Polls and NPI 2026

[CU2007]

Weekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI.  Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.

Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.

Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.

One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.

Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.

You're right - it's a pain in the ass. But we have to treat it like a loss, because that's what goes in the team's official record, and coach's record, for example.

There are numerous places on the site where we separate out these things into distinct columns or put OT records in parentheticals.

Adam and Bearlover in agreement! Who says there's no chance for peace in the Middle East?!

[abmarks]

Weekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI.  Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.

Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.

Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.

One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.

Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.

You're right - it's a pain in the ass. But we have to treat it like a loss, because that's what goes in the team's official record, and coach's record, for example.

There are numerous places on the site where we separate out these things into distinct columns or put OT records in parentheticals.

Adam and Bearlover in agreement! Who says there's no chance for peace in the Middle East?!

It's a trap. My money's on Adam laying the kill shot if bearlover.is kures in by false sense of security.

[marty]

Weekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI.  Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.

Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.

Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.

One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.

Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.

You're right - it's a pain in the ass. But we have to treat it like a loss, because that's what goes in the team's official record, and coach's record, for example.

There are numerous places on the site where we separate out these things into distinct columns or put OT records in parentheticals.

Adam and Bearlover in agreement! Who says there's no chance for peace in the Middle East?!

It's a trap. My money's on Adam laying the kill shot if bearlover.is kures in by false sense of security.

Frozen Four is in Vegas and no one will be betting on BearLover.

[BearLover]

Weekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI.  Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.

Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.

Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.

One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.

Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.

You're right - it's a pain in the ass. But we have to treat it like a loss, because that's what goes in the team's official record, and coach's record, for example.

There are numerous places on the site where we separate out these things into distinct columns or put OT records in parentheticals.

Adam and Bearlover in agreement! Who says there's no chance for peace in the Middle East?!

It's a trap. My money's on Adam laying the kill shot if bearlover.is kures in by false sense of security.

Frozen Four is in Vegas and no one will be betting on BearLover.

You should do stand-up, your material is incredible

[Trotsky]

Weekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI.  Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.

Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.

Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win

This is a good point, thank you.

[Trotsky]

Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.

Yes.  I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.

[stereax]

Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.

Yes.  I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.

3v3 play is useful in that it prepares college athletes for NHL/similar league play, where OT proceeds the same way. Plus, strategy in 3v3 is markedly different than at 5v5.

That being said, the "possession game" OT has become fucking sucks to watch.

[Dafatone]

Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.

Yes.  I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.

3v3 play is useful in that it prepares college athletes for NHL/similar league play, where OT proceeds the same way. Plus, strategy in 3v3 is markedly different than at 5v5.

That being said, the "possession game" OT has become fucking sucks to watch.

3x3 OT sucks in the pros, too.

If nothing else, you should lose possession if you leave the offensive zone with the puck. Like a backcourt in basketball.

[underskill]

NHL players are also much better in open space than college players.  But yea 3x3 sucks either way

[stereax]

Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.

Yes.  I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.

3v3 play is useful in that it prepares college athletes for NHL/similar league play, where OT proceeds the same way. Plus, strategy in 3v3 is markedly different than at 5v5.

That being said, the "possession game" OT has become fucking sucks to watch.

3x3 OT sucks in the pros, too.

If nothing else, you should lose possession if you leave the offensive zone with the puck. Like a backcourt in basketball.

It sucks full stop. But that's likely why the NCAA does it that way.

[Trotsky]

The NC$$ is aping NHL rules because they think it helps college players' prospects.

The only way to end shootout and 3x3 in NC$$ is uproot them everywhere.

[Trotsky]

10 USCHO, 11 USA Hockey, 10 NPI

Q is 5 / 5 / 6

[adamw]

Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.

Yes.  I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.

If that were true, it would be the case. Because coaches are essentially the drivers as to what the rules are.

[Trotsky]

NPI with some games still in progress:

Code Select Expand

  7 Qpc
 10 Cor
 11 Drt
 21 Uni
 27 Hvd
 32 Prn