. 2 Cornell 4 at Yale 0
02/22/2020 – No. 2 Cornell 3 at Brown 0

No. 3 Minnesota State (28-4-2)
02/21/2020 – Alabama Huntsville 0 at No. 3 Minnesota State 10
02/22/2020 – Alabama Huntsville 0 at No. 3 Minnesota State 8

No. 4 Minnesota Duluth (18-10-2)
02/21/2020 – No. 4 Minnesota Duluth 3 at No. 19 Western Michigan 5
02/22/2020 – No. 4 Minnesota Duluth 2 at No. 19 Western Michigan 1

No. 5 Clarkson (23-7-2)
02/21/2020 – No. 20 Harvard 5 at No. 5 Clarkson 2
02/22/2020 – Dartmouth 0 at No. 5 Clarkson 4

No. 6 Boston College (21-8-1)
02/20/2020 – No. 6 Boston College 3 at No. 10 Northeastern 2
02/21/2020 – No. 10 Northeastern 1 at No. 6 Boston College 10

No. 7 Denver (19-8-5)
02/21/2020 – Miami 3 at No. 7 Denver 7
02/22/2020 – Miami 0 at No. 7 Denver 7

No. 8 Massachusetts (19-10-2)
02/21/2020 – No. 8 Massachusetts 2 at No. 14 UMass Lowell 3
02/22/2020 – No. 14 UMass Lowell 3 at No. 8 Massachusetts 5

No. 9 Arizona State (22-11-3)
02/21/2020 – No. 9 Arizona State 6 at Wisconsin 7
02/22/2020 – No. 9 Arizona State 2 at Wisconsin 6

No. 10 Northeastern (17-10-3)
02/20/2020 – No. 6 Boston College 3 at No. 10 Northeastern 2
02/21/2020 – No. 10 Northeastern 1 at No. 6 Boston College 10

No. 11 Penn State (20-10-4)
02/21/2020 – No. 18 Minnesota 3 at No. 11 Penn State 3 (OT)
02/22/2020 – No. 18 Minnesota 2 at No. 11 Penn State 3

No. 12 Ohio State (18-10-4)
02/21/2020 – No. 12 Ohio State 1 at RV Michigan State 0
02/22/2020 – No. 12 Ohio State 4 at RV Michigan State 2

No. 13 Bemidji State (19-8-5)
02/21/2020 – No. 13 Bemidji State 4 at Alaska Anchorage 1
02/22/2020 – No. 13 Bemidji State 2 at Alaska Anchorage 2 (OT)

No. 14 UMass Lowell (16-10-5)
02/21/2020 – No. 8 Massachusetts 2 at No. 14 UMass Lowell 3
02/22/2020 – No. 14 UMass Lowell 3 at No. 8 Massachusetts 5

No. 15 Providence (15-11-6)
02/21/2020 – Merrimack 2 at No. 15 Providence 0
02/22/2020 – No. 15 Providence 2 at Merrimack 3

No. 16 Quinnipiac (19-11-2)
02/21/2020 – No. 16 Quinnipiac 0 at Rensselaer 4
02/22/2020 – No. 16 Quinnipiac 3 at Union 2 (OT)

No. 17 Maine (17-10-5)
02/21/2020 – Vermont 1 at No. 17 Maine 6
02/22/2020 – Vermont 0 at No. 17 Maine 0 (OT)

No. 18 Minnesota (14-12-6)
02/21/2020 – No. 18 Minnesota 3 at No. 11 Penn State 3 (OT)
02/22/2020 – No. 18 Minnesota 2 at No. 11 Penn State 3

No. 19 Western Michigan (16-11-5)
02/21/2020 – No. 4 Minnesota Duluth 3 at No. 19 Western Michigan 5
02/22/2020 – No. 4 Minnesota Duluth 2 at No. 19 Western Michigan 1

No. 20 Harvard (12-9-6)
02/21/2020 – No. 20 Harvard 5 at No. 5 Clarkson 2
02/22/2020 – No. 20 Harvard 3 at St. Lawrence 6

RV = Received Votes

#1

ice
#1

That’s nice. Fun task for historians. How many times has that happened in modern (introduction of the women’s tournament) history? Wisconsin won both championships in 2006. Minnesota was strong in both in the early 2000s, and Duluth had both strong in early 2010s.

Anyway. Ultimately meaningless, yes, but there’s some pride in it and something to show off to our coworkers.

ice
#1

According to a tweet from @CornellSports that my daughter forwarded to me, this is the first time both teams have been ranked number one at the same time.

I hope we do everything we can with this while it lasts. If nothing else it's a helluva recruiting theme.

RichH
Ultimately meaningless

Fig. 1 "Hey, fuck you too, buddy."

RichH

ice
#1

That’s nice. Fun task for historians. How many times has that happened in modern (introduction of the women’s tournament) history? Wisconsin won both championships in 2006. Minnesota was strong in both in the early 2000s, and Duluth had both strong in early 2010s.

Anyway. Ultimately meaningless, yes, but there’s some pride in it and something to show off to our coworkers.

If I show it to my coworker he'll just get pissed. And he's bigger than me and stronger than me and I'll just pass for now on the office talk...

Trotsky
I hope we do everything we can with this while it lasts. If nothing else it's a helluva recruiting theme.

Personally I'd rather be #2 and try harder.

But people in the office are bringing me newspapers, so it is fun to talk about.

Let's just be sure that SLU is not like Q.

Jim Hyla
Personally I'd rather be #2 and try harder.

Still number 2 in the USA Today poll, so you've got that...

andyw2100

Jim Hyla
Personally I'd rather be #2 and try harder.

Still number 2 in the USA Today poll, so you've got that...

And creeping closer to #2 in PWR.

andyw2100

ice
#1

According to a tweet from @CornellSports that my daughter forwarded to me, this is the first time both teams have been ranked number one at the same time.

Not exactly:

Cornell gets 27 first-place votes, takes over as No. 1 team in USCHO.com Division I Men’s Poll

Cornell is No. 1 in both USCHO Division I men’s and women’s polls. The last time that happened was back on Oct. 27, 2014, when Minnesota was first in both polls.

Swampy

andyw2100

ice
#1

According to a tweet from @CornellSports that my daughter forwarded to me, this is the first time both teams have been ranked number one at the same time.

Not exactly:

Cornell gets 27 first-place votes, takes over as No. 1 team in USCHO.com Division I Men’s Poll

Cornell is No. 1 in both USCHO Division I men’s and women’s polls. The last time that happened was back on Oct. 27, 2014, when Minnesota was first in both polls.

i think andy was talking specifically about cornell topping both polls

ugarte

Swampy

andyw2100

ice
#1

According to a tweet from @CornellSports that my daughter forwarded to me, this is the first time both teams have been ranked number one at the same time.

Not exactly:

Cornell gets 27 first-place votes, takes over as No. 1 team in USCHO.com Division I Men’s Poll

Cornell is No. 1 in both USCHO Division I men’s and women’s polls. The last time that happened was back on Oct. 27, 2014, when Minnesota was first in both polls.

i think andy was talking specifically about cornell topping both polls

Yes. Thank you.

The tweet was a Cornell Sports tweet noting that it was the first time both Cornell hockey teams were at the top of the polls at the same time.

andyw2100

ugarte

Swampy

andyw2100

ice
#1

According to a tweet from @CornellSports that my daughter forwarded to me, this is the first time both teams have been ranked number one at the same time.

Not exactly:

Cornell gets 27 first-place votes, takes over as No. 1 team in USCHO.com Division I Men’s Poll

Cornell is No. 1 in both USCHO Division I men’s and women’s polls. The last time that happened was back on Oct. 27, 2014, when Minnesota was first in both polls.

i think andy was talking specifically about cornell topping both polls

Yes. Thank you.

The tweet was a Cornell Sports tweet noting that it was the first time both Cornell hockey teams were at the top of the polls at the same time.

For all schools that play hockey, I suspect an event like this is rarer than hen's teeth.

