ELynah Forum

It's still January, so take this with big chunks of rock salt. But USCHO has us playing Round 1 in Fargo.

Other placements of interest include Union & Q (against ASU) in Providence & Clarkson in Manchester.

Quote from: SwampyIt's still January, so take this with big chunks of rock salt. But USCHO has us playing Round 1 in Fargo.

Other placements of interest include Union & Q (against ASU) in Providence & Clarkson in Manchester.

I did a bracketology last Sunday and came up with the same result.

So here's the link. (https://www.uscho.com/2019/01/23/bracketology-our-first-shot-at-predicting-the-2019-ncaa-tournament/)

And results:

This week's brackets

West Regional (Fargo):
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
9 Cornell vs. 8 Minnesota State

Midwest Regional (Allentown):
14 Notre Dame vs. 4 Minnesota Duluth
12 Bowling Green vs. 5 Ohio State

East Regional (Providence):
15 Union vs. 3 Denver
11 Arizona State vs. 6 Quinnipiac

Northeast Regional (Manchester):
13 Western Michigan vs. 2 Massachusetts
10 Clarkson vs. 7 Northeastern
Conference breakdowns

ECAC Hockey — 4
NCHC — 4
Big Ten — 2
Hockey East — 2
WCHA — 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1

This week's. (https://www.uscho.com/2019/01/30/bracketology-if-the-ncaa-tournament-began-today-whos-in-whos-out/)

This week's brackets

West Regional (Fargo):
16 Air Force vs. 1 St. Cloud State
9 Cornell vs. 8 Western Michigan

Midwest Regional (Allentown):
14 Notre Dame vs. 3 Minnesota Duluth
12 Arizona State vs. 5 Ohio State

East Regional (Providence):
13 Northeastern vs. 4 Quinnipiac
10 Providence vs. 7 Minnesota State

Northeast Regional (Manchester):
15 Harvard vs. 2 Massachusetts
11 Clarkson vs. 6 Denver
Conference breakdowns

ECAC Hockey — 4
NCHC — 4
Hockey East — 3
Big Ten — 2
WCHA — 1
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1

Break up the ECAC!

As usual, I'm torn between hoping we stay East so fans can attend and hoping we go to Fargo so I can attend.

We either need to get out of the 8 and 9 positions or UMass needs to move up to #1 again.

I'm not eager to go to Fargo.

Four ECAC without Union. I approve. :-D

Quote from: DafatoneAs usual, I'm torn between hoping we stay East so fans can attend and hoping we go to Fargo so I can attend.

I hope that this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cJJjr8imTU), this (https://www.fxnetworks.com/shows/fargo), or this (https://www.kvrr.com/2019/01/31/police-dead-woman-found-in-fargo-parking-lot-had-been-there-for-a-few-months/) changes your mind.

Fargo wasn't filmed or set in Fargo.

Quote from: DafatoneAs usual, I'm torn between hoping we stay East so fans can attend and hoping we go to Fargo so I can attend.

Too many of our placements that I've "wished" for (e.g. playing NH in Albany in 2010) have blown up in my face, so all I want is for us to get in wherever they put us and hope for the best.

Quote from: TrotskyFargo wasn't filmed or set in Fargo.

But it was about Fargo. And the third link in my earlier note is about actual existing Fargo.

Quote from: Swampy

Quote from: TrotskyFargo wasn't filmed or set in Fargo.

But it was about Fargo. And the third link in my earlier note is about actual existing Fargo.

Yeah, but your links were all about dying in Fargo.  I don't want to die in Fargo, and I sure don't want to see our hopes for the Frozen Four die in Fargo.

This week is nicer. (https://www.uscho.com/2019/02/06/bracketology-if-ncaa-tourney-began-today-st-cloud-state-umass-ohio-state-quinnipiac-would-be-top-four-seeds/)

What I didn't get was this:

"And while we're at it, why not swap Cornell and Northeastern for distance purposes."

West Regional (Fargo):
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
9 Western Michigan vs. 6 Minnesota State

Midwest Regional (Allentown):
13 UMass Lowell vs. 3 Ohio State
12 Clarkson vs. 8 Arizona State

East Regional (Providence):
15 Providence vs. 4 Quinnipiac
10 Cornell vs. 5 Minnesota Duluth

Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Bowling Green vs. 2 Massachusetts
11 Northeastern vs. 7 Denver

Conference breakdowns

Hockey East — 4
NCHC — 4
ECAC Hockey — 3
WCHA — 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Big Ten — 1
Independent – 1

Quote from: Jim HylaThis week is nicer. (https://www.uscho.com/2019/02/06/bracketology-if-ncaa-tourney-began-today-st-cloud-state-umass-ohio-state-quinnipiac-would-be-top-four-seeds/)

What I didn't get was this:

"And while we're at it, why not swap Cornell and Northeastern for distance purposes."

"Let's give Cornell a tougher matchup than their seed warrants every year because 'distance purposes.'"

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Jim HylaThis week is nicer. (https://www.uscho.com/2019/02/06/bracketology-if-ncaa-tourney-began-today-st-cloud-state-umass-ohio-state-quinnipiac-would-be-top-four-seeds/)

What I didn't get was this:

"And while we're at it, why not swap Cornell and Northeastern for distance purposes."

"Let's give Cornell a tougher matchup than their seed warrants every year because 'distance purposes.'"

duluth is a tough first round but that's a good second round if we survive.

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Jim HylaThis week is nicer. (https://www.uscho.com/2019/02/06/bracketology-if-ncaa-tourney-began-today-st-cloud-state-umass-ohio-state-quinnipiac-would-be-top-four-seeds/)

What I didn't get was this:

"And while we're at it, why not swap Cornell and Northeastern for distance purposes."

"Let's give Cornell a tougher matchup than their seed warrants every year because 'distance purposes.'"

duluth is a tough first round but that's a good second round if we survive.

We haven't gotten past the 1R in 7 years (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_NCAA_Playoff_Bargraph.html).  Let's just worry about Clarkson.  ::cheer::

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Jim HylaThis week is nicer. (https://www.uscho.com/2019/02/06/bracketology-if-ncaa-tourney-began-today-st-cloud-state-umass-ohio-state-quinnipiac-would-be-top-four-seeds/)

What I didn't get was this:

"And while we're at it, why not swap Cornell and Northeastern for distance purposes."

"Let's give Cornell a tougher matchup than their seed warrants every year because 'distance purposes.'"

duluth is a tough first round but that's a good second round if we survive.

We haven't gotten past the 1R in 7 years (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_NCAA_Playoff_Bargraph.html).  Let's just worry about Clarkson.  ::cheer::

In the bracketology thread? I have to admit that I don't care where they place Clarkson.

I know avoiding second round conference matchups are not a listed criterion, but...

Northeastern is 5 miles closer to Providence than Manchester and Cornell is 40 miles closer to Providence than Manchester.

Is saving a net of 35 miles of total travel worth exposure to the risk of an additional second round conference matchup?

Attendance cannot be an issue - any Northeastern fan willing to travel 50 miles would travel 55 miles and any Cornell fan willing to travel 325 miles would travel 365 miles

Quote from: ugarteI have to admit that I don't care where they place Clarkson.

Though we probably should, since we may well wind up in the same band and thus competing for the same slot.

Back to Fargo (https://www.uscho.com/2019/02/13/bracketology-providence-out-harvard-in-if-ncaa-tournament-started-today/)

This week's brackets

West Regional (Fargo):
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
9 Arizona State vs. 8 Cornell[/b]

Midwest Regional (Allentown):
15 Bowling Green vs. 3 Ohio State
12 Clarkson vs. 6 Minnesota State

East Regional (Providence):
14 Northeastern vs. 4 Minnesota Duluth
10 Western Michigan vs. 5 Quinnipiac

Northeast Regional (Manchester):
13 Harvard vs. 2 Massachusetts
11 UMass Lowell vs. 7 Denver
Conference breakdowns

NCHC — 4
ECAC Hockey — 4
Hockey East — 3
WCHA — 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Big Ten — 1
Independent – 1

So last week Moy swapped seeds 10 and 11 (Cornell and Northeastern) to save 35 miles (net) of travel.

This week he does not swap seeds 7 and 8 (Denver and Cornell) which would save over 2000 miles of travel.

What am I missing?

it's just one season but it's wild that after the big ten split off there was an expectation that their resources meant that they'd start to dominate and yet... Ohio State is the only team from the conference in position for a bid.

Quote from: ugarteit's just one season but it's wild that after the big ten split off there was an expectation that their resources meant that they'd start to dominate and yet... Ohio State is the only team from the conference in position for a bid.

This is a turnaround compared to last year which saw 4 of the 7 Big 10 teams make the 16 team tournament and 3 advance to the Frozen Four. This after the I believe only 1 (post split) Big 10 team making the FF in all the years prior to 2018.

Stats like this must cause insanity for certain fans. Eh?

This week. (https://www.uscho.com/2019/02/20/bracketology-if-ncaa-tournament-began-today-cornell-arizona-state-would-make-for-intriguing-matchup/)


[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
9 Western Michigan vs. 8 Arizona State

[b]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/b]
[b][u]13 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 3 Minnesota Duluth
11 Northeastern vs. 7 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
14 UMass Lowell vs. 4 Denver
12 Providence vs. [b][u]6 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
[b][u][b][u]15 Harvard[/u][/b] vs. 2 Massachusetts
10 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 5 Minnesota State

Conference breakdowns

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
Hockey East — 4
NCHC — 4
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Big Ten — 1
Independent – 1
WCHA — 1


If NCAA tournament started today, UMass Lowell out, Bowling Green in (https://www.uscho.com/2019/02/27/bracketology-if-ncaa-tournament-started-today-umass-lowell-out-bowling-green-in/)


This week's brackets

[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
11 Western Michigan vs. 5 Minnesota State

[b]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/b]
15 Bowling Green vs. 3 Minnesota Duluth
[b][u]12 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 7 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
[b][u]13 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 4 Denver
9 Providence vs. [b][u]6 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
[b][u]14 Harvard[/u][/b] vs. 2 Massachusetts
10 Northeastern vs. 8 Arizona State

Conference breakdowns

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
NCHC — 4
Hockey East — 3
WCHA – 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Big Ten — 1
Independent – 1


Not to get too obsessive about these things, but we're rooting against Providence again tonight; a BU win again pushes them down to #13 and us up to #12. Other results don't seem to matter much.

The game's on NBC Sports Boston, whatever that is.

Quote from: BeeeejNot to get too obsessive about these things, but we're rooting against Providence again tonight; a BU win again pushes them down to #13 and us up to #12. Other results don't seem to matter much.

The game's on NBC Sports Boston, whatever that is.

Those are the Comcast regional networks re-baptized.

Playoffstatus currently has us at 70% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournpartprob.html) to make the Show.  3% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournperformprob.html) to win it all.

In the ECAC, 45% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecacstandings.html) for the Cleary, 19% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecachockeypostseasonprob.html) for the Whitelaw.

Quote from: TrotskyPlayoffstatus currently has us at 70% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournpartprob.html) to make the Show.  3% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournperformprob.html) to win it all.

In the ECAC, 45% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecacstandings.html) for the Cleary, 19% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecachockeypostseasonprob.html) for the Whitelaw.

In addition to the already-discussed issues with this prediction model, it also assumes top-14 is the cut-off for making the tournament. That's probably generous.

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: TrotskyPlayoffstatus currently has us at 70% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournpartprob.html) to make the Show.  3% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournperformprob.html) to win it all.

In the ECAC, 45% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecacstandings.html) for the Cleary, 19% (http://www.playoffstatus.com/ecachockey/ecachockeypostseasonprob.html) for the Whitelaw.

In addition to the already-discussed issues with this prediction model, it also assumes top-14 is the cut-off for making the tournament. That's probably generous.

The model should take into account the results of the conference tournaments to determine what the cut-off is. That's what we do on CHN. So for each simulation, they each have their own cutoff, and thus the final odds is based on that.

That said, 14 isn't a terrible guess. I'd say 13 has a plurality - but 14 isn't bad.

Quote from: BearLoverIn addition to the already-discussed issues with this prediction model

I haven't read any discussion of the issues with the model other than you don't understand it.

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BearLoverIn addition to the already-discussed issues with this prediction model

I haven't read any discussion of the issues with the model other than you don't understand it.

Some salient points were made last year. I saved the thread, and, over the past year, have had discussions with a few people on improving things. But since I lack the math insight to do it, I've been waiting on some to help me. So far, nothing is finalized.

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BearLoverIn addition to the already-discussed issues with this prediction model

I haven't read any discussion of the issues with the model other than you don't understand it.

lmao. Go back and read the thread.

And thank you, AdamW.

Adam's first take on the NCAA seeding difficulties. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/05_Bracket-ABCs-Pre-Playoff.php)

And Adam takes his annual(?) swipe about bracket talk before it really matters.

QuoteWhile everyone else has been pondering their "bracketology" — explaining in fine-point detail the architecture of brackets that will never actually happen — we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day.

Adam, don't you think having fun is important? Isn't that why we go to games?

So why is it so hard to understand that having fun with brackets is okay?

Plus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

Quote from: Jim HylaPlus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

I agree with the educational aspect.  I was pretty close to predicting the result last year because I had run a few simulations the week or so before. And for some of us it is FUN.

Quote from: marty

Quote from: Jim HylaPlus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

I agree with the educational aspect.  I was pretty close to predicting the result last year because I had run a few simulations the week or so before. And for some of us it is FUN.

I don't run any simulations.  But, I enjoy reading the comments of those who do.  Accuracy is not important to me.

