uscho's bracketology

[min]

the first bracketology of 2005 is in. three ECACHL teams, but no cornell.

http://www.uscho.com/news/2005/01/10_009595.php

[KeithK]

Ah, the utter silliness of looking at tournament possibilities when we have fully half of the season yet to play!  Fun nonetheless.  Note that in their scenario Cornell is the last team to get cut and Vermont (ranked a couple places behind the Red) get in by virtue of their current 1st place standing in the conference (as presumptive tourney winner).  By points anyway - if USCHO had used Win% to determine the conference leaders then Colgate would get the putative autobid and Cornell would take the last at-large, replacing Vermont in the brackets.

[French Rage]

[Q]KeithK Wrote:

 Ah, the utter silliness of looking at tournament possibilities when we have fully half of the season yet to play!  Fun nonetheless.  Note that in their scenario Cornell is the last team to get cut and Vermont (ranked a couple places behind the Red) get in by virtue of their current 1st place standing in the conference (as presumptive tourney winner).  By points anyway - if USCHO had used Win% to determine the conference leaders then Colgate would get the putative autobid and Cornell would take the last at-large, replacing Vermont in the brackets.
[/q]

Yeah for a column of that caliber it seemed dumb to take the team with most points when they've played more.

[billhoward]

It is utterly silly to project bids halfway through the season ... which is what we all say *after* we've read the lengthy column, about half of which gets re-used each week.

[KeithK]

[q]which is what we all say *after* we've read the lengthy column[/q]Hey, I only skimmed the column to pick up how they picked their field.  Then again I'm at work.  Then again, when has that ever stopped me from reading lengthy columns?

[Facetimer]

[Q]billhoward Wrote:

which is what we all say *after* we've read the lengthy column [/q]

Kind of like your posts.