Swampy

andyw2100

ugarte

Swampy

andyw2100

ice
#1

According to a tweet from @CornellSports that my daughter forwarded to me, this is the first time both teams have been ranked number one at the same time.

Not exactly:

Cornell gets 27 first-place votes, takes over as No. 1 team in USCHO.com Division I Men’s Poll

Cornell is No. 1 in both USCHO Division I men’s and women’s polls. The last time that happened was back on Oct. 27, 2014, when Minnesota was first in both polls.

i think andy was talking specifically about cornell topping both polls

Yes. Thank you.

The tweet was a Cornell Sports tweet noting that it was the first time both Cornell hockey teams were at the top of the polls at the same time.

For all schools that play hockey, I suspect an event like this is rarer than hen's teeth.

Agreed. Roughly half (33) of the men's D1 schools have women's teams. And I'd bet that most of them haven't even had a sniff at #1.

Better late than never, I guess.

Anyway I couldn't skip the 2 #1 week.

Soon to be plural, I hope.

USCHO Division I Men's Poll - February 24, 2020
Rnk	Team	      (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll

1	Cornell	        (27)	21-2-4	961	2
2	Minnesota State	(14)	28-4-2	940	3
3	North Dakota	(9)	23-4-4	939	1
4	Boston College		21-8-1	833	6
5	Minnesota Duluth	18-10-2	777	4
6	Denver		        19-8-5	752	7
7	Clarkson		23-7-2	720	5
8	Massachusetts		19-10-2	625	8
9	Penn State		20-10-4	594	11
10	Ohio State		18-10-4	540	12
11	Bemidji State		19-8-5	471	13
12	UMass Lowell		16-10-5	394	14
13	Northeastern		17-10-3	388	10
14	Arizona State		22-11-3	376	9
15	Maine		        17-10-5	240	17
16	Western Michigan	16-11-5	236	19
17	Quinnipiac		19-11-2	184	16
18	Minnesota		14-12-6	136	18
19	Providence		15-11-6	135	15
20	AIC		        20-11-1	88	NR

Others receiving votes: Notre Dame 62, Harvard 39, St. Cloud 20, 
Sacred Heart 16, Michigan 14, Bowling Green 8, Connecticut 6, 
Michigan State 2, Omaha 2, Northern Michigan 1, New Hampshire 1

USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Men's College Hockey Poll February 24, 2020
	Team	                      Points (First) Last Poll	Record	Weeks in Poll
	
1	University of North Dakota 	486	(16)	1	23-4-4	18
2	Cornell University 	        471	(12)	2	21-2-4	21
3	Minnesota State University 	463	(6)	3	28-4-2	21
4	Boston College 	                392		5	21-8-1	19
5	University of Minnesota Duluth 	372		4	18-10-2	21
6	University of Denver 	        342		7	19-8-5	21
7	Clarkson University 	        282		6	23-7-2	21
8	Penn State University 	        270		10	20-10-4	21
9	University of Massachusetts 	255		8	19-10-2	21
10	Ohio State University 	        219		12	18-10-4	21
11	Bemidji State University 	124		13	19-8-5	2
12	Northeastern University 	105		10	17-10-3	21
13	Arizona State University 	 84		9	22-11-3	9
14	Western Michigan University 	 68		NR	16-11-5	1
15	University Massachusetts Lowell  61		15	16-10-5	10

Others receiving votes: University of Minnesota 32, Quinnipiac University 26, 
University of Maine 20, University of Notre Dame 4, Harvard University 2, St. 
Cloud State University 2.

NCAA Tournament Pairwise Comparison Ratings

Rk 	Team 	       PCWs 	RPI 	Rk 	QWB-† 	W-L-T 	Win % 	Wgtd Win % - ‡
1 	North Dakota 	59 	.6180 	1 	.0114 	23-4-4 	.8065 	.8194
2 	Minnesota State 58 	.6018 	2 	.0068 	28-4-2 	.8529 	.8452
3 	Cornell 	57 	.5919 	3 	.0026 	21-2-4 	.8519 	.8619
4 	Boston College 	55 	.5752 	4 	.0047 	21-8-1 	.7167 	.7147
5 	Minnesota-Duluth55 	.5737 	5 	.0090 	18-10-2 .6333 	.6351
6 	Denver 	        55 	.5715 	6 	.0060 	19-8-5 	.6719 	.6710
7 	Penn State 	53 	.5581 	7 	.0042 	20-10-4 .6471 	.6369
8 	Massachusetts 	52 	.5536 	8 	.0042 	19-10-2 .6452 	.6513
9 	Ohio State 	51 	.5525 	9 	.0032 	18-10-4 .6250 	.6307
10 	Clarkson 	50 	.5519 	10 	.0009 	23-7-2 	.7500 	.7407
11 	Bemidji State 	48 	.5431 	11 	.0019 	19-8-5 	.6719 	.6883
12 	Northeastern 	48 	.5420 	12 	.0023 	17-10-3 .6167 	.6232
13 	Arizona State 	47 	.5393 	13 	.0028 	22-11-3 .6528 	.6657
14 	Minnesota 	46 	.5384 	15 	.0038 	14-12-6 .5312 	.5250
15 	Western Michigan45 	.5385 	14 	.0039 	16-11-5 .5781 	.5737
16 	Mass.-Lowell 	44 	.5372 	16 	.0051 	16-10-5 .5968 	.5924
17 	Notre Dame 	43 	.5367 	17 	.0068 	14-12-6 .5312 	.5250
18 	Maine 	        42 	.5361 	18 	.0046 	17-10-5 .6094 	.6207
19 	Quinnipiac 	41 	.5311 	19 	.0026 	19-11-2 .6250 	.6382
20 	Michigan 	40 	.5273 	20 	.0051 	15-14-3 .5156 	.5062
21 	Providence 	39 	.5232 	21 	.0047 	15-11-6 .5625 	.5610
22 	St. Cloud State 38 	.5231 	22 	.0074 	12-12-6 .5000 	.5034
23 	Harvard 	37 	.5188 	23 	.0036 	12-9-6 	.5556 	.5616
24 	Northrn Michigan36 	.5172 	24 	.0019 	17-13-4 .5588 	.5588

KRACH: Division I Men

Rank	Team	       Rating	RRWP Win % Rk	W-L-T	Win % Win Ratio	SOS Rk	SOS

1	Minnesota State	879.2	.8703	1	28-4-2	0.8529	5.800	15	151.6
2	North Dakota	874.2	.8697	3	23-4-4	0.8065	4.167	3	209.8
3	Cornell	        529.5	.8073	2	21-2-4	0.8519	5.750	39	92.08
4	Denver	        423.4	.7741	6	19-8-5	0.6719	2.048	5	206.8
5	Minnesota Duluth393.8	.7626	13	18-10-2	0.6333	1.727	1	228.0
6	Boston College	338.6	.7377	5	21-8-1	0.7167	2.529	17	133.9
7	Penn State	289.1	.7102	10	20-10-4	0.6471	1.833	14	157.7
8	Ohio State	282.7	.7061	14	18-10-4	0.6250	1.667	11	169.6
9	Bemidji State	259.6	.6906	6	19-8-5	0.6719	2.048	19	126.8
10	Clarkson	250.2	.6838	4	23-7-2	0.7500	3.000	41	83.40
11	Western Michigan244.5	.6795	20	16-11-5	0.5781	1.370	10	178.4
12	Minnesota	237.7	.6742	28	14-12-6	0.5312	1.133	4	209.8
13	Massachusetts	224.5	.6634	11	19-10-2	0.6452	1.818	21	123.5
14	Notre Dame	212.9	.6532	28	14-12-6	0.5312	1.133	8	187.8
15	Michigan	197.1	.6383	33	15-14-3	0.5156	1.065	9	185.2
16	St. Cloud	192.1	.6332	35	12-12-6	0.5000	1.000	7	192.1
17	Northeastern	189.3	.6303	16	17-10-3	0.6167	1.609	23	117.6
18	Arizona State	188.8	.6298	8	22-11-3	0.6528	1.880	34	100.4
19	Michigan State	168.1	.6066	39	14-17-1	0.4531	0.829	6	202.8
20	UMass Lowell	165.9	.6040	18	16-10-5	0.5968	1.480	25	112.1
21	Omaha	        159.1	.5955	37	13-14-5	0.4844	0.939	12	169.3
22	Wisconsin	158.5	.5948	41	13-18-1	0.4219	0.730	2	217.2
23	Northrn Michigan158.3	.5945	23	17-13-4	0.5588	1.267	20	125.0
24	Maine	        157.6	.5937	17	17-10-5	0.6094	1.560	33	101.0
25	Bowling Green	149.6	.5830	23	17-13-4	0.5588	1.267	22	118.1
26	Quinnipiac	145.5	.5774	14	19-11-2	0.6250	1.667	40	87.32
27	Michigan Tech	140.9	.5708	25	18-14-3	0.5571	1.258	26	112.0
28	Alaska	        139.7	.5691	33	14-13-5	0.5156	1.065	18	131.3
29	Providence	133.4	.5597	22	15-11-6	0.5625	1.286	31	103.8
30	Boston Univer	120.7	.5389	31	12-11-8	0.5161	1.067	24	113.1
31	Harvard	        116.5	.5316	26	12-9-6	0.5556	1.250	38	93.20