I assume that Adam didn't major in math or another scientific or engineering field, not that it is necessary to be a scientist to have interest in bracketology and how PWR works.

This link (https://blog.collegehockeyranked.com/2019/03/05/which-games-this-season-had-the-most-impact-on-pwr/) is relevant to this thread. I linked it earlier on the ASU thread, but it is of more general bracketology interest.

Has anyone checked how Union's performance has affected the ratings of the other ECAC schools? I would think that an ECAC team that has a great OOC record and a pretty average ECAC record benefits the entire league.

Quote from: Jim HylaAdam's first take on the NCAA seeding difficulties. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/05_Bracket-ABCs-Pre-Playoff.php)

And Adam takes his annual(?) swipe about bracket talk before it really matters.

QuoteWhile everyone else has been pondering their "bracketology" — explaining in fine-point detail the architecture of brackets that will never actually happen — we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day.

Adam, don't you think having fun is important? Isn't that why we go to games?

So why is it so hard to understand that having fun with brackets is okay?

Plus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

Seems a little strange to not call us a bubble team given we'd likely be out if we lost our first playoff series (or even possibly if we won in three games and then lost in the semis). Especially given, as the article states, the likelihood of there being at least two, and probably more, conference winners outside the top-16. And the article even mentions Union as a potential ECAC dark horse outside the top-16--who would be, if the higher seeds win in the first round, our second-round opponent.

It appears that, as usual, the "pairwise probability matrix" overrates the likelihood of us (and everyone else) beating a lower-seeded opponent in the ECAC second-round, which might have colored the above analysis. (How much the model overrates our chances I can't say off the top of my head--but based on some of the tests people on this forum ran last year, it overrates our chances at least marginally.)

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Jim HylaAdam's first take on the NCAA seeding difficulties. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/05_Bracket-ABCs-Pre-Playoff.php)

And Adam takes his annual(?) swipe about bracket talk before it really matters.

QuoteWhile everyone else has been pondering their "bracketology" — explaining in fine-point detail the architecture of brackets that will never actually happen — we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day.

Adam, don't you think having fun is important? Isn't that why we go to games?

So why is it so hard to understand that having fun with brackets is okay?

Plus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

Seems a little strange to not call us a bubble team given we'd likely be out if we lost our first playoff series (or even possibly if we won in three games and then lost in the semis). Especially given, as the article states, the likelihood of there being at least two, and probably more, conference winners outside the top-16. And the article even mentions Union as a potential ECAC dark horse outside the top-16--who would be, if the higher seeds win in the first round, our second-round opponent.

Since he spends the rest of that paragraph, and the next several paragraphs, explaining his reasoning, it doesn't seem that strange to me at all. I'm not counting chickens or prepaying a hotel room in Providence or anything, but I'd certainly rather be #12 right now in this scenario than #13.

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Jim HylaAdam's first take on the NCAA seeding difficulties. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/05_Bracket-ABCs-Pre-Playoff.php)

And Adam takes his annual(?) swipe about bracket talk before it really matters.

QuoteWhile everyone else has been pondering their "bracketology" — explaining in fine-point detail the architecture of brackets that will never actually happen — we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day.

Adam, don't you think having fun is important? Isn't that why we go to games?

So why is it so hard to understand that having fun with brackets is okay?

Plus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

Seems a little strange to not call us a bubble team given we'd likely be out if we lost our first playoff series (or even possibly if we won in three games and then lost in the semis). Especially given, as the article states, the likelihood of there being at least two, and probably more, conference winners outside the top-16. And the article even mentions Union as a potential ECAC dark horse outside the top-16--who would be, if the higher seeds win in the first round, our second-round opponent.

Since he spends the rest of that paragraph, and the next several paragraphs, explaining his reasoning, it doesn't seem that strange to me at all. I'm not counting chickens or prepaying a hotel room in Providence or anything, but I'd certainly rather be #12 right now in this scenario than #13.

I don't think the reasoning why we (and those teams right above us) aren't bubble teams is adequately explained. It seems to rely on the (at least somewhat) flawed parwise probability model that gives us an 86% shot of making the tournament, or else relies just on our RPI, which is materially higher than those teams below us, but not high enough to take us safely out of bubble range. It is absolutely true that teams 13-18 are in a considerably more perilous position than we are--but that doesn't mean our position isn't perilous. I think most of the rest of the piece actually points to us being a bubble team, as adamw emphasizes the high likelihood of 2+ conference winners from outside the top-16.

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Jim HylaAdam's first take on the NCAA seeding difficulties. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/05_Bracket-ABCs-Pre-Playoff.php)

And Adam takes his annual(?) swipe about bracket talk before it really matters.

QuoteWhile everyone else has been pondering their "bracketology" — explaining in fine-point detail the architecture of brackets that will never actually happen — we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day.

Adam, don't you think having fun is important? Isn't that why we go to games?

So why is it so hard to understand that having fun with brackets is okay?

Plus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

Seems a little strange to not call us a bubble team given we'd likely be out if we lost our first playoff series (or even possibly if we won in three games and then lost in the semis). Especially given, as the article states, the likelihood of there being at least two, and probably more, conference winners outside the top-16. And the article even mentions Union as a potential ECAC dark horse outside the top-16--who would be, if the higher seeds win in the first round, our second-round opponent.

Since he spends the rest of that paragraph, and the next several paragraphs, explaining his reasoning, it doesn't seem that strange to me at all. I'm not counting chickens or prepaying a hotel room in Providence or anything, but I'd certainly rather be #12 right now in this scenario than #13.

I don't think the reasoning why we (and those teams right above us) aren't bubble teams is adequately explained. It seems to rely on the (at least somewhat) flawed parwise probability model that gives us an 86% shot of making the tournament, or else relies just on our RPI, which is materially higher than those teams below us, but not high enough to take us safely out of bubble range. It is absolutely true that teams 13-18 are in a considerably more perilous position than we are--but that doesn't mean our position isn't perilous. I think most of the rest of the piece actually points to us being a bubble team, as adamw emphasizes the high likelihood of 2+ conference winners from outside the top-16.

Yes, he emphasizes the relatively high likelihood of up to three conference winners from outside the top 16, which would still leave the top 13 in the tournament. Notwithstanding the possibility for individual sub-18 teams to have surprising runs, at a certain point when you're projecting a tournament field at the end of a few-dozen-games-long season, you have to assume the teams in the top 12 belong there and will perform more or less according to their ranking. The point of the bubble teams' peril is that they could perform more or less according to their top 16 ranking and yet still not make it. If you're going to go by the mere possibility of Cinderella runs combined with the mere possibility of top teams underperforming, we should be talking about #8-16 as "the bubble" pretty much every year.

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Jim HylaAdam's first take on the NCAA seeding difficulties. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/05_Bracket-ABCs-Pre-Playoff.php)

And Adam takes his annual(?) swipe about bracket talk before it really matters.

QuoteWhile everyone else has been pondering their "bracketology" — explaining in fine-point detail the architecture of brackets that will never actually happen — we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day.

Adam, don't you think having fun is important? Isn't that why we go to games?

So why is it so hard to understand that having fun with brackets is okay?

Plus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

Seems a little strange to not call us a bubble team given we'd likely be out if we lost our first playoff series (or even possibly if we won in three games and then lost in the semis). Especially given, as the article states, the likelihood of there being at least two, and probably more, conference winners outside the top-16. And the article even mentions Union as a potential ECAC dark horse outside the top-16--who would be, if the higher seeds win in the first round, our second-round opponent.

Since he spends the rest of that paragraph, and the next several paragraphs, explaining his reasoning, it doesn't seem that strange to me at all. I'm not counting chickens or prepaying a hotel room in Providence or anything, but I'd certainly rather be #12 right now in this scenario than #13.

I don't think the reasoning why we (and those teams right above us) aren't bubble teams is adequately explained. It seems to rely on the (at least somewhat) flawed parwise probability model that gives us an 86% shot of making the tournament, or else relies just on our RPI, which is materially higher than those teams below us, but not high enough to take us safely out of bubble range. It is absolutely true that teams 13-18 are in a considerably more perilous position than we are--but that doesn't mean our position isn't perilous. I think most of the rest of the piece actually points to us being a bubble team, as adamw emphasizes the high likelihood of 2+ conference winners from outside the top-16.

Yes, he emphasizes the relatively high likelihood of up to three conference winners from outside the top 16, which would still leave the top 13 in the tournament. Notwithstanding the possibility for individual sub-18 teams to have surprising runs, at a certain point when you're projecting a tournament field at the end of a few-dozen-games-long season, you have to assume the teams in the top 12 belong there and will perform more or less according to their ranking. The point of the bubble teams' peril is that they could perform more or less according to their top 16 ranking and yet still not make it. If you're going to go by the mere possibility of Cinderella runs combined with the mere possibility of top teams underperforming, we should be talking about #8-16 as "the bubble" pretty much every year.

I think "you're out of the NCAA if you lose your next playoff series" is grounds for being a bubble team.

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Jim HylaAdam's first take on the NCAA seeding difficulties. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/05_Bracket-ABCs-Pre-Playoff.php)

And Adam takes his annual(?) swipe about bracket talk before it really matters.

QuoteWhile everyone else has been pondering their "bracketology" — explaining in fine-point detail the architecture of brackets that will never actually happen — we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day.

Adam, don't you think having fun is important? Isn't that why we go to games?

So why is it so hard to understand that having fun with brackets is okay?

Plus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

Seems a little strange to not call us a bubble team given we'd likely be out if we lost our first playoff series (or even possibly if we won in three games and then lost in the semis). Especially given, as the article states, the likelihood of there being at least two, and probably more, conference winners outside the top-16. And the article even mentions Union as a potential ECAC dark horse outside the top-16--who would be, if the higher seeds win in the first round, our second-round opponent.

Since he spends the rest of that paragraph, and the next several paragraphs, explaining his reasoning, it doesn't seem that strange to me at all. I'm not counting chickens or prepaying a hotel room in Providence or anything, but I'd certainly rather be #12 right now in this scenario than #13.

I don't think the reasoning why we (and those teams right above us) aren't bubble teams is adequately explained. It seems to rely on the (at least somewhat) flawed parwise probability model that gives us an 86% shot of making the tournament, or else relies just on our RPI, which is materially higher than those teams below us, but not high enough to take us safely out of bubble range. It is absolutely true that teams 13-18 are in a considerably more perilous position than we are--but that doesn't mean our position isn't perilous. I think most of the rest of the piece actually points to us being a bubble team, as adamw emphasizes the high likelihood of 2+ conference winners from outside the top-16.

Yes, he emphasizes the relatively high likelihood of up to three conference winners from outside the top 16, which would still leave the top 13 in the tournament. Notwithstanding the possibility for individual sub-18 teams to have surprising runs, at a certain point when you're projecting a tournament field at the end of a few-dozen-games-long season, you have to assume the teams in the top 12 belong there and will perform more or less according to their ranking. The point of the bubble teams' peril is that they could perform more or less according to their top 16 ranking and yet still not make it. If you're going to go by the mere possibility of Cinderella runs combined with the mere possibility of top teams underperforming, we should be talking about #8-16 as "the bubble" pretty much every year.

I think "you're out of the NCAA if you lose your next playoff series" is grounds for being a bubble team.

It is certainly your prerogative to think that. But then you're limiting the universe of non-bubble teams to those that are already mathematically impervious to the effects of a late collapse plus sub-16 Cinderella runs. That's pretty damn narrow, not to mention nearly impossible to nail down at the moment because of what's left on the schedule. My speculation is that the bubble would have to start at #8, maybe even #7.

we could also lose the next 2 and still get in. but its clear we are on the bubble

the Bubble also has some variables.

Minn getting swept by mich takes them off the bubble since they will be under .500
mich getting swpt the following week the same
NDak losing to omaha would put them below .500
MSu beating ND helps us too

other than winning the league there are only 4-5 teams that can catch us and some things can help us too root for

WMU losing to Miami
LSU to bemidji
bowling green to mich tech
mass lowell to vermont

My take is that "bubble" doesn't apply. College basketball, where the bracket is determined by handwaving and magic, has a bubble of teams whose future is up in the air.

College hockey uses a hard and fast system (or, a system that closely resembles a hard and fast system). We can pin down odds to the extent that we can predict odds of winners of future matchups. In any given simulation, there's no guessing about bubbles or who is in or out once all the games are played.

We're probably out if we lose two straight. But we're a lot closer to the teams ahead of us than the teams behind us, and it's more likely than not that our current position, 12th, gets in. It's fair to say that we're closer to in than out.

This comes down to the fear that using math to predict our likelihood of winning will anger the Hockey Gods and cause us to lose.

That is magical thinking.

But the Hockey Gods are, objectively, a bitch, so I wouldn't provoke them.

Quote from: BeeeejYes, he emphasizes the relatively high likelihood of up to three conference winners from outside the top 16, which would still leave the top 13 in the tournament. Notwithstanding the possibility for individual sub-18 teams to have surprising runs, at a certain point when you're projecting a tournament field at the end of a few-dozen-games-long season, you have to assume the teams in the top 12 belong there and will perform more or less according to their ranking. The point of the bubble teams' peril is that they could perform more or less according to their top 16 ranking and yet still not make it. If you're going to go by the mere possibility of Cinderella runs combined with the mere possibility of top teams underperforming, we should be talking about #8-16 as "the bubble" pretty much every year.

That's what I've always thought that was meant by hockey teams being on the bubble.

We're different than bball in that when our pre-NCAA games are over, we know who is in and out. There's no bubble then.

When bball is at the same point, they have teams that the gods can choose to include or exclude, thus a bubble.