USCHO Division I Women's Poll - February 24, 2020
Rnk	Team	      (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll

1	Cornell	        (14)	25-1-3	149	1
2	Wisconsin	(1)	27-4-3	135	2
3	Minnesota		25-5-3	114	3
4	Northeastern		28-4-2	112	3
5	Ohio State		20-8-6	89	5
6	Princeton		22-5-1	73	6
7	Clarkson		23-5-6	60	7
8	Boston University	24-6-4	44	8
9	Minnesota Duluth	16-10-6	34	9
10	Quinnipiac		19-12-3	9	10

Others receiving votes: Harvard 4, Providence 2

Women's National Collegiate PairWise Rankings

Rnk	Team	       PWR	W-L-T	W%\  W% Rnk	RPI  RPI Rnk

1	Cornell	        40	25-1-3	0.9138	1	0.6653*	1
2	Wisconsin	39	27-4-3	0.8382	3	0.6518*	2
3	Minnesota	38	25-5-3	0.8030	5	0.6405*	3
4	Northeastern	37	28-4-2	0.8529	2	0.6279*	4
5	Ohio State	36	20-8-6	0.6765	8	0.6089	5
6	Princeton	35	22-5-1	0.8036	4	0.6079*	6
7	Clarkson	34	23-5-6	0.7647	6	0.5914*	7
8	Boston Univer	33	24-6-4	0.7647	6	0.5880*	8
9	Minnesota Duluth32	16-10-6	0.5938	13	0.5767	9
10	Quinnipiac	31	19-12-3	0.6029	12	0.5404*	10
11	Harvard	        30	16-12-1	0.5690	15	0.5403*	11
12	Mercyhurst	29	18-9-5	0.6406	9	0.5366	12
13	Colgate	        28	17-13-6	0.5556	16	0.5345*	13

KRACH: National Collegiate Women

Rank	Team	       Rating	RRWP Win % Rk	W-L-T	Win % Win Ratio	SOS Rk	SOS

1	Cornell	        3216.	.9183	1	25-1-3	0.9138	10.600	8	303.4
2	Wisconsin	3050.	.9147	3	27-4-3	0.8382	5.182	4	588.6
3	Minnesota	2575.	.9025	5	25-5-3	0.8030	4.077	3	631.7
4	Ohio State	1576.	.8611	8	20-8-6	0.6765	2.091	1	753.7
5	Princeton	1070.	.8224	4	22-5-1	0.8036	4.091	9	261.6
6	Northeastern	956.6	.8102	2	28-4-2	0.8529	5.800	15	164.9
7	Minnesota Duluth924.1	.8063	13	16-10-6	0.5938	1.462	2	632.2
8	Clarkson	724.9	.7781	6	23-5-6	0.7647	3.250	11	223.1
9	Boston Univer	479.8	.7258	6	24-6-4	0.7647	3.250	17	147.6
10	Bemidji State	368.1	.6897	24	15-16-3	0.4853	0.943	5	390.5
11	Harvard	        308.3	.6647	15	16-12-1	0.5690	1.320	10	233.5
12	Colgate	        273.3	.6474	16	17-13-6	0.5556	1.250	12	218.6
13	Quinnipiac	256.1	.6380	12	19-12-3	0.6029	1.519	14	168.7
14	Minnesota State	241.2	.6292	30	11-18-6	0.4000	0.667	6	361.8
15	Robert Morris	220.9	.6164	11	18-10-4	0.6250	1.667	19	132.6
16	Yale	        216.3	.6132	17	16-13-0	0.5517	1.231	13	175.8
17	Mercyhurst	197.8	.6000	9	18-9-5	0.6406	1.783	23	111.0

I’m vexed, terribly vexed, that the Women’s team isn’t a unanimous number 1. I’d like to know who is the miscreant voting for Wisco.

JasonN95
I’m vexed, terribly vexed, that the Women’s team isn’t a unanimous number 1. I’d like to know who is the miscreant voting for Wisco.

Probably Coach Derraugh.

Jeff Hopkins '82

JasonN95
I’m vexed, terribly vexed, that the Women’s team isn’t a unanimous number 1. I’d like to know who is the miscreant voting for Wisco.

Probably Coach Derraugh.

I withdraw my “miscreant” comment.

I have found a great deal of correlation between ice temperature at a specific point in a game* and the success of certain teams. This information will not come cheap, let alone free, since it's based on physical evidence and hard data.
* it also factors in the amount of rocker and bevel in the skate blades of key skaters.

osorojo
I have found a great deal of correlation between ice temperature at a specific point in a game* and the success of certain teams. This information will not come cheap, let alone free, since it's based on physical evidence and hard data.
* it also factors in the amount of rocker and bevel in the skate blades of key skaters.

I've always wondered about this possibility, since it seems certain rinks seem to have a hold over us. That said, I find it hard to believe it's not something already measured or somehow taken into consideration.

osorojo
I have found a great deal of correlation between ice temperature at a specific point in a game* and the success of certain teams. This information will not come cheap, let alone free, since it's based on physical evidence and hard data.
* it also factors in the amount of rocker and bevel in the skate blades of key skaters.

Do tell, how much will it cost us to extract this data from you?

It will take me a couple years to collective data, more time to organize it and assemble it in handy spreadsheets. I'll keep stringent cost records and charge only enough to cover my expenses - paper, ink, hours on the Sunway TaihuLight Computer . . .

osorojo
I have found a great deal of correlation between ice temperature at a specific point in a game* and the success of certain teams. This information will not come cheap, let alone free, since it's based on physical evidence and hard data.
* it also factors in the amount of rocker and bevel in the skate blades of key skaters.

Red Bear, tell us something we don’t already know:

From "The Poison Ivy in the Ivy League,” Jan. 2, 1967

Sports Illustrated

Harkness' boys at RPI tended to be slower than a lot of other teams, and it seemed that whenever a really fast-skating team came up to Troy the arena would get terribly warm, so warm that the ice often became soft and slushy. At RPI they said it was probably only coincidence or a faulty thermostat, but the soft ice did serve wonderfully well to slow fast skaters down to RPI speed. (There were a few smiles visible at rinkside this year when Cornell's fast-skating outfit played its second game of the season against RPI at Troy and Visiting Coach Harkness complained about the excessive heat.)

osorojo
It will take me a couple years to collective data, more time to organize it and assemble it in handy spreadsheets. I'll keep stringent cost records and charge only enough to cover my expenses - paper, ink, hours on the Sunway TaihuLight Computer . . .

Oh, gee, I thought that since you found the correlation you must have the data. Isn’t that how you find correlation, by examining data?

Nah. The most prolific statisticians assume there's a correlation and then set out to find and select the data which confirms their hypothesis. Ask around.

osorojo
Nah. The most prolific statisticians assume there's a correlation and then set out to find and select the data which confirms their hypothesis. Ask around.