I think Bear Lover's interpretation of the bubble - a reasonable chance that one bad game/series will move you from in to out - isn't bad. It's how I'd have instinctively thought about it too. I definitely see us as a bubble team. That said, I wouldn't care if someone had a different (non-stupid) definition, as long as they roughly defined it and arguing about someone else's definition is ...

is ...

is what we do around here mostly I guess.

There's bubble teams, and then there's BUBBLE teams ... I think, as Beeej (thank you) pointed out, I gave the reasoning for putting the line there, while also acknowledging that there were teams above 13 that still could possibly not make it. Had to draw the line somewhere in terms of focusing on the BUBBLE BUBBLE. ... Last thing I want to do is jinx anything however, so, sure, Cornell is on the bubble, hockey gods.

Quote from: Jim HylaAdam's first take on the NCAA seeding difficulties. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/05_Bracket-ABCs-Pre-Playoff.php)

And Adam takes his annual(?) swipe about bracket talk before it really matters.

QuoteWhile everyone else has been pondering their "bracketology" — explaining in fine-point detail the architecture of brackets that will never actually happen — we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day.

Adam, don't you think having fun is important? Isn't that why we go to games?

So why is it so hard to understand that having fun with brackets is okay?

Plus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

Jim, my good sir, we'll never agree on this I suppose. And those remarks are never aimed at you, by the way, or fans in general. ...

I love fun - but fun is in the eye of the beholder - and I don't find pointless exercises to be fun. Fun is figuring out what could happen, and why. Fun is explaining these things to readers in ways that hopefully make sense. Therein is the education. The mechanics of how these things work have been written about ad nauseum where I don't feel the need to repeat them each week, using examples that will be moot by the next week.

And there's more I could say, but shall not. So it will have to be left at that.

Quote from: ursusminorI assume that Adam didn't major in math or another scientific or engineering field, not that it is necessary to be a scientist to have interest in bracketology and how PWR works.

I'm not sure whether you are intending that as a criticism or not - because I can't figure out why you brought it up.

The answer is no, but then again, neither did Bill James. I've been writing about this stuff forever, and Pairwise math is certainly simpler than KRACH math, so I don't think it requires an engineering degree. When I need that, I turn to John Whelan - and then I take his stuff and turn it into English, for readers :)

Quote from: adamwI don't find pointless exercises to be fun.

Pointless exercises are the only things that are fun.  Everything else has too much riding on it.

That's why we invented sports and games in the first place.  The other shit was war, work, and parenting, and all that shit's exhausting.

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: ursusminorI assume that Adam didn't major in math or another scientific or engineering field, not that it is necessary to be a scientist to have interest in bracketology and how PWR works.

I'm not sure whether you are intending that as a criticism or not - because I can't figure out why you brought it up.

The answer is no, but then again, neither did Bill James. I've been writing about this stuff forever, and Pairwise math is certainly simpler than KRACH math, so I don't think it requires an engineering degree. When I need that, I turn to John Whelan - and then I take his stuff and turn it into English, for readers :)

It was not meant as a criticism. It was just a comment on the previous post and based upon my misinterpretation of that post. :-/

Way back when RPI was frequently on the bubble and always missed the NCAA tourney in the early Fridgen years and before IIRC, it was fun calculating what minor changes would have gotten the 'Tute in. And then there was the more recent year that RPI was eliminated early in the ECAC tourney, but by the way that PWR was then calculated, most scenarios would have get the team in the NCAA tourney, and that was what happened, only for them to embarrass themselves as usual in the opening round.

BTW, lack of the ability to write clear English, as in the previous paragraph, is certainly one of my characteristics.

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Jim HylaAdam's first take on the NCAA seeding difficulties. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/05_Bracket-ABCs-Pre-Playoff.php)

And Adam takes his annual(?) swipe about bracket talk before it really matters.

QuoteWhile everyone else has been pondering their "bracketology" — explaining in fine-point detail the architecture of brackets that will never actually happen — we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day.

Adam, don't you think having fun is important? Isn't that why we go to games?

So why is it so hard to understand that having fun with brackets is okay?

Plus, anyone who goes through the process each week has a much better understanding of why some things work out the way they do.

Fun and education, what's not to like about that?

Jim, my good sir, we'll never agree on this I suppose. And those remarks are never aimed at you, by the way, or fans in general. ...

I love fun - but fun is in the eye of the beholder - and I don't find pointless exercises to be fun. Fun is figuring out what could happen, and why. Fun is explaining these things to readers in ways that hopefully make sense. Therein is the education. The mechanics of how these things work have been written about ad nauseum where I don't feel the need to repeat them each week, using examples that will be moot by the next week.

And there's more I could say, but shall not. So it will have to be left at that.

Adam, you're probably correct, "we'll never agree on this I suppose."

But look at what you said, "I love fun - but fun is in the eye of the beholder - and I don't find pointless exercises to be fun."

That's okay and I agree with you. You have your fun and I have mine. As long as our funs(?) don't hurt anyone, there's no need to criticize each other for what we enjoy.

You say, and let me say that I totally believe you when you say it, that "those remarks are never aimed at you, by the way, or fans in general."

But criticizing the subject is indirectly criticizing the people who enjoy it.

I know you don't mean to criticize fans who follow it, but saying "we'll just calmly remind everyone of what to be looking for as we approach selection day." has an elitist ring to it. It's as if you're saying, "We're the calm ones, while the rest are just screamers. You shouldn't pay attention to them."

You have the right to say that you think what is being done is pointless, and to an extent I agree, but you don't need to put down those that have their fun in this "pointless exercise."

Trotsky is correct, "Pointless exercises are the only things that are fun."

Hockey is inherently a pointless exercise. In the end the athletes have gotten good exercise, but for the rest of us, we were just sitting on our butts and, aside from the fun of watching, could have done a lot of other more "important" things with that time.

Sitting at their computer and reading about bracketology can be no less fun for some, than is it for me to sit and read, and respond to eLynah posts. Both are pointless and that's the point.

Enough fun for me, now I have to go back to dictating patients charts. That's the epitome of the opposite of pointless fun.

Quote from: Jim HylaYou say, and let me say that I totally believe you when you say it, that "those remarks are never aimed at you, by the way, or fans in general."

But criticizing the subject is indirectly criticizing the people who enjoy it.

It's entirely up to you how to react to learning that someone thinks something you like is silly.

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Jim HylaYou say, and let me say that I totally believe you when you say it, that "those remarks are never aimed at you, by the way, or fans in general."

But criticizing the subject is indirectly criticizing the people who enjoy it.

It's entirely up to you how to react to learning that someone thinks something you like is silly.

Whaddya mean by that (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6CF8iq8_Y4)?!  ::flipd::

Once again we're rooting against Providence tonight; the unlikely event of #37 Boston College defeating #9 Providence would drop PC to #13 and kick us up a notch to #11.

...which as you know is still totally on THE BUBBLE^tm, because non-zero unlikely catastrophic doom blah blah blah.

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: adamwI don't find pointless exercises to be fun.

Pointless exercises are the only things that are fun.  Everything else has too much riding on it.

That's why we invented sports and games in the first place.  The other shit was war, work, and parenting, and all that shit's exhausting.

Not to mention birth control. Don't forget about birth control, an innovation that prevents parenting, making sex pointless but casual.

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Jim HylaYou say, and let me say that I totally believe you when you say it, that "those remarks are never aimed at you, by the way, or fans in general."

But criticizing the subject is indirectly criticizing the people who enjoy it.

It's entirely up to you how to react to learning that someone thinks something you like is silly.

I'm not reacting to thinking that bracketology discussion in mid-season is silly, it is, but that not discussing it implies that you're somehow better.

Quote from: Jim Hyla

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Jim HylaYou say, and let me say that I totally believe you when you say it, that "those remarks are never aimed at you, by the way, or fans in general."

But criticizing the subject is indirectly criticizing the people who enjoy it.

It's entirely up to you how to react to learning that someone thinks something you like is silly.

I'm not reacting to thinking that bracketology discussion in mid-season is silly, it is, but that not discussing it implies that you're somehow better.

The people writing articles about it, are doing a disservice to readers (IMO), most of whom, unlike yourself, actually don't know better. That is my issue in a nutshell. So if that makes me sound like I'm "better" for my position on it, then so be it.

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Jim Hyla

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Jim HylaYou say, and let me say that I totally believe you when you say it, that "those remarks are never aimed at you, by the way, or fans in general."

But criticizing the subject is indirectly criticizing the people who enjoy it.

It's entirely up to you how to react to learning that someone thinks something you like is silly.

I'm not reacting to thinking that bracketology discussion in mid-season is silly, it is, but that not discussing it implies that you're somehow better.

The people writing articles about it, are doing a disservice to readers (IMO), most of whom, unlike yourself, actually don't know better. That is my issue in a nutshell. So if that makes me sound like I'm "better" for my position on it, then so be it.

Waitasec... is it part of your feelings on the subject that you think a lot of less-well-informed readers believe the weekly bracketology articles are somehow indicative or predictive of how the tournament will actually be seeded despite several weeks' worth of games left in the season to affect the outcomes? If not, what's the "disservice to readers"?

Better late than never? (https://www.uscho.com/2019/03/07/bracketology-notre-dame-in-bowling-green-out-if-ncaa-tournament-started-today/)

Was this the Adam effect?:-D

I don't mind playing ASU, but does it have to be in Fargo?

This week's brackets

[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
[b][u]12 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 8 Arizona State

[b][u]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/u][/b]
15 Notre Dame vs. 3 Minnesota Duluth
[b][u]10 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 7 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
[b][u]13 Harvard[/u][/b] vs. 4 Minnesota State
9 Providence vs. [b][u]5 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
14 Western Michigan vs. 2 Massachusetts
11 Northeastern vs. 6 Denver
Conference breakdowns

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
NCHC — 4
Hockey East — 3
Big Ten – 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1
WCHA — 1


Quote from: Jim HylaI don't mind playing ASU, but does it have to be in Fargo?

"I have some good news and some bad news."

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: Jim HylaI don't mind playing ASU, but does it have to be in Fargo?

"I have some good news and some bad news."

As the #12, playing #8 instead of #5 seems like a gift, except of course that #8 getting to play #12 instead of #9 also seems like a gift. Either way, you then (probably) have to get through #1 for a spot in the Frozen Four.

But of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome. Now that seems like a pointless exercise.

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

Quote from: BeeeejEither way, you then (probably) have to get through #1 for a spot in the Frozen Four.

Shout out to RIT.

Ruminating on #1ness, is there a continental shelf in NC$$ talent this year, or is it a fairly gentle incline?  Seems to me the NC$$ has been getting flatter, and there are no more Super Teams (RPI 85, Maine 93, etc).

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

That game resulted in #8 ASU and #9 Providence swapping places (and #37 BC dropping to #39, but that surely didn't affect much else). I don't know that this would've had earth-shattering effects on Jayson's results, but it still seems bizarre to me to publish the column late on Thursday but before a Thursday night game involving a top-16 team, when there otherwise haven't been any games since Saturday night.

I agree with you on prediction vs. training, but it still seems silly to me to publish such a training based on current information when the information won't be current in a half hour.

Quote from: BeeeejI agree with you on prediction vs. training, but it still seems silly to me to publish such a training based on current information when the information won't be current in a half hour.

I can dig it (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNyDG9foDGk).

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Jim Hyla

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Jim HylaYou say, and let me say that I totally believe you when you say it, that "those remarks are never aimed at you, by the way, or fans in general."

But criticizing the subject is indirectly criticizing the people who enjoy it.

It's entirely up to you how to react to learning that someone thinks something you like is silly.

I'm not reacting to thinking that bracketology discussion in mid-season is silly, it is, but that not discussing it implies that you're somehow better.

The people writing articles about it, are doing a disservice to readers (IMO), most of whom, unlike yourself, actually don't know better. That is my issue in a nutshell. So if that makes me sound like I'm "better" for my position on it, then so be it.

Waitasec... is it part of your feelings on the subject that you think a lot of less-well-informed readers believe the weekly bracketology articles are somehow indicative or predictive of how the tournament will actually be seeded despite several weeks' worth of games left in the season to affect the outcomes? If not, what's the "disservice to readers"?

Yes - that is exactly what I believe. And some other more nuanced points. And some other "inside baseball" points. Which all add up to me feeling it's a disservice. The vast majority of readers are not you, or anyone here on this board. The vast majority are clueless ... or, to be more kind, they are casual readers, who don't really understand what they're reading. When you combine the fact that the articles really don't make these points clear, well ....

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

You understand them to be that way. The vast majority do not.

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

You understand them to be that way. The vast majority do not.

Responding both to this and your other reply to me... can I ask, on what basis are you making that assertion? I'm genuinely curious, not just shit-stirring.

Quote from: Jim HylaBetter late than never? (https://www.uscho.com/2019/03/07/bracketology-notre-dame-in-bowling-green-out-if-ncaa-tournament-started-today/)

Was this the Adam effect?:-D

Code Select Expand

I don't mind playing ASU, but does it have to be in Fargo?

This week's brackets

[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
[b][u]12 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 8 Arizona State

[b][u]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/u][/b]
15 Notre Dame vs. 3 Minnesota Duluth
[b][u]10 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 7 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
[b][u]13 Harvard[/u][/b] vs. 4 Minnesota State
9 Providence vs. [b][u]5 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
14 Western Michigan vs. 2 Massachusetts
11 Northeastern vs. 6 Denver
Conference breakdowns

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
NCHC — 4
Hockey East — 3
Big Ten – 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1
WCHA — 1


I ran a Bracketology myself earlier in the week and came to the same conclusion:  Cornell being the low seed in the 3-band would get screwed in order to give Providence a home game.  

It would be nice if Providence's #8 position holds up, but my guess is they need to do pretty well in the HE tourney to stay up there.

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

You understand them to be that way. The vast majority do not.

Responding both to this and your other reply to me... can I ask, on what basis are you making that assertion? I'm genuinely curious, not just shit-stirring.

Based upon the deluge of dumb tweets and emails I receive on a regular basis, particularly around this time of year. Also based upon - anecdotally speaking - the traffic numbers we see for these things, compared to my assumptions of how many "in the know" people there actually are. For example, how many people, in hard numbers, actually post on this message board on a regular basis? 20? The readership of each article is upwards of 10,000 - probably more when you combine USCHO/CHN/NCAA sites. The vast majority of people who read the sites are not active, long-time college hockey die hards - let alone ones with institutional knowledge, so to speak, of these things.

Quote from: adamwBased upon the deluge of dumb tweets and emails I receive on a regular basis, particularly around this time of year. Also based upon - anecdotally speaking - the traffic numbers we see for these things, compared to my assumptions of how many "in the know" people there actually are. For example, how many people, in hard numbers, actually post on this message board on a regular basis? 20? The readership of each article is upwards of 10,000 - probably more when you combine USCHO/CHN/NCAA sites. The vast majority of people who read the sites are not active, long-time college hockey die hards - let alone ones with institutional knowledge, so to speak, of these things.

I'll quote myself to add, that it's also, to some extent, based upon how I see people discussing these articles. Again, not necessarily here.

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

You understand them to be that way. The vast majority do not.

As with everything else, the vast majority are morons, so fuck em.

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

You understand them to be that way. The vast majority do not.

As with everything else, the vast majority are morons, so fuck em.

"Hear, hear!  Well spoken, Bruce!"

Wisc beating PSU helps
MSU almost took down ND

Verm ties lowell

not sure CC beating Denver does much even if they do it again

west Mich
bowlin green
ND
PSU
North Dak

all the teams below us would be nice to see lose

Not in Fargo, but tougher first game opponent.

[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
10 Arizona State vs. 7 Denver

[b]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/b]
13 Western Michigan vs. 3 Minnesota State
[b][u]12 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 6 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
[b][u]14 Harvard[/u][/b] vs. 4 Minnesota Duluth
9 Providence vs. [b][u]5 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
15 Notre Dame vs. 2 Massachusetts
[b][u]11 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 8 Northeastern

[b]Conference breakdowns[/b]

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
NCHC — 4
Hockey East — 3
Big Ten – 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1
WCHA — 1


I'd take that bracket in a heartbeat.

Quote from: TrotskyI'd take that bracket in a heartbeat.

St Cloud's collective heartbeat would be faster if this is their draw.

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

You understand them to be that way. The vast majority do not.

When I used to do this, I called it "If the season ended today" which seems like it describes the role pretty succinctly.

Quote from: jtwcornell91

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

You understand them to be that way. The vast majority do not.

When I used to do this, I called it "If the season ended today" which seems like it describes the role pretty succinctly.

Yes, that is perfect.

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: jtwcornell91

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Trotsky

Quote from: BeeeejBut of course as soon as last night's BC @ PC game got played, this prediction was completely moot regardless of the outcome.

That particular game appears to have changed nothing, but sure things continue to evolve.

I wouldn't call these things predictions.  I'd call them training to show people how to understand and create a bracket in preparation for the real one.  They're like math problems -- nobody thinks you're going to get the identical problem set at work someday, but they teach you how to perform the algorithm.

You understand them to be that way. The vast majority do not.

When I used to do this, I called it "If the season ended today" which seems like it describes the role pretty succinctly.

Yes, that is perfect.

You mean sort of like including in the headline "...if NCAA tournament started today" and including in the text "Bracketology assumes that the season has ended and there are no more games to be played..."? Yeah, it really sucks that Jayson doesn't do anything like that. Terribly misleading to the vast majority of people. :-|

Quote from: BeeeejYou mean sort of like including in the headline "...if NCAA tournament started today" and including in the text "Bracketology assumes that the season has ended and there are no more games to be played..."? Yeah, it really sucks that Jayson doesn't do anything like that. Terribly misleading to the vast majority of people. :-|

All true, but it's somewhat undercut by this:

Quote from: Jayson Moy, USCHO.comIt's our weekly look at how I believe the NCAA tournament might look like come selection time, using what we know now.

Quote from: djk26

Quote from: BeeeejYou mean sort of like including in the headline "...if NCAA tournament started today" and including in the text "Bracketology assumes that the season has ended and there are no more games to be played..."? Yeah, it really sucks that Jayson doesn't do anything like that. Terribly misleading to the vast majority of people. :-|

All true, but it's somewhat undercut by this:

Quote from: Jayson Moy, USCHO.comIt's our weekly look at how I believe the NCAA tournament might look like come selection time, using what we know now.

Listen, I'm willing to take as an article of faith that there are some dumb people out there. But not understanding what Jayson is doing - especially when what Adam does later is not materially much different - requires a seriously willful level of dumb.

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: djk26

Quote from: BeeeejYou mean sort of like including in the headline "...if NCAA tournament started today" and including in the text "Bracketology assumes that the season has ended and there are no more games to be played..."? Yeah, it really sucks that Jayson doesn't do anything like that. Terribly misleading to the vast majority of people. :-|

All true, but it's somewhat undercut by this:

Quote from: Jayson Moy, USCHO.comIt's our weekly look at how I believe the NCAA tournament might look like come selection time, using what we know now.

Listen, I'm willing to take as an article of faith that there are some dumb people out there. But not understanding what Jayson is doing - especially when what Adam does later is not materially much different - requires a seriously willful level of dumb.

hahaha you think that maybe there is not much that seems like willful dumbness in the world

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: djk26

Quote from: BeeeejYou mean sort of like including in the headline "...if NCAA tournament started today" and including in the text "Bracketology assumes that the season has ended and there are no more games to be played..."? Yeah, it really sucks that Jayson doesn't do anything like that. Terribly misleading to the vast majority of people. :-|

All true, but it's somewhat undercut by this:

Quote from: Jayson Moy, USCHO.comIt's our weekly look at how I believe the NCAA tournament might look like come selection time, using what we know now.

Listen, I'm willing to take as an article of faith that there are some dumb people out there. But not understanding what Jayson is doing - especially when what Adam does later is not materially much different - requires a seriously willful level of dumb.

hahaha you think that maybe there is not much that seems like willful dumbness in the world

According to "FiveThirtyEight" it's about 41.6% right now.::bolt::

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: djk26

Quote from: BeeeejYou mean sort of like including in the headline "...if NCAA tournament started today" and including in the text "Bracketology assumes that the season has ended and there are no more games to be played..."? Yeah, it really sucks that Jayson doesn't do anything like that. Terribly misleading to the vast majority of people. :-|

All true, but it's somewhat undercut by this:

Quote from: Jayson Moy, USCHO.comIt's our weekly look at how I believe the NCAA tournament might look like come selection time, using what we know now.

Listen, I'm willing to take as an article of faith that there are some dumb people out there. But not understanding what Jayson is doing - especially when what Adam does later is not materially much different - requires a seriously willful level of dumb.

Have you looked around?

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: djk26

Quote from: BeeeejYou mean sort of like including in the headline "...if NCAA tournament started today" and including in the text "Bracketology assumes that the season has ended and there are no more games to be played..."? Yeah, it really sucks that Jayson doesn't do anything like that. Terribly misleading to the vast majority of people. :-|

All true, but it's somewhat undercut by this:

Quote from: Jayson Moy, USCHO.comIt's our weekly look at how I believe the NCAA tournament might look like come selection time, using what we know now.

Listen, I'm willing to take as an article of faith that there are some dumb people out there. But not understanding what Jayson is doing - especially when what Adam does later is not materially much different - requires a seriously willful level of dumb.

Have you looked around?

If he hadn't would that be a willful level of dumb?

Back to the lecture at hand, we currently sit at 15.  Remember how last year turned to shit in the blink of an eye?

Quote from: TrotskyBack to the lecture at hand, we currently sit at 15.

From what I can tell, we're definitely out if we lose tomorrow.

If we win tomorrow and lose Sunday, we have a chance of sticking in the top 15 and maybe having a shot.

Quote from: Dafatone

Quote from: TrotskyBack to the lecture at hand, we currently sit at 15.

From what I can tell, we're definitely out if we lose tomorrow.

If we win tomorrow and lose Sunday, we have a chance of sticking in the top 15 and maybe having a shot.

Q lost. Bowling Green is in the WCHA final. A lot has to break right still for 15 to be good enough.

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Dafatone

Quote from: TrotskyBack to the lecture at hand, we currently sit at 15.

From what I can tell, we're definitely out if we lose tomorrow.

If we win tomorrow and lose Sunday, we have a chance of sticking in the top 15 and maybe having a shot.

Q lost. Bowling Green is in the WCHA final. A lot has to break right still for 15 to be good enough.

Bowling Green won 1 out of 3 in their semifinal series. NMU, like CU, can still come back to win the series and get to the finals.

If NMU wins the next 2, it should drop BGU from the top 15.

However the only thing that really matters in the WCHA, is for Minnesota State to win it all and they just squeaked by LSU 2-1 in their first game.

BC's 2-1 win over Providence pushes Cornell to 11th in the PWR

Quote from: scoop85BC's 2-1 win over Providence pushes Cornell to 11th in the PWR

10^th in KRACH and ASU is 15, meaning likely out of the NCAAs.

playing with a few results if we lose to brown and clarkson beats harvard we may stay ahead of harvard.

Currently in PWR:

05 Qpc
09 Clk
11 Cor
12 Hvd

If we meet Harvard in the final that probably means 4 ECAC teams in the NC$$.

Quote from: TrotskyCurrently in PWR:

05 Qpc
09 Clk
11 Cor
12 Hvd

If we meet Harvard in the final that probably means 4 ECAC teams in the NC$$.

That would be pretty awesome, even if one of them would be Q.

Another thing according to my second-favorite site: the #1 seeds are set (though their order can change):


   [b]1    2    3    4[/b]
1.00                 St. Cloud
      .65  .27  .08  UMass
      .24  .49  .27  Mankato
      .11  .24  .65  Minn-Duluth

"Today's" bracket would pose an interesting decision for the committee.  The ECAC teams other than Q are in the 9-12 slots along with ASU. This likely puts ASU in Providence VS QPeck.

That in turn means that one of the remaining teams has to hitchhike to Fargo. Clarkson at 9 would by the numbers draw N. Eastern in Manchester.  

But it's more likely Harvard would go there.  Which would mean Cornell and Clarkson would be Fighting for Fargo.

but since one of harvard/clark will lose things will change. clarkson beating harvard and they probably go to the 2 line.

if we win out we might be able to get ahead of both clarson and harvard and stay east easier.

Quote from: upprdeckbut since one of harvard/clark will lose things will change. clarkson beating harvard and they probably go to the 2 line.

if we win out we might be able to get ahead of both clarson and harvard and stay east easier.

And that is why doing this is only exercise - and fun for some of us.

if anyone is still on the fence as to the intelligence level of your average college hockey fan, I will gladly data dump my inbox and twitter feed from this weekend.

Quote from: adamwif anyone is still on the fence as to the intelligence level of

The answer to this question is always no.

To sum up the numbers-crunching I've done so far (keep in mind that Pairwise is just RPI except in weird exceptional cases):

If we beat Brown, we're almost definitely in. There is a scenario where we aren't, though: If Western Michigan wins the NCHC, BU or BC wins Hockey East, Bowling Green wins the WCHA, AND Sucks beats us in the ECAC finals, we wind up in 14th, with at large bids only going to the top 13. I didn't crunch this for every iteration of Atlantic Hockey, but it's unlikely that changes there would get us the .0017 we need to catch Clarkson in RPI.

If we lose to Brown, we're still in better shape than not, but things start getting hairy. If everything shakes out just wrong, we fall below Providence in RPI. Bowling Green passes us if they win, and maybe still if they lose depending on how other things go. Western Michigan passes us if they win their conference, or if they lose their semi-final game and beat St. Cloud in the third-place game, but not if they beat Denver in a semi-final (though this could change with various other details). If we lose and Harvard loses, it gets very tight between the two of us. The lowest we could drop is 16th, which would have us out. How many teams pass us and how many spots are available is the question.

Root for Clarkson over Harvard, Western Michigan to lose twice, and the favorites to win in Hockey East (NE and UMass) and WCHA (Minnesota State). CHN has us at 95% to get in. That honestly sounds about right, but keep in mind their methods don't calculate how hot a team is at the moment, so they probably underrate Brown.

That being said, Brown's up to 26th in the Pairwise. What a world.

Quote from: DafatoneTo sum up the numbers-crunching I've done so far (keep in mind that Pairwise is just RPI except in weird exceptional cases):

If we beat Brown, we're almost definitely in. There is a scenario where we aren't, though: If Western Michigan wins the NCHC, BU or BC wins Hockey East, Bowling Green wins the WCHA, AND Sucks beats us in the ECAC finals, we wind up in 14th, with at large bids only going to the top 13. I didn't crunch this for every iteration of Atlantic Hockey, but it's unlikely that changes there would get us the .0017 we need to catch Clarkson in RPI.