Oh, chef of the future: Who shall we ask?

Perhaps we should consult with a professor in the field.

marty
Oh, chef of the future: Who shall we ask?

I'd have gone my whole life without seeing this. Thank you!

"A string of..."

Come on, admit it: Free-lance statisticians consciously or not seek and sort data which supports their previous conclusions. Monaco. Reno, and Vegas were founded and survive because of this human peculiarity.

osorojo
Come on, admit it: Free-lance statisticians consciously or not seek and sort data which supports their previous conclusions. Monaco. Reno, and Vegas were founded and survive because of this human peculiarity.

No, those places exist because people don't understand odds and statistics. That doesn't mean those ignorant people are "free-lance statisticians."

Shut it all down.

Please do not feed...

Bag the hysteria. A regrettable portion of what calls itself "statistics" is hogwash, no matter how many decimal places and pages of numbers the vendor of statistical "truth" or even "probability" offers. What percentage of statisticians are filthy rich? Numbers are fun to play with but real life is not a binary exercise.

Jeff Hopkins '82

osorojo
Come on, admit it: Free-lance statisticians consciously or not seek and sort data which supports their previous conclusions. Monaco. Reno, and Vegas were founded and survive because of this human peculiarity.

No, those places exist because people don't understand odds and statistics. That doesn't mean those ignorant people are "free-lance statisticians."

Yes and no. Not everyone who goes to Vegas expects to win money. Plenty of people, myself included, consider the chase a form of entertainment for which we are comfortable losing a certain amount of money. I’m well aware the odds are not in my favor.

CU2007

Jeff Hopkins '82

osorojo
Come on, admit it: Free-lance statisticians consciously or not seek and sort data which supports their previous conclusions. Monaco. Reno, and Vegas were founded and survive because of this human peculiarity.

No, those places exist because people don't understand odds and statistics. That doesn't mean those ignorant people are "free-lance statisticians."

Yes and no. Not everyone who goes to Vegas expects to win money. Plenty of people, myself included, consider the chase a form of entertainment for which we are comfortable losing a certain amount of money. I’m well aware the odds are not in my favor.

I've been to Vegas once. I made a few hundred dollars.

Therefore, probability is a hoax.

Dafatone

CU2007

Jeff Hopkins '82

osorojo
Come on, admit it: Free-lance statisticians consciously or not seek and sort data which supports their previous conclusions. Monaco. Reno, and Vegas were founded and survive because of this human peculiarity.

No, those places exist because people don't understand odds and statistics. That doesn't mean those ignorant people are "free-lance statisticians."

Yes and no. Not everyone who goes to Vegas expects to win money. Plenty of people, myself included, consider the chase a form of entertainment for which we are comfortable losing a certain amount of money. I’m well aware the odds are not in my favor.

I've been to Vegas once. I made a few hundred dollars.

Therefore, probability is a hoax.

I'm immortal so far so Bayesianism can suck a dick, too.

Trotsky
Please do not feed...

+1

I don't remember seeing the following discussed here before, though I expect it has been.

What is the general consensus with respect to what we think about whether or not the poll voters take scores into account when casting their votes? I'm guessing the voters will factor into their thinking that Cornell beat a highly ranked Clarkson team this week, and that that may be enough to push us to number one in the USA Today poll. I'm wondering if the fact that we won 5-1 while North Dakota needed most of the OT period to achieve their win will factor in or not.

Thanks.

andyw2100
I don't remember seeing the following discussed here before, though I expect it has been.

What is the general consensus with respect to what we think about whether or not the poll voters take scores into account when casting their votes? I'm guessing the voters will factor into their thinking that Cornell beat a highly ranked Clarkson team this week, and that that may be enough to push us to number one in the USA Today poll. I'm wondering if the fact that we won 5-1 while North Dakota needed most of the OT period to achieve their win will factor in or not.

Thanks.

My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Trotsky
My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Last time I had anything to do with voting was 1999. But it's probably not any different in the fact that no guidance is given. You're lucky if the voters bother to look at a boxscore.

Rankings roundup: How the top 20 NCAA hockey teams fared, Feb. 28-29

No. 1 Cornell (23-2-4)
02/28/2020 – St. Lawrence 0 at No. 1 Cornell 5
02/29/2020 – No. 7 Clarkson 1 at No. 1 Cornell 5

No. 2 Minnesota State (29-5-2)
02/28/2020 – No. 2 Minnesota State 1 at No. 11 Bemidji State 3
02/29/2020 – No. 2 Minnesota State 4 at No. 11 Bemidji State 1

No. 3 North Dakota (25-4-4)
02/28/2020 – No. 16 Western Michigan 1 at No. 3 North Dakota 3
02/29/2020 – No. 16 Western Michigan 1 at No. 3 North Dakota 2 (OT)

No. 4 Boston College (23-8-1)
02/27/2020 – Merrimack 1 at No. 4 Boston College 6
02/29/2020 – No. 4 Boston College 4 at Boston University 1

No. 5 Minnesota Duluth (20-10-2)
02/28/2020 – No. 5 Minnesota Duluth 4 at Colorado College 2
02/29/2020 – No. 5 Minnesota Duluth 6 at Colorado College 1

No. 6 Denver (20-9-5)
02/28/2020 – No. 6 Denver 1 at RV St. Cloud State 5
02/29/2020 – No. 6 Denver 5 at RV St. Cloud State 2

No. 7 Clarkson (23-8-3)
02/28/2020 – No. 7 Clarkson 1 at Colgate 1 (OT)
02/29/2020 – No. 7 Clarkson 1 at No. 1 Cornell 5

No. 8 Massachusetts (20-11-2)
02/28/2020 – No. 8 Massachusetts 2 at RV Connecticut 3
02/29/2020 – RV Connecticut 3 at No. 8 Massachusetts 4

No. 9 Penn State (20-10-4)
Did not play.

No. 10 Ohio State (18-11-5)
02/28/2020 – Wisconsin 3 at No. 10 Ohio State 2
02/29/2020 – Wisconsin 3 at No. 10 Ohio State 3 (OT)

No. 11 Bemidji State (20-9-5)
02/28/2020 – No. 2 Minnesota State 1 at No. 11 Bemidji State 3
02/29/2020 – No. 2 Minnesota State 4 at No. 11 Bemidji State 1

No. 12 UMass Lowell (17-10-6)
02/28/2020 – RV New Hampshire 2 at No. 12 UMass Lowell 2 (OT)
02/29/2020 – No. 12 UMass Lowell 3 at RV New Hampshire 2

No. 13 Northeastern (17-12-3)
02/28/2020 – No. 13 Northeastern 2 at Vermont 4
02/29/2020 – No. 13 Northeastern 1 at Vermont 3

No. 14 Arizona State (22-11-3)
Did not play.

No. 15 Maine (17-11-5)
02/29/2020 – No. 15 Maine 2 at No. 19 Providence 3

No. 16 Western Michigan (16-13-5)
02/28/2020 – No. 16 Western Michigan 1 at No. 3 North Dakota 3
02/29/2020 – No. 16 Western Michigan 1 at No. 3 North Dakota 2 (OT)

No. 17 Quinnipiac (21-11-2)
02/28/2020 – Brown 1 at No. 17 Quinnipiac 2
02/29/2020 – Yale 0 at No. 17 Quinnipiac 5

No. 18 Minnesota (14-13-7)
02/28/2020 – RV Michigan 2 at No. 18 Minnesota 2 (OT)
02/29/2020 – RV Michigan 2 at No. 18 Minnesota 1

No. 19 Providence (16-11-6)
02/29/2020 – No. 15 Maine 2 at No. 19 Providence 3

No. 20 AIC (21-12-1)
02/26/2020 – No. 20 AIC 3 at RV Sacred Heart 5
02/29/2020 – No. 20 AIC 4 at Army 1

RV = Received Votes

adamw

Trotsky
My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Last time I had anything to do with voting was 1999. But it's probably not any different in the fact that no guidance is given. You're lucky if the voters bother to look at a boxscore.