If we lose to Brown, we're still in better shape than not, but things start getting hairy. If everything shakes out just wrong, we fall below Providence in RPI. Bowling Green passes us if they win, and maybe still if they lose depending on how other things go. Western Michigan passes us if they win their conference, or if they lose their semi-final game and beat St. Cloud in the third-place game, but not if they beat Denver in a semi-final (though this could change with various other details). If we lose and Harvard loses, it gets very tight between the two of us. The lowest we could drop is 16th, which would have us out. How many teams pass us and how many spots are available is the question.

Root for Clarkson over Harvard, Western Michigan to lose twice, and the favorites to win in Hockey East (NE and UMass) and WCHA (Minnesota State). CHN has us at 95% to get in. That honestly sounds about right, but keep in mind their methods don't calculate how hot a team is at the moment, so they probably underrate Brown.

That being said, Brown's up to 26th in the Pairwise. What a world.

my goal is to take recent play into account in future iterations of the Probability Matrix. Again, this will require someone better at math than I am to help come up with a formula.

FYI - I don't think you noted that WMU plays a Game 3 tonight - and so just that one loss would help as well.

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: DafatoneTo sum up the numbers-crunching I've done so far (keep in mind that Pairwise is just RPI except in weird exceptional cases):

If we beat Brown, we're almost definitely in. There is a scenario where we aren't, though: If Western Michigan wins the NCHC, BU or BC wins Hockey East, Bowling Green wins the WCHA, AND Sucks beats us in the ECAC finals, we wind up in 14th, with at large bids only going to the top 13. I didn't crunch this for every iteration of Atlantic Hockey, but it's unlikely that changes there would get us the .0017 we need to catch Clarkson in RPI.

If we lose to Brown, we're still in better shape than not, but things start getting hairy. If everything shakes out just wrong, we fall below Providence in RPI. Bowling Green passes us if they win, and maybe still if they lose depending on how other things go. Western Michigan passes us if they win their conference, or if they lose their semi-final game and beat St. Cloud in the third-place game, but not if they beat Denver in a semi-final (though this could change with various other details). If we lose and Harvard loses, it gets very tight between the two of us. The lowest we could drop is 16th, which would have us out. How many teams pass us and how many spots are available is the question.

Root for Clarkson over Harvard, Western Michigan to lose twice, and the favorites to win in Hockey East (NE and UMass) and WCHA (Minnesota State). CHN has us at 95% to get in. That honestly sounds about right, but keep in mind their methods don't calculate how hot a team is at the moment, so they probably underrate Brown.

That being said, Brown's up to 26th in the Pairwise. What a world.

my goal is to take recent play into account in future iterations of the Probability Matrix. Again, this will require someone better at math than I am to help come up with a formula.

FYI - I don't think you noted that WMU plays a Game 3 tonight - and so just that one loss would help as well.

Thanks! I forgot about that makeup game. So, if CC beats WMU, then WMU is out of our way and we only have to worry about CC winning the NCHC. If WMU beats CC, they get a leg up in the pairwise, and we probably need them to lose both of their remaining games for us to stay ahead of them if we lose to Brown.

if CC beats west mich and minn duluth and st cloud then they deserve to get in.

bowling green has pretty good shot at beating Minn st

we can drop out, we can get a 2 seed..

lets just beat brown and the worry on sat..

Quote from: Dafatone

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: DafatoneTo sum up the numbers-crunching I've done so far (keep in mind that Pairwise is just RPI except in weird exceptional cases):

If we beat Brown, we're almost definitely in. There is a scenario where we aren't, though: If Western Michigan wins the NCHC, BU or BC wins Hockey East, Bowling Green wins the WCHA, AND Sucks beats us in the ECAC finals, we wind up in 14th, with at large bids only going to the top 13. I didn't crunch this for every iteration of Atlantic Hockey, but it's unlikely that changes there would get us the .0017 we need to catch Clarkson in RPI.

If we lose to Brown, we're still in better shape than not, but things start getting hairy. If everything shakes out just wrong, we fall below Providence in RPI. Bowling Green passes us if they win, and maybe still if they lose depending on how other things go. Western Michigan passes us if they win their conference, or if they lose their semi-final game and beat St. Cloud in the third-place game, but not if they beat Denver in a semi-final (though this could change with various other details). If we lose and Harvard loses, it gets very tight between the two of us. The lowest we could drop is 16th, which would have us out. How many teams pass us and how many spots are available is the question.

Root for Clarkson over Harvard, Western Michigan to lose twice, and the favorites to win in Hockey East (NE and UMass) and WCHA (Minnesota State). CHN has us at 95% to get in. That honestly sounds about right, but keep in mind their methods don't calculate how hot a team is at the moment, so they probably underrate Brown.

That being said, Brown's up to 26th in the Pairwise. What a world.

my goal is to take recent play into account in future iterations of the Probability Matrix. Again, this will require someone better at math than I am to help come up with a formula.

FYI - I don't think you noted that WMU plays a Game 3 tonight - and so just that one loss would help as well.

Thanks! I forgot about that makeup game. So, if CC beats WMU, then WMU is out of our way and we only have to worry about CC winning the NCHC. If WMU beats CC, they get a leg up in the pairwise, and we probably need them to lose both of their remaining games for us to stay ahead of them if we lose to Brown.

WMU just lost to CC. Does that mean we're in barring CC winning the NCHC (which would require two major upsets)? WMU looked to be in fairly safe territory to make the NCAAs a month ago. Then they gave up two goals to #1 SCSU in the final three minutes and things went downhill from there. The NCHC is a brutally difficult conference.

Colorado College has beaten Western Michigan. This is good.

It looks like the worst we could do is 15th.

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Dafatone

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: DafatoneTo sum up the numbers-crunching I've done so far (keep in mind that Pairwise is just RPI except in weird exceptional cases):

If we beat Brown, we're almost definitely in. There is a scenario where we aren't, though: If Western Michigan wins the NCHC, BU or BC wins Hockey East, Bowling Green wins the WCHA, AND Sucks beats us in the ECAC finals, we wind up in 14th, with at large bids only going to the top 13. I didn't crunch this for every iteration of Atlantic Hockey, but it's unlikely that changes there would get us the .0017 we need to catch Clarkson in RPI.

If we lose to Brown, we're still in better shape than not, but things start getting hairy. If everything shakes out just wrong, we fall below Providence in RPI. Bowling Green passes us if they win, and maybe still if they lose depending on how other things go. Western Michigan passes us if they win their conference, or if they lose their semi-final game and beat St. Cloud in the third-place game, but not if they beat Denver in a semi-final (though this could change with various other details). If we lose and Harvard loses, it gets very tight between the two of us. The lowest we could drop is 16th, which would have us out. How many teams pass us and how many spots are available is the question.

Root for Clarkson over Harvard, Western Michigan to lose twice, and the favorites to win in Hockey East (NE and UMass) and WCHA (Minnesota State). CHN has us at 95% to get in. That honestly sounds about right, but keep in mind their methods don't calculate how hot a team is at the moment, so they probably underrate Brown.

That being said, Brown's up to 26th in the Pairwise. What a world.

my goal is to take recent play into account in future iterations of the Probability Matrix. Again, this will require someone better at math than I am to help come up with a formula.

FYI - I don't think you noted that WMU plays a Game 3 tonight - and so just that one loss would help as well.

Thanks! I forgot about that makeup game. So, if CC beats WMU, then WMU is out of our way and we only have to worry about CC winning the NCHC. If WMU beats CC, they get a leg up in the pairwise, and we probably need them to lose both of their remaining games for us to stay ahead of them if we lose to Brown.

WMU just lost to CC. Does that mean we're in barring CC winning the NCHC (which would require two major upsets)? WMU looked to be in fairly safe territory to make the NCAAs a month ago. Then they gave up two goals to #1 SCSU in the final three minutes and things went downhill from there. The NCHC is a brutally difficult conference.

I don't think it's quite that neat. Brown winning the ECAC or BU/BC winning Hockey East could threaten us as well.

Quote from: Dafatone

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: Dafatone

Quote from: adamw

Quote from: DafatoneTo sum up the numbers-crunching I've done so far (keep in mind that Pairwise is just RPI except in weird exceptional cases):

If we beat Brown, we're almost definitely in. There is a scenario where we aren't, though: If Western Michigan wins the NCHC, BU or BC wins Hockey East, Bowling Green wins the WCHA, AND Sucks beats us in the ECAC finals, we wind up in 14th, with at large bids only going to the top 13. I didn't crunch this for every iteration of Atlantic Hockey, but it's unlikely that changes there would get us the .0017 we need to catch Clarkson in RPI.

If we lose to Brown, we're still in better shape than not, but things start getting hairy. If everything shakes out just wrong, we fall below Providence in RPI. Bowling Green passes us if they win, and maybe still if they lose depending on how other things go. Western Michigan passes us if they win their conference, or if they lose their semi-final game and beat St. Cloud in the third-place game, but not if they beat Denver in a semi-final (though this could change with various other details). If we lose and Harvard loses, it gets very tight between the two of us. The lowest we could drop is 16th, which would have us out. How many teams pass us and how many spots are available is the question.

Root for Clarkson over Harvard, Western Michigan to lose twice, and the favorites to win in Hockey East (NE and UMass) and WCHA (Minnesota State). CHN has us at 95% to get in. That honestly sounds about right, but keep in mind their methods don't calculate how hot a team is at the moment, so they probably underrate Brown.

That being said, Brown's up to 26th in the Pairwise. What a world.

my goal is to take recent play into account in future iterations of the Probability Matrix. Again, this will require someone better at math than I am to help come up with a formula.

FYI - I don't think you noted that WMU plays a Game 3 tonight - and so just that one loss would help as well.

Thanks! I forgot about that makeup game. So, if CC beats WMU, then WMU is out of our way and we only have to worry about CC winning the NCHC. If WMU beats CC, they get a leg up in the pairwise, and we probably need them to lose both of their remaining games for us to stay ahead of them if we lose to Brown.

WMU just lost to CC. Does that mean we're in barring CC winning the NCHC (which would require two major upsets)? WMU looked to be in fairly safe territory to make the NCAAs a month ago. Then they gave up two goals to #1 SCSU in the final three minutes and things went downhill from there. The NCHC is a brutally difficult conference.

I don't think it's quite that neat. Brown winning the ECAC or BU/BC winning Hockey East could threaten us as well.

Ah, thanks. We could really drop below Prov? Even still, I didn't think this through enough--Brown+BU/BC winning would mean we'd need to be top-13.

EDIT: Yeah, I played around with the CHN "You are the Committee" tool, and it looks like there are still quite a few permutations that would lead to us missing the NCAAs. Seems like the key is Brown not winning the ECAC. Brown winning would not only would take away an at-large spot, but it would boost Providence's ranking because they played each other twice.

You Are The Committee

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/yatc.php

Quote from: adamwYou Are The Committee

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/yatc.php

This is slick. Works well on my iPhone. Thanks, Adam.

Quote from: DafatoneRoot for Clarkson over Harvard,

I realize that the post I am quoting is talking about what it takes to make sure we get into the tourney.

But if we prefer to root for the things that get is as high as possible in the pairwise, I believe we need to root for Harvard (ouch) over Clarkson.

Using Adam's "You Are The Committee" site, and selecting all the favorites, including Clarkson over Harvard, we wind up 8th in pairwise. Switch the Harvard and Clarkson result, so that we beat Harvard in the Championship game (always fun) and we wind up 7th in pairwise.

Quote from: andyw2100

Quote from: DafatoneRoot for Clarkson over Harvard,

I realize that the post I am quoting is talking about what it takes to make sure we get into the tourney.

But if we prefer to root for the things that get is as high as possible in the pairwise, I believe we need to root for Harvard (ouch) over Clarkson.

Using Adam's "You Are The Committee" site, and selecting all the favorites, including Clarkson over Harvard, we wind up 8th in pairwise. Switch the Harvard and Clarkson result, so that we beat Harvard in the Championship game (always fun) and we wind up 7th in pairwise.

Absolute best finish is, somehow, 6th. There's a bunch that goes into it, but ND over Penn State and UMass not doing as well in Hockey East helps us against Ohio State. Northeastern losing in the semis or finals helps us pass Northeastern, and Denver would have to lose in both the semis and the consolation game in the NCHC. We pass Clarkson and ASU if we win out.

Quote from: Dafatone

Quote from: andyw2100

Quote from: DafatoneRoot for Clarkson over Harvard,

I realize that the post I am quoting is talking about what it takes to make sure we get into the tourney.

But if we prefer to root for the things that get is as high as possible in the pairwise, I believe we need to root for Harvard (ouch) over Clarkson.

Using Adam's "You Are The Committee" site, and selecting all the favorites, including Clarkson over Harvard, we wind up 8th in pairwise. Switch the Harvard and Clarkson result, so that we beat Harvard in the Championship game (always fun) and we wind up 7th in pairwise.

Absolute best finish is, somehow, 6th. There's a bunch that goes into it, but ND over Penn State and UMass not doing as well in Hockey East helps us against Ohio State. Northeastern losing in the semis or finals helps us pass Northeastern, and Denver would have to lose in both the semis and the consolation game in the NCHC. We pass Clarkson and ASU if we win out.

my interests are more morbid and we can definitely beat brown and still fall to 13th and out

we beat brown and lots of bad has to happen to not get in

we lose to brown and there is still some good that can happen to get in.

basically the higher we want to finish the more we want bad teams to win and our margin of error gets slimmer.

if we win friday it will become pretty clear by nights end just how much chaos we can root for

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Dafatone

Quote from: andyw2100

Quote from: DafatoneRoot for Clarkson over Harvard,

I realize that the post I am quoting is talking about what it takes to make sure we get into the tourney.

But if we prefer to root for the things that get is as high as possible in the pairwise, I believe we need to root for Harvard (ouch) over Clarkson.

Using Adam's "You Are The Committee" site, and selecting all the favorites, including Clarkson over Harvard, we wind up 8th in pairwise. Switch the Harvard and Clarkson result, so that we beat Harvard in the Championship game (always fun) and we wind up 7th in pairwise.

Absolute best finish is, somehow, 6th. There's a bunch that goes into it, but ND over Penn State and UMass not doing as well in Hockey East helps us against Ohio State. Northeastern losing in the semis or finals helps us pass Northeastern, and Denver would have to lose in both the semis and the consolation game in the NCHC. We pass Clarkson and ASU if we win out.

my interests are more morbid and we can definitely beat brown and still fall to 13th and out

Regardless of pairwise.... if they cannot find a way to work past Brown on Friday I will have little confidence in their ability to win games in the NC$$.  Our best bet for next week is to have a healthy Big Red team firing on all cylinders and on a 4-game winning streak.

Quote from: upprdeckbasically the higher we want to finish the more we want bad teams to win and our margin of error gets slimmer.

We wind up seventh with chalk and a single upset of Harvard over Clarkson.

A post on USCHO states that both the CHN and USCHO predictors treat the B1G and WCHA on campus tourney games as neutral site. The poster and I both wonder if this is correct. It, of course, can matter.

Quote from: KenP

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Dafatone

Quote from: andyw2100

Quote from: DafatoneRoot for Clarkson over Harvard,

I realize that the post I am quoting is talking about what it takes to make sure we get into the tourney.

But if we prefer to root for the things that get is as high as possible in the pairwise, I believe we need to root for Harvard (ouch) over Clarkson.

Using Adam's "You Are The Committee" site, and selecting all the favorites, including Clarkson over Harvard, we wind up 8th in pairwise. Switch the Harvard and Clarkson result, so that we beat Harvard in the Championship game (always fun) and we wind up 7th in pairwise.

Absolute best finish is, somehow, 6th. There's a bunch that goes into it, but ND over Penn State and UMass not doing as well in Hockey East helps us against Ohio State. Northeastern losing in the semis or finals helps us pass Northeastern, and Denver would have to lose in both the semis and the consolation game in the NCHC. We pass Clarkson and ASU if we win out.

my interests are more morbid and we can definitely beat brown and still fall to 13th and out

Regardless of pairwise.... if they cannot find a way to work past Brown on Friday I will have little confidence in their ability to win games in the NC$$.  Our best bet for next week is to have a healthy Big Red team firing on all cylinders and on a 4-game in the middle of an 8-game winning streak.

FYP

Bracketology: Last one before March 24 NCAA selection show has Bowling Green in, Western Michigan out (https://www.uscho.com/2019/03/19/bracketology-last-one-before-march-24-ncaa-selection-show-has-bowling-green-in-western-michigan-out/)


[b]This week's brackets[/b]

[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
[u][b]12 Harvard[/b][/u] vs. 6 Denver

[b]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/b]
15 Notre Dame vs. 3 Minnesota State
[b][u]11 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 7 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
14 Providence vs. 4 Minnesota Duluth
10 Arizona State vs. [b][u]5 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
13 Bowling Green vs. 2 Massachusetts
[b][u]9 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 8 Northeastern
Conference breakdowns

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
Hockey East — 3
NCHC — 3
Big Ten – 2
WCHA — 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1


Time to feel sorry for Harvard, but isn't there some way we can get Q away from ASU?

Quote from: Jim HylaBracketology: Last one before March 24 NCAA selection show has Bowling Green in, Western Michigan out (https://www.uscho.com/2019/03/19/bracketology-last-one-before-march-24-ncaa-selection-show-has-bowling-green-in-western-michigan-out/)

Code Select Expand


[b]This week's brackets[/b]

[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
[u][b]12 Harvard[/b][/u] vs. 6 Denver

[b]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/b]
15 Notre Dame vs. 3 Minnesota State
[b][u]11 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 7 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
14 Providence vs. 4 Minnesota Duluth
10 Arizona State vs. [b][u]5 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
13 Bowling Green vs. 2 Massachusetts
[b][u]9 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 8 Northeastern
Conference breakdowns

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
Hockey East — 3
NCHC — 3
Big Ten – 2
WCHA — 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1


Time to feel sorry for Harvard, but isn't there some way we can get Q away from ASU?

The only reason Q got ASU was to prevent an ECAC first round matchup.  Because it is extremely unlikely that 3 of the 4 teams that can be seeded against Q will be from our league,  this bracket is just a mental bubble gum chew for the nerd in us (me!).

5 won't often be matched with 10.

Quote from: Jim HylaBracketology: Last one before March 24 NCAA selection show has Bowling Green in, Western Michigan out (https://www.uscho.com/2019/03/19/bracketology-last-one-before-march-24-ncaa-selection-show-has-bowling-green-in-western-michigan-out/)

Code Select Expand


[b]This week's brackets[/b]

[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
[u][b]12 Harvard[/b][/u] vs. 6 Denver

[b]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/b]
15 Notre Dame vs. 3 Minnesota State
[b][u]11 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 7 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
14 Providence vs. 4 Minnesota Duluth
10 Arizona State vs. [b][u]5 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
13 Bowling Green vs. 2 Massachusetts
[b][u]9 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 8 Northeastern
Conference breakdowns

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
Hockey East — 3
NCHC — 3
Big Ten – 2
WCHA — 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1


Time to feel sorry for Harvard, but isn't there some way we can get Q away from ASU?

I would be totally fine with this bracket.

From what I can tell, the Frozen Four bracket projects semifinal matchups of east vs. northeast and west vs. midwest. Does anybody know or recall whether they've messed with that in the past in order to preserve the likelihood of 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 semifinals should the top seeds prevail in the regionals, or whether it's a strictly set-in-advance thing?

Quote from: Jim HylaTime to feel sorry for Harvard

never

I did, in fact, fix a glitch this morning regarding neutral sites/Big Ten/WCHA ... may have to clear cache to make sure it goes into effect on the user end.

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: Jim HylaBracketology: Last one before March 24 NCAA selection show has Bowling Green in, Western Michigan out (https://www.uscho.com/2019/03/19/bracketology-last-one-before-march-24-ncaa-selection-show-has-bowling-green-in-western-michigan-out/)

Code Select Expand


[b]This week's brackets[/b]

[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
[u][b]12 Harvard[/b][/u] vs. 6 Denver

[b]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/b]
15 Notre Dame vs. 3 Minnesota State
[b][u]11 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 7 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
14 Providence vs. 4 Minnesota Duluth
10 Arizona State vs. [b][u]5 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
13 Bowling Green vs. 2 Massachusetts
[b][u]9 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 8 Northeastern
Conference breakdowns

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
Hockey East — 3
NCHC — 3
Big Ten – 2
WCHA — 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1


Time to feel sorry for Harvard, but isn't there some way we can get Q away from ASU?

I would be totally fine with this bracket.

From what I can tell, the Frozen Four bracket projects semifinal matchups of east vs. northeast and west vs. midwest. Does anybody know or recall whether they've messed with that in the past in order to preserve the likelihood of 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 semifinals should the top seeds prevail in the regionals, or whether it's a strictly set-in-advance thing?

Pretty sure they do 1-4 and 2-3 rather than fixed regional locations.

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: Beeeej

Quote from: Jim HylaBracketology: Last one before March 24 NCAA selection show has Bowling Green in, Western Michigan out (https://www.uscho.com/2019/03/19/bracketology-last-one-before-march-24-ncaa-selection-show-has-bowling-green-in-western-michigan-out/)

Code Select Expand


[b]This week's brackets[/b]

[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
[u][b]12 Harvard[/b][/u] vs. 6 Denver

[b]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/b]
15 Notre Dame vs. 3 Minnesota State
[b][u]11 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 7 Ohio State

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
14 Providence vs. 4 Minnesota Duluth
10 Arizona State vs. [b][u]5 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
13 Bowling Green vs. 2 Massachusetts
[b][u]9 Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 8 Northeastern
Conference breakdowns

[b][u]ECAC Hockey — 4[/u][/b]
Hockey East — 3
NCHC — 3
Big Ten – 2
WCHA — 2
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Independent – 1


Time to feel sorry for Harvard, but isn't there some way we can get Q away from ASU?

I would be totally fine with this bracket.

From what I can tell, the Frozen Four bracket projects semifinal matchups of east vs. northeast and west vs. midwest. Does anybody know or recall whether they've messed with that in the past in order to preserve the likelihood of 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 semifinals should the top seeds prevail in the regionals, or whether it's a strictly set-in-advance thing?

Pretty sure they do 1-4 and 2-3 rather than fixed regional locations.

Yes, it's bracketed based upon the regions where the overall top 4 seeds are, and has been since 2004.  Basketball now does the same thing.

BU and Northeastern are in overtime. A win by the Terriers would help us out.

Quote from: KenPBU and Northeastern are in overtime. A win by the Terriers would help us out.

I'm rooting for the scenarios where Union gets an at-large bid, considering some of their players have already signed pro contracts. Luckily, this requires us winning tomorrow. Northeastern has to win to get there as well.

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/yatc.php?preset=1&yatc%5B1%5D%5Bs1%5D=50&yatc%5B1%5D%5Bs2%5D=39&yatc%5B1%5D%5Bf%5D=50&yatc%5B4%5D%5Bs1%5D=18&yatc%5B4%5D%5Bs2%5D=22&yatc%5B4%5D%5Bf%5D=18&yatc%5B5%5D%5Bs1%5D=27&yatc%5B5%5D%5Bs2%5D=41&yatc%5B5%5D%5Bf%5D=41&yatc%5B6%5D%5Bf%5D=11&yatc%5B9%5D%5Bs1%5D=52&yatc%5B9%5D%5Bs2%5D=20&yatc%5B9%5D%5Bc%5D=16&yatc%5B9%5D%5Bf%5D=52&yatc%5B10%5D%5Bf%5D=60

Northeastern wins and st. cloud is burying CC.

Quote from: ugarteNortheastern wins and st. cloud is burying CC.

With Northeastern's win I believe Cornell will make its third NCAA in a row, a first under Schafer. Funny to think back now on all the griping (mine included) when the team missed out on the NCAAs for four years straight preceding this current run.

Quote from: RichHI'm rooting for the scenarios where Union gets an at-large bid, considering some of their players have already signed pro contracts. Luckily, this requires us winning tomorrow. Northeastern has to win to get there as well.

So boneheaded! This result would be hilarious.

Quote from: RichHI'm rooting for the scenarios where Union gets an at-large bid, considering some of their players have already signed pro contracts. Luckily, this requires us winning tomorrow. Northeastern has to win to get there as well.

Well, that would be hilarious. Do any of those scenarios result in 5 ECAC teams in?

Quote from: BearLover

Quote from: ugarteNortheastern wins and st. cloud is burying CC.

With Northeastern's win I believe Cornell will make its third NCAA in a row, a first under Schafer. Funny to think back now on all the griping (mine included) when the team missed out on the NCAAs for four years straight preceding this current run.

I'd also like to take this opportunity to tell everyone who insisted that we couldn't possibly get an at-large bid when we were 5-5 that they were wrong.

Now let's go get an automatic bid and not an at-large one.

multiple shots to get to 7 seed.   PSU losing would help since it keeps them out of allentown too.

Quote from: upprdeckmultiple shots to get to 7 seed.   PSU losing would help since it keeps them out of allentown too.

Basically...

If we win and Northeastern and Denver both lose (or Denver ties), we get to 7.  If either one of those two win, we get 8.  If they both win, we get 9.

We lose, and we're 11 in most cases, except if Bowling Green beats Mankato.  Then BG gets 11 and we're 12.

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: upprdeckmultiple shots to get to 7 seed.   PSU losing would help since it keeps them out of allentown too.

Basically...

If we win and Northeastern and Denver both lose (or Denver ties), we get to 7.  If either one of those two win, we get 8.  If they both win, we get 9.

We lose, and we're 11 in most cases, except if Bowling Green beats Mankato.  Then BG gets 11 and we're 12.

Thanks

So Harvard is in right? 4 ECAC teams guaranteed.

What is the scenario for union to get in? NE, ND, Minn St wins???

Quote from: CU2007So Harvard is in right? 4 ECAC teams guaranteed.

What is the scenario for union to get in? NE, ND, Minn St wins???

It's the first time since The Divorce that the ECAC got 4 teams in.

With BC's upset of UMass, Union has been eliminated. UMass & Northeastern had to play in the HEA Final, but BC's win pushed Providence out of reach of Union. I bet Bennett exhaled just a little bit.

Quote from: CU2007So Harvard is in right? 4 ECAC teams guaranteed.

What is the scenario for union to get in? NE, ND, Minn St wins???

Looks like Harvard is in and Union is out. The team that is sweating today's results that can't punch its own ticket is Providence.

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: upprdeckmultiple shots to get to 7 seed.   PSU losing would help since it keeps them out of allentown too.

Basically...

If we win and Northeastern and Denver both lose (or Denver ties), we get to 7.  If either one of those two win, we get 8.  If they both win, we get 9.

We lose, and we're 11 in most cases, except if Bowling Green beats Mankato.  Then BG gets 11 and we're 12.

Please no 8 or 9. Fargo gets 8 and 9 unless they are both from the same conference.

Quote from: marty

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: upprdeckmultiple shots to get to 7 seed.   PSU losing would help since it keeps them out of allentown too.

Basically...

If we win and Northeastern and Denver both lose (or Denver ties), we get to 7.  If either one of those two win, we get 8.  If they both win, we get 9.