I have a plan.

Trotsky

adamw

Trotsky
My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Last time I had anything to do with voting was 1999. But it's probably not any different in the fact that no guidance is given. You're lucky if the voters bother to look at a boxscore.

I have a plan.

Any plan should be at the expense of the B1G and hopefully U of I will get a bit of mustard in the mix.

Trotsky

adamw

Trotsky
My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Last time I had anything to do with voting was 1999. But it's probably not any different in the fact that no guidance is given. You're lucky if the voters bother to look at a boxscore.

I have a plan.

But is it a cunning plan?

Great story.

Jeff Hopkins '82

Trotsky

adamw

Trotsky
My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Last time I had anything to do with voting was 1999. But it's probably not any different in the fact that no guidance is given. You're lucky if the voters bother to look at a boxscore.

I have a plan.

But is it a cunning plan?

Before there was an internet, I remember reading something in Hockey News about a fictional hockey player that was added to a Top 100 list to embarrass the hockey writer (Stan Fischler?)

Trotsky

adamw

Trotsky
My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Last time I had anything to do with voting was 1999. But it's probably not any different in the fact that no guidance is given. You're lucky if the voters bother to look at a boxscore.

I have a plan.

+10,0000

Jeff Hopkins '82

Trotsky

adamw

Trotsky
My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Last time I had anything to do with voting was 1999. But it's probably not any different in the fact that no guidance is given. You're lucky if the voters bother to look at a boxscore.

I have a plan.

But is it a cunning plan?

Better.

Cornell gains 10 more first place votes in the USCHO men's poll. NoDak has 11 total first place votes, with Mankato and BC each with 1. Clarkson stays at #7 and gets 666 poll points.

In the USA Today/Hockey poll, Cornell did enough to regain the #1 spot there also, but only by 3 poll points. 19 first votes for CU, 13 for UND, 2 for Mankato.

Cornell women are now the unanimous #1 in the USCHO poll, USA out tomorrow.

Trotsky

Jeff Hopkins '82

Trotsky

adamw

Trotsky
My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Last time I had anything to do with voting was 1999. But it's probably not any different in the fact that no guidance is given. You're lucky if the voters bother to look at a boxscore.

I have a plan.

But is it a cunning plan?

Better.

Nice. Gotta love Blackadder.

Jeff Hopkins '82

Trotsky

Jeff Hopkins '82

Trotsky

adamw

Trotsky
My guess is it comes down to the voter. Adam can tell us if they get any guidance re: what to consider.

Last time I had anything to do with voting was 1999. But it's probably not any different in the fact that no guidance is given. You're lucky if the voters bother to look at a boxscore.

I have a plan.

But is it a cunning plan?

Better.

Nice. Gotta love Blackadder.

And RIP Rik Mayall.

USCHO Division I Men's Poll - March 2, 2020
Rnk	Team	     (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll

1	Cornell	        (37)	23-2-4	978	1
2	North Dakota	(11)	25-4-4	957	3
3	Minnesota State	(1)	29-5-2	881	2
4	Boston College	(1)	23-8-1	829	4
5	Minnesota Duluth	20-10-2	802	5
6	Denver		        20-9-5	728	6
7	Clarkson		23-8-3	666	7
8	Penn State		20-10-4	645	9
9	Massachusetts		20-11-2	629	8
10	Bemidji State		20-9-5	545	11
11	Ohio State		18-11-5	491	10
12	UMass Lowell		17-10-6	454	12
13	Arizona State		22-11-3	404	14
14	Quinnipiac		21-11-2	331	17
15	Maine		        17-11-5	233	15
16	Northeastern		17-12-3	192	13
17	Western Michigan	16-13-5	188	16
18	Providence		16-11-6	180	19
19	Minnesota		14-13-7	75	18
20	AIC		        21-12-1	66	20

Others receiving votes: Michigan 63, Sacred Heart 48, 
Notre Dame 24, Bowling Green 23, Harvard 21, 
St. Cloud 20, Connecticut 17, Alaska 4, Michigan State 3, 
Rensselaer 2, Wisconsin 1

USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Men's College Hockey Poll March 2, 2020
	Team	              Points  (First) Last Poll	Record	Weeks in Poll
	
1	Cornell University 	488	(19)	2	23-2-4	22
2	University North Dakota 485	(13)	1	25-4-4	19
3	Minnesota State Univer 	451	(2)	3	29-5-2	22
4	Boston College 	        402		4	23-8-1	20
5	Univer Minnesota Duluth 362		5	20-10-2	22
6	University of Denver 	326		6	20-9-5	22
7	Penn State University 	290		8	20-10-4	22
8	Clarkson University 	261		7	23-8-3	22
9	Univer Massachusetts 	251		9	20-11-2	22
10	Bemidji State University210		11	20-9-5	3
11	Ohio State University 	186		10	18-11-5	22
12	U Massachusetts Lowell 	103		15	17-10-6	11
13	Arizona State University101		13	22-11-3	10
14	Quinnipiac University 	 67		NR	21-11-2	6
15	Western Michigan Univer  27		14	16-13-5	2

Others receiving votes: University of Maine 24, University of Michigan 14, 
Northeastern University 10, University of Minnesota 10, St. Cloud State University 6, 
American International University 4, Providence College 2.

NCAA Tournament Pairwise Comparison Ratings

Rk 	Team 	       PCWs 	RPI 	Rk 	QWB-† 	W-L-T 	Win % 	Wgtd Win % - ‡
1 	North Dakota 	59 	.6220 	1 	.0101 	25-4-4 	.8182 	.8289
2 	Minnesota State 58 	.6012 	2 	.0077 	29-5-2 	.8333 	.8315
3 	Cornell 	57 	.5958 	3 	.0035 	23-2-4 	.8621 	.8697
4 	Boston College 	55 	.5785 	4 	.0041 	23-8-1 	.7344 	.7319
5 	Minnesota-Duluth55 	.5744 	5 	.0073 	20-10-2 .6562 	.6625
6 	Denver 	        55 	.5704 	6 	.0056 	20-9-5 	.6618 	.6667
7 	Penn State 	53 	.5560 	7 	.0036 	20-10-4 .6471 	.6369
8 	Massachusetts 	52 	.5520 	8 	.0042 	20-11-2 .6364 	.6438
9 	Clarkson 	51 	.5490 	9 	.0018 	23-8-3 	.7206 	.7193
10 	Bemidji State 	49 	.5449 	10 	.0029 	20-9-5 	.6618 	.6707
11 	Ohio State 	49 	.5422 	11 	.0028 	18-11-5 .6029 	.6006
12 	Arizona State 	48 	.5398 	12 	.0032 	22-11-3 .6528 	.6657
13 	Mass.-Lowell 	47 	.5388 	13 	.0049 	17-10-6 .6061 	.6012
14 	Quinnipiac 	46 	.5356 	14 	.0026 	21-11-2 .6471 	.6562
15 	Maine    	45 	.5325 	15 	.0049 	17-11-5 .5909 	.6040
16 	Michigan 	44 	.5319 	16 	.0048 	16-14-4 .5294 	.5263
17 	Minnesota 	44 	.5317 	17 	.0033 	14-13-7 .5147 	.5029
18 	Northeastern 	42 	.5313 	18 	.0027 	17-12-3 .5781 	.5900
19 	Western Michigan40 	.5309 	19 	.0036 	16-13-5 .5441 	.5457
20 	Notre Dame 	40 	.5289 	20 	.0058 	14-13-7 .5147 	.5029
21 	Providence 	39 	.5271 	21 	.0048 	16-11-6 .5758 	.5714
22 	St. Cloud State 38 	.5241 	22 	.0080 	13-13-6 .5000 	.4968
23 	Sacred Heart 	37 	.5193 	23 	.0005 	21-10-3 .6618 	.6556
24 	Bowling Green 	36 	.5172 	25 	.0021 	19-13-4 .5833 	.5815
25 	Michigan State 	35 	.5187 	24 	.0038 	15-17-2 .4706 	.4678
26 	Northrn Michigan34 	.5164 	26 	.0018 	18-14-4 .5556 	.5549
27 	American Int'l 	33 	.5161 	27 	.0000 	21-12-1 .6324 	.6424

KRACH: Division I Men

Rank	Team	       Rating	RRWP Win % Rk	W-L-T	Win % Win Ratio	SOS Rk	SOS

1	North Dakota	941.0	.8779	3	25-4-4	0.8182	4.500	3	209.1
2	Minnesota State	802.6	.8607	2	29-5-2	0.8333	5.000	13	160.5
3	Cornell	        585.9	.8218	1	23-2-4	0.8621	6.250	38	93.74
4	Denver	        407.6	.7687	6	20-9-5	0.6618	1.957	4	208.3
5	Minnesota Duluth402.1	.7665	9	20-10-2	0.6562	1.909	2	210.6
6	Boston College	355.1	.7463	4	23-8-1	0.7344	2.765	18	128.4
7	Penn State	286.8	.7093	11	20-10-4	0.6471	1.833	14	156.4
8	Bemidji State	284.9	.7081	6	20-9-5	0.6618	1.957	17	145.6
9	Ohio State	250.4	.6845	16	18-11-5	0.6029	1.519	11	164.9
10	Clarkson	231.0	.6693	5	23-8-3	0.7206	2.579	39	89.55
11	Western Michigan226.6	.6657	26	16-13-5	0.5441	1.194	8	189.9
12	Minnesota	220.6	.6605	33	14-13-7	0.5147	1.061	5	208.0
13	Massachusetts	213.4	.6542	13	20-11-2	0.6364	1.750	21	121.9
14	Michigan	206.2	.6475	28	16-14-4	0.5294	1.125	10	183.3
15	St. Cloud	198.1	.6397	35	13-13-6	0.5000	1.000	7	198.1
16	Notre Dame	197.0	.6386	33	14-13-7	0.5147	1.061	9	185.8
17	Arizona State	186.9	.6282	10	22-11-3	0.6528	1.880	36	99.44
18	Michigan State	177.2	.6176	39	15-17-2	0.4706	0.889	6	199.4
19	UMass Lowell	172.9	.6127	15	17-10-6	0.6061	1.538	25	112.4
20	Wisconsin	168.2	.6071	41	14-18-2	0.4412	0.789	1	213.1
21	Northrn Michigan158.4	.5950	23	18-14-4	0.5556	1.250	19	126.7
22	Quinnipiac	157.0	.5932	11	21-11-2	0.6471	1.833	41	85.64
23	Bowling Green	154.8	.5902	18	19-13-4	0.5833	1.400	26	110.5
24	Northeastern	147.7	.5807	20	17-12-3	0.5781	1.370	29	107.8
25	Alaska	        146.7	.5794	26	16-13-5	0.5441	1.194	20	122.9
26	Maine	        145.1	.5771	17	17-11-5	0.5909	1.444	34	100.5
27	Providence	142.8	.5738	21	16-11-6	0.5758	1.357	31	105.2

USCHO Division I Women's Poll - March 2, 2020
Rnk	Team	    (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll

1	Cornell	      (15)	27-1-3	150	1
2	Wisconsin		27-4-3	134	2
3	Minnesota		27-5-3	118	3
4	Northeastern		30-4-2	108	4
5	Ohio State		22-8-6	90	5
6	Princeton		24-6-1	71	6
7	Clarkson		25-5-6	62	7
8	Minnesota Duluth	18-11-6	41	9
9	Boston University	24-8-4	28	8
10	Harvard		        18-13-1	11	NR
10	Quinnipiac		20-14-3	11	10

Others receiving votes: Mercyhurst 1

Women's National Collegiate PairWise Rankings

Rnk	Team	        PWR	W-L-T	W%	W% Rnk	RPI	RPI Rnk

1	Cornell	        40	27-1-3	0.9194	1	0.6633*	1
2	Wisconsin	39	27-4-3	0.8382	3	0.6471*	2
3	Minnesota	38	27-5-3	0.8143	4	0.6366*	3
4	Northeastern	37	30-4-2	0.8611	2	0.6277*	4
5	Ohio State	36	22-8-6	0.6944	8	0.6091	5
6	Princeton	35	24-6-1	0.7903	5	0.6073*	6
7	Clarkson	34	25-5-6	0.7778	6	0.5979*	7
8	Boston Univer   33	24-8-4	0.7222	7	0.5743*	8
9	Minnesota Duluth32	18-11-6	0.6000	12	0.5735	9
10	Harvard	        31	18-13-1	0.5781	14	0.5430*	10
11	Quinnipiac	30	20-14-3	0.5811	13	0.5396*	11
12	Mercyhurst	29	19-10-5	0.6324	10	0.5327	12
13	Robert Morris	28	19-11-4	0.6176	11	0.5296*	13
14	Colgate	        27	17-15-6	0.5263	20	0.5263*	14

KRACH: National Collegiate Women

Rank	Team	       Rating	RRWP Win % Rk	W-L-T	Win % Win Ratio	SOS Rk	SOS

1	Cornell	        3287.	.9209	1	27-1-3	0.9194	11.400	8	288.3
2	Wisconsin	2994.	.9146	3	27-4-3	0.8382	5.182	4	577.7
3	Minnesota	2545.	.9029	4	27-5-3	0.8143	4.385	3	580.5
4	Ohio State	1598.	.8642	8	22-8-6	0.6944	2.273	1	703.2
5	Princeton	972.0	.8141	5	24-6-1	0.7903	3.769	9	257.9
6	Northeastern	958.1	.8125	2	30-4-2	0.8611	6.200	15	154.5
7	Minnesota Duluth889.2	.8042	12	18-11-6	0.6000	1.500	2	592.8
8	Clarkson	783.6	.7896	6	25-5-6	0.7778	3.500	12	223.9
9	Boston Univer   372.3	.6934	7	24-8-4	0.7222	2.600	18	143.2
10	Bemidji State	360.3	.6888	24	16-18-3	0.4730	0.897	5	401.4
11	Harvard	        314.7	.6696	14	18-13-1	0.5781	1.370	10	229.6
12	Quinnipiac	274.0	.6496	13	20-14-3	0.5811	1.387	13	197.6
13	Colgate	        249.9	.6361	20	17-15-6	0.5263	1.111	11	224.9
14	Minnesota State	223.0	.6192	31	11-20-6	0.3784	0.609	6	366.3
15	Yale	        205.9	.6073	18	17-15-0	0.5312	1.133	14	181.7
16	Robert Morris	199.4	.6025	11	19-11-4	0.6176	1.615	20	123.4
17	Mercyhurst	180.8	.5879	10	19-10-5	0.6324	1.720	26	105.1

Rankings roundup: How the top 20 NCAA hockey teams fared, March 6-8 By USCHO Staff -

No. 1 Cornell (23-2-4)
Did not play.

No. 2 North Dakota (26-5-4)
03/06/2020 – No. 2 North Dakota 1 at Omaha 4
03/07/2020 – No. 2 North Dakota 5 at Omaha 0

No. 3 Minnesota State (31-5-2)
03/06/2020 – Alaska Anchorage 1 at No. 3 Minnesota State 8 (WCHA quarterfinal Game 1)
03/07/2020 – Alaska Anchorage 2 at No. 3 Minnesota State 4 (WCHA quarterfinal Game 2)

No. 4 Boston College (24-8-2)
03/06/2020 – New Hampshire 1 at No. 4 Boston College 2
03/07/2020 – No. 4 Boston College 3 at New Hampshire 3 (OT)

No. 5 Minnesota Duluth (22-10-2)
03/06/2020 – RV St. Cloud 1 at No. 5 Minnesota Duluth 4
03/07/2020 – RV St. Cloud 1 at No. 5 Minnesota Duluth 6

No. 6 Denver (21-9-6)
03/06/2020 – No. 6 Denver 2 at Colorado College 2 (OT)
03/07/2020 – Colorado College 1 at No. 6 Denver 5

No. 7 Clarkson (23-8-3)
Did not play.