We lose, and we're 11 in most cases, except if Bowling Green beats Mankato.  Then BG gets 11 and we're 12.

Please no 8 or 9. Fargo gets 8 and 9 unless they are both from the same conference.

According to playoffstatus we are 8-9 if we win or 11-12 if we lose.

so if the rules say bracket integrity matters and they want 1-4 2-3.. why is that always thrown out the window for distance the first thing when the brackets are created in the mocks?

Quote from: marty

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: upprdeckmultiple shots to get to 7 seed.   PSU losing would help since it keeps them out of allentown too.

Basically...

If we win and Northeastern and Denver both lose (or Denver ties), we get to 7.  If either one of those two win, we get 8.  If they both win, we get 9.

We lose, and we're 11 in most cases, except if Bowling Green beats Mankato.  Then BG gets 11 and we're 12.

Please no 8 or 9. Fargo gets 8 and 9 unless they are both from the same conference.

They won't be.  If we're 8 or 9, Clarkson will drop well below us and Quinny will be above us.

We win and we may be off to Fargo?  Hopefully some juggling goes on.

PC isn't the host in Providence, correct? At a 3 seed, if they make NCAAs, is PC a lock to stay in Providence regardless?

I don't know about everyone else, but if winning the ECACs gets us sent to Fargo, while losing tonight gets us closer to home, I'd rather have the ECAC title even if it means most of us won't get to watch the NCAA games next weekend in person. After all, we haven't wont the ECACS since 2010. It's time to end the drought!

[Disregard  - I find the answer but not how to delete a post!]

Quote from: RatushnyFan[Disregard  - I find the answer but not how to delete a post!]

Guessing you also figured out how to delete a post, since the post with the question seems to be gone...  :)

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: marty

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: upprdeckmultiple shots to get to 7 seed.   PSU losing would help since it keeps them out of allentown too.

Basically...

If we win and Northeastern and Denver both lose (or Denver ties), we get to 7.  If either one of those two win, we get 8.  If they both win, we get 9.

We lose, and we're 11 in most cases, except if Bowling Green beats Mankato.  Then BG gets 11 and we're 12.

Please no 8 or 9. Fargo gets 8 and 9 unless they are both from the same conference.

They won't be.  If we're 8 or 9, Clarkson will drop well below us and Quinny will be above us.

Using the CHN "You Are The Committee" site, having all the higher seeds except Denver win, gets us in 8th and Clarkson in 9th. Switching that up and having BU beat Northeastern gets us 7th and Clarkson 8th.

Quote from: andyw2100

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: marty

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: upprdeckmultiple shots to get to 7 seed.   PSU losing would help since it keeps them out of allentown too.

Basically...

If we win and Northeastern and Denver both lose (or Denver ties), we get to 7.  If either one of those two win, we get 8.  If they both win, we get 9.

We lose, and we're 11 in most cases, except if Bowling Green beats Mankato.  Then BG gets 11 and we're 12.

Please no 8 or 9. Fargo gets 8 and 9 unless they are both from the same conference.

They won't be.  If we're 8 or 9, Clarkson will drop well below us and Quinny will be above us.

Using the CHN "You Are The Committee" site, having all the higher seeds except Denver win, gets us in 8th and Clarkson in 9th. Switching that up and having BU beat Northeastern gets us 7th and Clarkson 8th.

OK, mea culpa.

Quote from: dbilmesI don't know about everyone else, but if winning the ECACs gets us sent to Fargo, while losing tonight gets us closer to home, I'd rather have the ECAC title even if it means most of us won't get to watch the NCAA games next weekend in person. After all, we haven't wont the ECACS since 2010. It's time to end the drought!

I agree with that sentiment.  Let's win in Placid and let the chips fall...

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: dbilmesI don't know about everyone else, but if winning the ECACs gets us sent to Fargo, while losing tonight gets us closer to home, I'd rather have the ECAC title even if it means most of us won't get to watch the NCAA games next weekend in person. After all, we haven't wont the ECACS since 2010. It's time to end the drought!

I agree with that sentiment.  Let's win in Placid and let the chips fall...

+1

Quote from: andyw2100

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: dbilmesI don't know about everyone else, but if winning the ECACs gets us sent to Fargo, while losing tonight gets us closer to home, I'd rather have the ECAC title even if it means most of us won't get to watch the NCAA games next weekend in person. After all, we haven't wont the ECACS since 2010. It's time to end the drought!

I agree with that sentiment.  Let's win in Placid and let the chips fall...

+1

agreed. I care more about winning NCAA than winning ECAC but I care much more about winning ECAC than seeding considerations once we're already in.

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: andyw2100

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: dbilmesI don't know about everyone else, but if winning the ECACs gets us sent to Fargo, while losing tonight gets us closer to home, I'd rather have the ECAC title even if it means most of us won't get to watch the NCAA games next weekend in person. After all, we haven't wont the ECACS since 2010. It's time to end the drought!

I agree with that sentiment.  Let's win in Placid and let the chips fall...

+1

agreed. I care more about winning NCAA than winning ECAC but I care much more about winning ECAC than seeding considerations once we're already in.

I have a better idea. Let's all chip in and pay off the committee to send the team to a venue we prefer. If rich kids can get into Yale by bribing university officials, surely we can come up with a bribe that would get our guys into Providence (or even Allentown).

Quote from: Swampy

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: andyw2100

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: dbilmesI don't know about everyone else, but if winning the ECACs gets us sent to Fargo, while losing tonight gets us closer to home, I'd rather have the ECAC title even if it means most of us won't get to watch the NCAA games next weekend in person. After all, we haven't wont the ECACS since 2010. It's time to end the drought!

I agree with that sentiment.  Let's win in Placid and let the chips fall...

+1

agreed. I care more about winning NCAA than winning ECAC but I care much more about winning ECAC than seeding considerations once we're already in.

I have a better idea. Let's all chip in and pay off the committee to send the team to a venue we prefer. If rich kids can get into Yale by bribing university officials, surely we can come up with a bribe that would get our guys into Providence (or even Allentown).

What does hosting entail? I have to figure that ultimately, it's just paying up. Let's host in Providence or Allentown, or maybe try to put a regional in some upstate NY town.

we could host anytime we wanted in albany or buffalo.  but it requires some effort from the AD and the staff to organize things..

Quote from: upprdeckwe could host anytime we wanted in albany or buffalo.  but it requires some effort from the AD and the staff to organize things..

For a regional, Rochester is probably easier than Buffalo. Someone should find out what it takes.

Quote from: Jim Hyla

Quote from: upprdeckwe could host anytime we wanted in albany or buffalo.  but it requires some effort from the AD and the staff to organize things..

For a regional, Rochester is probably easier than Buffalo. Someone should find out what it takes.

Syracuse and Binghamton also have big enough rinks, right?

i thought they had to be 10k or more to qualify

Quote from: upprdecki thought they had to be 10k or more to qualify

More than that. Albany is now too small.

Quote from: marty

Quote from: upprdecki thought they had to be 10k or more to qualify

More than that. Albany is now too small.

It is? Albany seats 14,000. The regional site in Fargo only seats 5,000 for hockey. Allentown seats 9,000.

Unless you mean for Frozen Four sites.

perhaps you are right thats its much lower than a final 4 requirement.

Quote from: RichH

Quote from: marty

Quote from: upprdecki thought they had to be 10k or more to qualify

More than that. Albany is now too small.

It is? Albany seats 14,000. The regional site in Fargo only seats 5,000 for hockey. Allentown seats 9,000.

Unless you mean for Frozen Four sites.

Sorry.  I meant Frozen Four and the topic was regionals. I'm under the weather and hope to get my marbles back soon.

So.... looking at CHN PWR... the 2 and 3 seeds look like a natural split - 5-12, 6-11, 7-10, 8-9. No 1st round conflicts.   Unless they really screw around for travel reasons we are #11 against #6 Northeastern.

Only question is which venue....

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Jim Hyla

Quote from: upprdeckwe could host anytime we wanted in albany or buffalo.  but it requires some effort from the AD and the staff to organize things..

For a regional, Rochester is probably easier than Buffalo. Someone should find out what it takes.

Syracuse and Binghamton also have big enough rinks, right?

Bing is definitely too small, under 5K. By some standards Syr is big enough, over 6K, but from my point of view, Rochester is better.

Makott tore his ACL per Schafer.

(Sorry, meant for this to be on the game thread)

Quote from: Jim Hyla

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: Jim Hyla

Quote from: upprdeckwe could host anytime we wanted in albany or buffalo.  but it requires some effort from the AD and the staff to organize things..

For a regional, Rochester is probably easier than Buffalo. Someone should find out what it takes.

Syracuse and Binghamton also have big enough rinks, right?

Bing is definitely too small, under 5K. By some standards Syr is big enough, over 6K, but from my point of view, Rochester is better.

Mine too, since I could walk to the rink from my house. :D

Quote from: KenPSo.... looking at CHN PWR... the 2 and 3 seeds look like a natural split - 5-12, 6-11, 7-10, 8-9. No 1st round conflicts.   Unless they really screw around for travel reasons we are #11 against #6 Northeastern.

Only question is which venue....

We're likely in Providence vs. NE
Whoever ends up 3rd in pairwise after the NCHC OT game finishes will likely play Providence.

In Manchester it will be UMass vs Harvard and Clarkson vs Notre Dame unless the committee moves ND to Allentown.

Allentown will be number2 vs Bowling Green & QPeck vs OSU

Fargo will be number 1 vs AIC & Denver vs ASU.

Quote from: scoop85Makott tore his ACL per Schafer.

(Sorry, meant for this to be on the game thread)

Wow. Well that sucks.

Quote from: marty

Quote from: KenPSo.... looking at CHN PWR... the 2 and 3 seeds look like a natural split - 5-12, 6-11, 7-10, 8-9. No 1st round conflicts.   Unless they really screw around for travel reasons we are #11 against #6 Northeastern.

Only question is which venue....

We're likely in Providence vs. NE
Whoever ends up 3rd in pairwise after the NCHC OT game finishes will likely play Providence.

In Manchester it will be UMass vs Harvard and Clarkson vs Notre Dame unless the committee moves ND to Allentown.

Allentown will be number2 vs Bowling Green & QPeck vs OSU

Fargo will be number 1 vs AIC & Denver vs ASU.

Not quite.

If Duluth beats St.Cloud, Duluth finishes #2 and they get #15 BGSU (probably in Allentown) and since UMass can't play Providence, Mankato gets Providence and UMass gets Harvard.  But if St.Cloud beats Duluth, Duluth drops to #4 and Mankato is #2.  Mankato can't play #15 BGSU, so likely Mankato gets Harvard, UMass gets BGSU, and Duluth gets Providence.  

As said above, we get Northeastern.  The only question is where.  I think it depends on which game the committee thinks will be a better draw in Allentown - QPac-ASU, NEastern-Cornell, or Clarkson-Notre Dame.

Edit:  And Duluth wins.

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: marty

Quote from: KenPSo.... looking at CHN PWR... the 2 and 3 seeds look like a natural split - 5-12, 6-11, 7-10, 8-9. No 1st round conflicts.   Unless they really screw around for travel reasons we are #11 against #6 Northeastern.

Only question is which venue....

We're likely in Providence vs. NE
Whoever ends up 3rd in pairwise after the NCHC OT game finishes will likely play Providence.

In Manchester it will be UMass vs Harvard and Clarkson vs Notre Dame unless the committee moves ND to Allentown.

Allentown will be number2 vs Bowling Green & QPeck vs OSU

Fargo will be number 1 vs AIC & Denver vs ASU.

Not quite.

If Duluth beats St.Cloud, Duluth finishes #2 and they get #15 BGSU (probably in Allentown) and since UMass can't play Providence, Mankato gets Providence and UMass gets Harvard.  But if St.Cloud beats Duluth, Duluth drops to #4 and Mankato is #2.  Mankato can't play #15 BGSU, so likely Mankato gets Harvard, UMass gets BGSU, and Duluth gets Providence.  

As said above, we get Northeastern.  The only question is where.  I think it depends on which game the committee thinks will be a better draw - QPac-ASU, NEastern-Cornell, or Clarkson-Notre Dame.

Edit:  And Duluth wins.

Don't you think tOSU will be moved to Allentown and ASU will go to Fargo?

Here's Adam's (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2019/03/24_Bracket-ABCs-Final-NCAA.php)


[b]Fargo[/b]
1. St. Cloud State vs. 16. American International
8. Denver vs. 9. Ohio State

[b]Allentown[/b]
2. Minnesota-Duluth vs. 15. Bowling Green
[b][u]7. Quinnipiac[/u][/b] vs. 10. Arizona State

[b]Providence[/b]
3. Minnesota State vs. 14. Providence
6. Northeastern vs. [b][u]11. Cornell[/u][/b]

[b]Manchester[/b]
4. Massachusetts vs. [b][u]13. Harvard[/u][/b]
[b][u]5. Clarkson[/u][/b] vs. 12. Notre Dame


and USCHO (https://www.uscho.com/2019/03/23/final-bracketology-the-prediction-for-the-2019-ncaa-mens-hockey-tournament-bracket/)


[b]West Regional (Fargo):[/b]
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
9 Ohio State vs. 8 Denver

[b]Midwest Regional (Allentown):[/b]
15 Bowling Green vs. 2 Minnesota Duluth
10 Arizona State vs. [b][u]7 Quinnipiac[/u][/b]

[b]East Regional (Providence):[/b]
14 Providence vs. 3 Minnesota State
[b][u]11 Cornell[/u][/b] vs. 6 Northeastern

[b]Northeast Regional (Manchester):[/b]
[b][u]13 Harvard[/u][/b] vs. 4 Massachusetts
12 Notre Dame vs. [b][u]5 Clarkson[/u][/b]


Quote from: marty

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: marty

Quote from: KenPSo.... looking at CHN PWR... the 2 and 3 seeds look like a natural split - 5-12, 6-11, 7-10, 8-9. No 1st round conflicts.   Unless they really screw around for travel reasons we are #11 against #6 Northeastern.

Only question is which venue....

We're likely in Providence vs. NE
Whoever ends up 3rd in pairwise after the NCHC OT game finishes will likely play Providence.

In Manchester it will be UMass vs Harvard and Clarkson vs Notre Dame unless the committee moves ND to Allentown.

Allentown will be number2 vs Bowling Green & QPeck vs OSU

Fargo will be number 1 vs AIC & Denver vs ASU.

Not quite.

If Duluth beats St.Cloud, Duluth finishes #2 and they get #15 BGSU (probably in Allentown) and since UMass can't play Providence, Mankato gets Providence and UMass gets Harvard.  But if St.Cloud beats Duluth, Duluth drops to #4 and Mankato is #2.  Mankato can't play #15 BGSU, so likely Mankato gets Harvard, UMass gets BGSU, and Duluth gets Providence.  

As said above, we get Northeastern.  The only question is where.  I think it depends on which game the committee thinks will be a better draw - QPac-ASU, NEastern-Cornell, or Clarkson-Notre Dame.

Edit:  And Duluth wins.

Don't you think tOSU will be moved to Allentown and ASU will go to Fargo?

Don't know.  It depends on what "bracket integrity" means.  If that means they keep 5-12, 6-11, etc. intact and they move the pairs around, then I think the 8-9 pairing stays intact in Fargo.  If bracket integrity simply means that they can move the 3 seeds anywhere as they see fit, then yeah, they can swap OSU and ASU as you suggest.

Personally, if I were on the committee, I could see either NEastern-Cornell or Clarkson-Notre Dame getting swapped to Allentown. I think the better choice for overall attendance is to swap NE-CU, since that puts at least two eastern schools in Allentown and two in Providence, but I can also see them putting Clarkson-Notre Dame there since Notre Dame is a midwestern school and they can rationalize the name of the regional.

But either way, I don't see much likelihood in us going to Fargo, which is just fine with me.

Way more Cornell fans in Allentown vs Providence IMO. The NYC alumni can get to Allentown easily, won't bother going to providence. MAKE IT HAPPEN NC$$

Win two at the Dunk to earn a trip to Buffalo?  With Minnesota State in the same regional?

Seems like a novel idea.

Women lose to clarkson in ecac final. Play northeastern in NCAAs. Men lose to clarkson in ecac final, play northeastern in NCAAs too? Weird.

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: marty

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: marty

Quote from: KenPSo.... looking at CHN PWR... the 2 and 3 seeds look like a natural split - 5-12, 6-11, 7-10, 8-9. No 1st round conflicts.   Unless they really screw around for travel reasons we are #11 against #6 Northeastern.

Only question is which venue....

We're likely in Providence vs. NE
Whoever ends up 3rd in pairwise after the NCHC OT game finishes will likely play Providence.

In Manchester it will be UMass vs Harvard and Clarkson vs Notre Dame unless the committee moves ND to Allentown.

Allentown will be number2 vs Bowling Green & QPeck vs OSU

Fargo will be number 1 vs AIC & Denver vs ASU.

Not quite.

If Duluth beats St.Cloud, Duluth finishes #2 and they get #15 BGSU (probably in Allentown) and since UMass can't play Providence, Mankato gets Providence and UMass gets Harvard.  But if St.Cloud beats Duluth, Duluth drops to #4 and Mankato is #2.  Mankato can't play #15 BGSU, so likely Mankato gets Harvard, UMass gets BGSU, and Duluth gets Providence.  

As said above, we get Northeastern.  The only question is where.  I think it depends on which game the committee thinks will be a better draw - QPac-ASU, NEastern-Cornell, or Clarkson-Notre Dame.

Edit:  And Duluth wins.

Don't you think tOSU will be moved to Allentown and ASU will go to Fargo?

Don't know.  It depends on what "bracket integrity" means.  If that means they keep 5-12, 6-11, etc. intact and they move the pairs around, then I think the 8-9 pairing stays intact in Fargo.  If bracket integrity simply means that they can move the 3 seeds anywhere as they see fit, then yeah, they can swap OSU and ASU as you suggest.

Personally, if I were on the committee, I could see either NEastern-Cornell or Clarkson-Notre Dame getting swapped to Allentown. I think the better choice for overall attendance is to swap NE-CU, since that puts at least two eastern schools in Allentown and two in Providence, but I can also see them putting Clarkson-Notre Dame there since Notre Dame is a midwestern school and they can rationalize the name of the regional.

But either way, I don't see much likelihood in us going to Fargo, which is just fine with me.

It's interesting that Adam and Jason have identical brackets. You have ND as a possible Allentown bracket and I have tOSU there. I think one of those teams will be there.

It's a tOSUp.

Quote from: martyIt's a tOSUp.

Marty.

Harvard @ Cornell national title game, anyone?

so from Jason Bracket article  if attendance is a concern and it always is..

in the west fargo is pretty solid
in the east you ave cornell/Ne and prov  all will have decent followings

in the midwest.  Ariz st will bring few, Quin doesnt really travel.  not sure bow many BG or MD will bring
in the NE should have solid attendance

but if crowds are wanted not sure why you wouldn't flip cornell/NE and Ari/Quin


West Regional (Fargo):
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
9 Ohio State vs. 8 Denver

Midwest Regional (Allentown):
15 Bowling Green vs. 2 Minnesota Duluth
10 Arizona State vs. 7 Quinnipiac

East Regional (Providence):
14 Providence vs. 3 Minnesota State
11 Cornell vs. 6 Northeastern

Northeast Regional (Manchester):
13 Harvard vs. 4 Massachusetts
12 Notre Dame vs. 5 Clarkson

Yes, from  an attendance perspective it makes sense.  But if we beat Northeastern I would rather face Minnesota State or Providence than Duluth.

I find it funny that for the 3rd straight year Cornell is going to face a HE team in the regionals and those are the teams that seemingly everybody in the conference except for Cornell has been playing OOC games against in recent years

Quote from: upprdeckso from Jason Bracket article  if attendance is a concern and it always is..

in the west fargo is pretty solid
in the east you ave cornell/Ne and prov  all will have decent followings

in the midwest.  Ariz st will bring few, Quin doesnt really travel.  not sure bow many BG or MD will bring
in the NE should have solid attendance

but if crowds are wanted not sure why you wouldn't flip cornell/NE and Ari/Quin


West Regional (Fargo):
16 American International vs. 1 St. Cloud State
9 Ohio State vs. 8 Denver

Midwest Regional (Allentown):
15 Bowling Green vs. 2 Minnesota Duluth
10 Arizona State vs. 7 Quinnipiac

East Regional (Providence):
14 Providence vs. 3 Minnesota State
11 Cornell vs. 6 Northeastern

Northeast Regional (Manchester):
13 Harvard vs. 4 Massachusetts
12 Notre Dame vs. 5 Clarkson

I still like the idea of switching ASU & tOSU. Probably doesn't increase Allentown attendance that much, but it is an easier drive from Columbus and I'd assume there are more tOSU grads in eastern cities than ASU grads. I don't think attendance to Fargo is a problem, as I expect it was sold out, or close to, already. But, because of N Dakota's recent troubles, I might be wrong on that. It's a small venue, so probably okay.

Just curious where would we most likely be playing had they won last night?

Quote from: KenPJust curious where would we most likely be playing had they won last night?

Still wish we had WON! (https://nypost.com/video/little-girl-opens-door-to-find-herself-trapped-behind-a-wall-of-snow/)

No changes

And they kept it simple...We're in Providence.

Vs. Northeastern in Providence it is.  But the bracket is about as good as we could hope for.  Northeastern is really good, but we have a puncher's chance. And as someone mentioned if we get by the 1st game we wouldn't have to deal with Duluth.

Quote from: Jim HylaNo changes

Jason's terse bracket was correct if boring.  At least Adam added some color to his analysis.

Quote from: marty

Quote from: Jim HylaNo changes

Jason's terse bracket was correct if boring.  At least Adam added some color to his analysis.

Jason seems to take previous posts and edits them. He often leaves in vestiges of those previous posts.

Quote from: ursusminor

Quote from: marty

Quote from: Jim HylaNo changes

Jason's terse bracket was correct if boring.  At least Adam added some color to his analysis.

Jason seems to take previous posts and edits them. He often leaves in vestiges of those previous posts.

Thanks to both of them for teaching us how this works.

More of this (https://youtu.be/vsBkQUEcudw) please

Quote from: IcebergI find it funny that for the 3rd straight year Cornell is going to face a HE team in the regionals and those are the teams that seemingly everybody in the conference except for Cornell has been playing OOC games against in recent years

You must not have gotten this messag (https://youtu.be/_nW1oIJ0h88)e.

Quote from: scoop85More of this (https://youtu.be/vsBkQUEcudw) please

My son was 9 months old and I woke him up yelling when Barlow scored that goal and I reminded my wife of it when I watched that clip and let me tell you she is not even a little less mad about it.

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: scoop85More of this (https://youtu.be/vsBkQUEcudw) please

My son was 9 months old and I woke him up yelling when Barlow scored that goal and I reminded my wife of it when I watched that clip and let me tell you she is not even a little less mad about it.

You mean my wife isn't the only one who thinks screaming at the tube during a Cornell game is insane?

Quote from: scoop85

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: scoop85More of this (https://youtu.be/vsBkQUEcudw) please

My son was 9 months old and I woke him up yelling when Barlow scored that goal and I reminded my wife of it when I watched that clip and let me tell you she is not even a little less mad about it.

You mean my wife isn't the only one who thinks screaming at the tube during a Cornell game is insane?

My dog gets startled during games as a result of it!

Quote from: abmarks

Quote from: scoop85

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: scoop85More of this (https://youtu.be/vsBkQUEcudw) please

My son was 9 months old and I woke him up yelling when Barlow scored that goal and I reminded my wife of it when I watched that clip and let me tell you she is not even a little less mad about it.

You mean my wife isn't the only one who thinks screaming at the tube during a Cornell game is insane?

My dog gets startled during games as a result of it!

All I get is the smile and "I just don't get it."

And here I thought someone would link to this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSGh7P3H1Lg).

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: scoop85More of this (https://youtu.be/vsBkQUEcudw) please

My son was 9 months old and I woke him up yelling when Barlow scored that goal and I reminded my wife of it when I watched that clip and let me tell you she is not even a little less mad about it.

It was only that win against Northeastern ten years ago this Thursday that allowed my wife dss28 and me to make plans separately to be at Ship of Fools for the next night's game, where we met ten years ago Friday.

Quote from: Greenberg '97And here I thought someone would link to this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSGh7P3H1Lg).

that isn't northeastern but as i'm typing... it is the Dunk, so the judges will allow it.

Quote from: abmarks

Quote from: scoop85

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: scoop85More of this (https://youtu.be/vsBkQUEcudw) please

My son was 9 months old and I woke him up yelling when Barlow scored that goal and I reminded my wife of it when I watched that clip and let me tell you she is not even a little less mad about it.

You mean my wife isn't the only one who thinks screaming at the tube during a Cornell game is insane?

My dog gets startled during games as a result of it!

My dog now leaves the immediate area when she realizes that I am watching a game, to avoid the inevitable.

Quote from: scoop85

Quote from: ugarte

Quote from: scoop85More of this (https://youtu.be/vsBkQUEcudw) please

My son was 9 months old and I woke him up yelling when Barlow scored that goal and I reminded my wife of it when I watched that clip and let me tell you she is not even a little less mad about it.

You mean my wife isn't the only one who thinks screaming at the tube during a Cornell game is insane?

You've got company here - I'll wager lots of company!

Dr. Mrs. is 2 floors away and keeps track of the score by counting the YES screams and the FUCK screams.

She asked me once, "wait, what's a HOLY SHIT?" and we figured out that was a great save.

The team gathered to watch the selection show:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVow3eCsfxs&feature=share&fbclid=IwAR3FT2Mjsz3PWIO4M1BlCStOuLeOOoNRDa0d48uqTKlemh2zXhqAN38VAOo

Quote from: RichHIt's the first time since The Divorce that the ECAC got 4 teams in.

I just realized today that not only does the ECAC have 4 teams in, they have more than any other conference.  No more "EZAC" (although I doubt an ECAC team will win it all this year.)

If this bracket (https://i.turner.ncaa.com/sites/default/files/images/2019/03/24/2019-frozen-four-bracket-ncaa-hockey.pdf) is correct, we're beating Quinnipiac in the SF and Clarkson in the F.

Quote from: TrotskyIf this bracket (https://i.turner.ncaa.com/sites/default/files/images/2019/03/24/2019-frozen-four-bracket-ncaa-hockey.pdf) is correct, we're beating Quinnipiac in the SF and Clarkson in the F.

Would be nice.

Quote from: TrotskyIf this bracket (https://i.turner.ncaa.com/sites/default/files/images/2019/03/24/2019-frozen-four-bracket-ncaa-hockey.pdf) is correct, we're beating Quinnipiac in the SF and Clarkson in the F.

I feel silly asking this, but I don't get it--that link is to a bracket without any predicted winners filled in.  If we're projecting our own winners in what we WANT to happen, I will have Cornell over Harvard in the championship game. ::uptosomething::