No. 8 Penn State (20-10-4)
Did not play.

No. 9 Massachusetts (21-11-2)
03/05/2020 – Vermont 0 at No. 9 Massachusetts 1

No. 10 Bemidji State (22-10-5)
03/06/2020 – Lake Superior State 0 at No. 10 Bemidji State 2 (WCHA quarterfinal Game 1)
03/07/2020 – Lake Superior State 5 at No. 10 Bemidji State 3 (WCHA quarterfinal Game 2)
03/08/2020 – Lake Superior State 1 at No. 10 Bemidji State 3 (WCHA quarterfinal Game 3)

No. 11 Ohio State (20-11-5)
03/06/2020 – RV Wisconsin 1 at No. 11 Ohio State 9 (Big Ten quarterfinal Game 1)
03/07/2020 RV Wisconsin 1 at No. 11 Ohio State 2 (OT) (Big Ten quarterfinal Game 2)

No. 12 UMass Lowell (18-10-6)
03/06/2020 – RV Connecticut 1 at No. 12 UMass Lowell 3

No. 13 Arizona State (22-11-3)
Did not play.

No. 14 Quinnipiac (21-11-2)
Did not play.

No. 15 Maine (18-11-5)
03/06/2020 – No. 18 Providence 0 at No. 15 Maine 1

No. 16 Northeastern (18-13-3)
03/06/2020 – Boston University 3 at No. 16 Northeastern 0
03/07/2020 – No. 16 Northeastern 2 at Boston University 1

No. 17 Western Michigan (18-13-5)
03/06/2020 – Miami 2 at No. 17 Western Michigan 5
03/07/2020 – Miami 4 at No. 17 Western Michigan 8

No. 18 Providence (16-12-6)
03/06/2020 – No. 18 Providence 0 at No. 15 Maine 1

No. 19 Minnesota (16-14-7)
03/06/2020 – RV Notre Dame 1 at No. 19 Minnesota 0 (Big Ten quarterfinal Game 1)
03/07/2020 – RV Notre Dame 1 at No. 19 Minnesota 2 (Big Ten quarterfinal Game 2)
03/08/2020 – RV Notre Dame 2 at No. 19 Minnesota 3 (Big Ten quarterfinal Game 3)

No. 20 AIC (21-12-1)
Did not play.

RV = Received Votes

For what it's worth, which isn't much this time of year, men and women are still #1. I'll post all later.

USCHO Division I Men's Poll - March 9, 2020
Rnk	Team	      (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll

1	Cornell	       (40)	23-2-4	981	1
2	Minnesota State	(5)	31-5-2	927	3
3	North Dakota	(5)	26-5-4	925	2
4	Minnesota Duluth	22-10-2	828	5
5	Boston College		24-8-2	826	4
6	Denver		        21-9-6	738	6
7	Clarkson		23-8-3	685	7
8	Penn State		20-10-4	647	8
9	Massachusetts		21-11-2	611	9
10	Ohio State		20-11-5	526	11
11	Bemidji State		22-10-5	470	10
12	UMass Lowell		18-10-6	459	12
13	Arizona State		22-11-3	377	13
14	Quinnipiac		21-11-2	349	14
15	Maine		        18-11-5	289	15
16	Western Michigan	18-13-5	244	17
17	Michigan		18-14-4	148	NR
18	Minnesota		16-14-7	126	19
19	Northeastern		18-13-3	119	16
20	AIC		        21-12-1	75	20

Others receiving votes: Providence 65, Bowling Green 27, 
Sacred Heart 23, Harvard 18, Notre Dame 11, St. Cloud 3, 
Rensselaer 2, Michigan State 1

USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Men's College Hockey Poll March 9, 2020
	Team	              Points (First) Last Poll	Record	Weeks in Poll
	
1	Cornell University 	487	(23)	1	23-2-4	23
2	University North Dakota 473	(9)	2	26-5-4	20
3	Minnesota State Univer 	460	(2)	3	31-5-2	23
4	Boston College 	        396		4	24-8-2	21
5	Univer Minnesota Duluth 387		5	22-10-2	23
6	University of Denver 	327		6	21-9-6	23
7	Penn State University 	292		7	20-10-4	23
8	Clarkson University 	280		8	23-8-3	23
9	University Massachusetts242		9	21-11-2	23
10	Ohio State University 	210		11	20-11-5	23
11	Bemidji State University155		10	22-10-5	4
12	U Massachusetts Lowell 	125		12	18-10-6	12
13	Arizona State University 80		13	22-11-3	11
14	Quinnipiac University 	 58		14	21-11-2	7
15	University of Michigan 	 36		NR	15-19-2	1

Others receiving votes: University of Maine 28, Western Michigan University 22, 
Northeastern 10, Minnesota 8, Harvard 4.

Men's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rnk	Team	       PWR	W-L-T	W%   W% Rnk	RPI  RPI Rnk

1	North Dakota	59	26-5-4	0.8000	3	0.6123*	1
2	Minnesota State	58	31-5-2	0.8421	2	0.5996*	2
3	Cornell	        57	23-2-4	0.8621	1	0.5933*	3
4	Minnesota Duluth56	22-10-2	0.6765	6	0.5777	4
5	Denver	        55	21-9-6	0.6667	7	0.5688	6
6	Boston College	54	24-8-2	0.7353	4	0.5762	5
7	Penn State	53	20-10-4	0.6471	11	0.5555	7
8	Massachusetts	52	21-11-2	0.6471	11	0.5525	8
9	Clarkson	51	23-8-3	0.7206	5	0.5499	9
10	Ohio State	50	20-11-5	0.6250	15	0.5485*	10
11	UMass Lowell	49	18-10-6	0.6176	16	0.5412	11
12	Bemidji State	47	22-10-5	0.6622	8	0.5397	12
12	Arizona State	47	22-11-3	0.6528	10	0.5394*	13
14	Michigan	46	18-14-4	0.5556	26	0.5371	14
15	Maine	        45	18-11-5	0.6029	18	0.5362	15
16	Quinnipiac	44	21-11-2	0.6471	11	0.5361	16
17	Minnesota	43	16-14-7	0.5270	28	0.5325	18
18	Western Michigan42	18-13-5	0.5694	23	0.5360	17
19	Northeastern	41	18-13-3	0.5735	22	0.5297	19
20	Notre Dame	40	15-15-7	0.5000	32	0.5284	20
20	Bowling Green	40	21-13-4	0.6053	17	0.5247	21
22	Providence	38	16-12-6	0.5588	25	0.5242	22
23	Sacred Heart	37	21-10-3	0.6618	9	0.5189	23
24	St. Cloud	36	13-15-6	0.4706	38	0.5182	24
25	Michigan Tech	35	21-15-3	0.5769	21	0.5179	25
26	AIC	        34	21-12-1	0.6324	14	0.5172	26
27	Harvard	        33	15-10-6	0.5806	20	0.5151	27
28	Michigan State	32	15-19-2	0.4444	40	0.5129	28
29	Boston Universit29	13-13-8	0.5000	32	0.5110	29
29	Omaha	        29	14-17-5	0.4583	39	0.5108	30

KRACH: Division I Men

Rank	Team	       Rating	RRWP Win % Rk	W-L-T  Win % Win Ratio	SOS Rk	SOS

1	North Dakota	816.5	.8627	3	26-5-4	0.8000	4.000	5	204.1
2	Minnesota State	790.0	.8590	2	31-5-2	0.8421	5.333	16	148.1
3	Cornell	        571.2	.8184	1	23-2-4	0.8621	6.250	38	91.39
4	Minnesota Duluth446.1	.7827	6	22-10-2	0.6765	2.091	2	213.4
5	Denver	        395.8	.7639	7	21-9-6	0.6667	2.000	7	197.9
6	Boston College	350.7	.7441	4	24-8-2	0.7353	2.778	18	126.2
7	Penn State	292.5	.7127	11	20-10-4	0.6471	1.833	14	159.5
8	Ohio State	282.7	.7066	15	20-11-5	0.6250	1.667	13	169.6
9	Bemidji State	260.2	.6915	8	22-10-5	0.6622	1.960	17	132.7
10	Western Michigan249.9	.6840	23	18-13-5	0.5694	1.323	9	188.9
11	Minnesota	234.4	.6720	28	16-14-7	0.5270	1.114	3	210.4
12	Michigan	233.1	.6710	26	18-14-4	0.5556	1.250	10	186.5
13	Clarkson	231.4	.6696	5	23-8-3	0.7206	2.579	39	89.73
14	Massachusetts	215.2	.6557	11	21-11-2	0.6471	1.833	21	117.4
15	Notre Dame	196.2	.6377	32	15-15-7	0.5000	1.000	8	196.2
16	Arizona State	185.8	.6270	10	22-11-3	0.6528	1.880	37	98.83
17 	UMass Lowell	182.2	.6230	16	18-10-6	0.6176	1.615	26	112.8
18	St. Cloud	180.7	.6214	38	13-15-6	0.4706	0.889	6	203.3
19	Bowling Green	174.9	.6149	17	21-13-4	0.6053	1.533	25	114.1
20	Michigan State	164.3	.6023	40	15-19-2	0.4444	0.800	4	205.4
21	Wisconsin	160.2	.5972	43	14-20-2	0.4167	0.714	1	224.2
22	Michigan Tech	158.0	.5944	21	21-15-3	0.5769	1.364	24	115.8
23	Quinnipiac	156.1	.5919	11	21-11-2	0.6471	1.833	40	85.13
24	Maine	        153.6	.5887	18	18-11-5	0.6029	1.519	36	101.2
25	Omaha	        145.2	.5772	39	14-17-5	0.4583	0.846	11	171.6
26	Northeastern	143.8	.5751	22	18-13-3	0.5735	1.345	30	106.9
27	Northrn Michigan136.6	.5646	29	18-16-4	0.5263	1.111	19	122.9
28	Providence	133.4	.5598	25	16-12-6	0.5588	1.267	33	105.3
29	Alaska	        128.2	.5516	30	16-15-5	0.5139	1.057	20	121.3
30	Boston Univer	116.8	.5322	32	13-13-8	0.5000	1.000	22	116.8
31	Harvard	        110.4	.5206	20	15-10-6	0.5806	1.385	41	79.74

USCHO Division I Women's Poll - March 9, 2020
Rnk	Team	      (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll

1	Cornell	        (14)	28-2-3	145	1
2	Wisconsin		28-5-3	132	2
3	Northeastern		32-4-2	114	4
4	Ohio State	(1)	24-8-6	101	5
5	Minnesota		27-6-3	100	3
6	Princeton		26-6-1	83	6
7	Clarkson		25-6-6	59	7
8	Minnesota Duluth	18-12-6	36	8
9	Boston University	24-8-4	34	9
10	Mercyhurst		21-10-5	13	NR

Others receiving votes: Quinnipiac 6, Harvard 2

Women's National Collegiate PairWise Rankings

Rnk	Team	        PWR	W-L-T	W%	W% Rnk	RPI	RPI Rnk

1	Cornell	        40	28-2-3	0.8939	1	0.6575*	1
2	Wisconsin	39	28-5-3	0.8194	3	0.6425*	2
3	Northeastern	38	32-4-2	0.8684	2	0.6302*	3
4	Minnesota	37	27-6-3	0.7917	5	0.6288*	4
5	Princeton	36	26-6-1	0.8030	4	0.6213*	5
6	Ohio State	35	24-8-6	0.7105	8	0.6188	6
7	Clarkson	34	25-6-6	0.7568	6	0.5921*	7
8	Boston Univer   33	24-8-4	0.7222	7	0.5736*	8
9	Minnesota Duluth32	18-12-6	0.5833	12	0.5685	9
10	Quinnipiac	31	20-14-3	0.5811	13	0.5405*	10
11	Harvard	        30	18-14-1	0.5606	14	0.5391*	11
12	Mercyhurst	29	21-10-5	0.6528	9	0.5390	12

KRACH: National Collegiate Women

Rank	Team	       Rating	RRWP Win % Rk	W-L-T	Win % Win Ratio	SOS Rk	SOS

1	Cornell	        2782.	.9092	1	28-2-3	0.8939	8.429	7	330.0
2	Wisconsin	2740.	.9081	3	28-5-3	0.8194	4.538	3	603.6
3	Minnesota	2266.	.8935	5	27-6-3	0.7917	3.800	4	596.3
4	Ohio State	1896.	.8787	8	24-8-6	0.7105	2.455	1	772.3
5	Princeton	1330.	.8458	4	26-6-1	0.8030	4.077	8	326.2
6	Northeastern	1012.	.8174	2	32-4-2	0.8684	6.600	16	153.4
7	Minnesota Duluth851.9	.7981	12	18-12-6	0.5833	1.400	2	608.5
8	Clarkson	745.8	.7826	6	25-6-6	0.7568	3.111	11	239.7
9	Boston Univer	373.5	.6928	7	24-8-4	0.7222	2.600	18	143.7
10	Bemidji State	354.1	.6853	24	16-18-3	0.4730	0.897	5	394.6
11	Harvard	        314.0	.6683	14	18-14-1	0.5606	1.276	10	246.1
12	Quinnipiac	287.4	.6556	13	20-14-3	0.5811	1.387	13	207.2
13	Colgate	        255.6	.6385	19	17-15-6	0.5263	1.111	12	230.1
14	Minnesota State	220.5	.6168	31	11-20-6	0.3784	0.609	6	362.3
15	Yale	        209.6	.6093	18	17-15-0	0.5312	1.133	14	184.9
16	Mercyhurst	202.3	.6040	9	21-10-5	0.6528	1.880	26	107.6

CBR: Men's Hockey Ranked #1 In Final USCHO poll Cornell tops year-end poll for first time in program history

CBR: Women's Ice Hockey Tabbed #1 in Final USCHO Poll

Interestingly it's also the first for the women, even though they don't headline it as such.

USCHO Division I Men's Poll - March 23, 2020

Rnk	Team	      (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll
1	Cornell	        (25)	23-2-4	954	1
2	North Dakota	(16)	26-5-4	943	3
3	Minnesota State	(6)	31-5-2	926	2
4	Boston College	(2)	24-8-2	833	5
5	Minnesota Duluth(1)	22-10-2	811	4
6	Denver		        21-9-6	739	6
7	Clarkson		23-8-3	684	7
8	Penn State		20-10-4	649	8
9	Massachusetts		21-11-2	619	9
10	Ohio State		20-11-5	537	10
11	Bemidji State		22-10-5	467	11
12	UMass Lowell		18-10-6	448	12
13	Arizona State		22-11-3	362	13
14	Quinnipiac		21-11-2	323	14
15	Maine		        18-11-5	301	15
16	Western Michigan	18-13-5	229	16
17	Michigan		18-14-4	210	17
18	Minnesota		16-14-7	124	18
19	Northeastern		18-13-3	105	19
20	AIC		        21-12-1	77	20
Others receiving votes: Providence 55, Sacred Heart 32, 
Bowling Green 31, Harvard 25, Rensselaer 7, Notre Dame 4, 
Boston University 2, Michigan Tech 1, St. Cloud 1, Bentley 1

USCHO Division I Women's Poll - March 23, 2020

Rnk	Team	      (First)	Record	Points	Last Poll
1	Cornell 	(12)	28-2-3	144	1
2	Wisconsin	(1)	28-5-3	134	2
3	Northeastern	(1)	32-4-2	115	3
4	Ohio State	(1)	24-8-6	102	4
5	Minnesota		27-6-3	99	5
6	Princeton		26-6-1	80	6
7	Clarkson		25-6-6	60	7
8	Minnesota Duluth	18-12-6	39	8
9	Boston University	24-8-4	36	9
10	Mercyhurst		21-10-5	12	10
Others receiving votes: Quinnipiac 4