Quarterfinal Choices-The Real Ones

[css228]

Three words that would prove ESPN cares about college hockey: Assign. Erin. Andrews.

That or they could get INCH to publish more than one thing a day

I guess I miss the correlation with Erin Andrews here...

Erin Andrews is ESPN's top sideline "reporter" (I use that term loosely). She only covers sports that ESPN cares about (so not college hockey).

I still don't see the similarities...

There are simpler things they can do than assign Erin Andrews to cover the sport. They could just write about it more.

[Aaron M. Griffin]

Speaking of ESPN's excessive moralism. Not that I condone bounties in football, but it seems like ESPN can't go two weeks without calling for someone's head. Meanwhile, when they had the Bernie fine tapes, they did nothing for 10 years.

Thank you for pointing that out. Most did not recognize that fact.

[jkahn]

Three words that would prove ESPN cares about college hockey: Assign. Erin. Andrews.

Erin is actually really good at hockey.  She was the by the bench reporter for the Tampa Bay Lightning's first round playoff series in 2004 (ESPN's last year) and really knew her stuff and could interview people with good questions without a script.  The ESPN brass was impressed and kept advancing her to subsequent playoff series, all the way through to the Lightning winning the Cup.  Then ESPN dropped hockey, Erin moved to college football and the rest is history.

[Jim Hyla]

Here's Ken Schott's choices:

RPI (No. 10) at Union (No. 1) — Union wins series in 3 by scores of 2-3, 4-2 and 5-2.
Quinnipiac (No. 5) at Colgate (No. 4) — Quinnipiac wins in 3 by scores of, 3-1, 2-5 and 3-2.
Yale (No. 6) at Harvard (No. 3) — Yale wins in 3 by scores of 4-1, 1-2 and 5-3.
Dartmouth (No. 9) at Cornell (No. 2) — Cornell wins in 2 by scores of 3-1 and 1-0.

CHN picks all higher seeds in 3.

USCHO picks:

Union in 3. ( 4-2, 1-2 (OT), 4-1).
Cornell in 2. (4-1, 6-2)
Yale in 3  (4-2, 3-4, 5-4 (OT)
Colgate in 3 (3-1, 3-4, 5-3).

INCH doesn't pick, but here's their analysis.

[Jordan 04]

Here's Ken Schott's choices:

RPI (No. 10) at Union (No. 1) — Union wins series in 3 by scores of 2-3, 4-2 and 5-2.
Quinnipiac (No. 5) at Colgate (No. 4) — Quinnipiac wins in 3 by scores of, 3-1, 2-5 and 3-2.
Yale (No. 6) at Harvard (No. 3) — Yale wins in 3 by scores of 4-1, 1-2 and 5-3.
Dartmouth (No. 9) at Cornell (No. 2) — Cornell wins in 2 by scores of 3

CHN picks all higher seeds in 3.

USCHO picks:

Union in 3. ( 4-2, 1-2 (OT), 4-1).
Cornell in 2. (4-1, 6-2)
Yale in 3  (4-2, 3-4, 5-4 (OT)
Colgate in 3 (3-1, 3-4, 5-3).

INCH doesn't pick, but here's their analysis.

Why do these analysts try to pick scores? Nobody does that in anything other than football, and that's simply for gambling entertainment purposes.

[Trotsky]

Here's Ken Schott's choices:

RPI (No. 10) at Union (No. 1) — Union wins series in 3 by scores of 2-3, 4-2 and 5-2.
Quinnipiac (No. 5) at Colgate (No. 4) — Quinnipiac wins in 3 by scores of, 3-1, 2-5 and 3-2.
Yale (No. 6) at Harvard (No. 3) — Yale wins in 3 by scores of 4-1, 1-2 and 5-3.
Dartmouth (No. 9) at Cornell (No. 2) — Cornell wins in 2 by scores of 3

CHN picks all higher seeds in 3.

USCHO picks:

Union in 3. ( 4-2, 1-2 (OT), 4-1).
Cornell in 2. (4-1, 6-2)
Yale in 3  (4-2, 3-4, 5-4 (OT)
Colgate in 3 (3-1, 3-4, 5-3).

INCH doesn't pick, but here's their analysis.

Why do these analysts try to pick scores? Nobody does that in anything other than football, and that's simply for gambling entertainment purposes.

For fun?

Our score predictions concern me a little.  3 to undefined?

[Aaron M. Griffin]

Here's Ken Schott's choices:

RPI (No. 10) at Union (No. 1) — Union wins series in 3 by scores of 2-3, 4-2 and 5-2.
Quinnipiac (No. 5) at Colgate (No. 4) — Quinnipiac wins in 3 by scores of, 3-1, 2-5 and 3-2.
Yale (No. 6) at Harvard (No. 3) — Yale wins in 3 by scores of 4-1, 1-2 and 5-3.
Dartmouth (No. 9) at Cornell (No. 2) — Cornell wins in 2 by scores of 3

CHN picks all higher seeds in 3.

USCHO picks:

Union in 3. ( 4-2, 1-2 (OT), 4-1).
Cornell in 2. (4-1, 6-2)
Yale in 3  (4-2, 3-4, 5-4 (OT)
Colgate in 3 (3-1, 3-4, 5-3).

INCH doesn't pick, but here's their analysis.

Why do these analysts try to pick scores? Nobody does that in anything other than football, and that's simply for gambling entertainment purposes.

For fun?

Our score predictions concern me a little.  3 to undefined?

Maybe Schott thinks Iles will go on a Scrivens-esque shutout playoff run like the 2010 ECAC Tournament.

[billhoward]

Why do these analysts try to pick scores? Nobody does that in anything other than football, and that's simply for gambling entertainment purposes.

Why not? Sports is entertainment (viz Erin Andrews). It's another way of saying it's going to be a high- or low-scoring game. If the writer picks the score right, he looks smart. The only thing easier would be to say a Europe soccer score will be one-nil or 2-1. Against Dartmouth, a 4-1 score sounds about right: 3 goal margin, we somehow manage to not get a shutout (man short? against? deflects off defender?).

Do we really have the easiest path to Atlantic City? MOre people are picking Cornell in 2 but not Union.

[Trotsky]

Do we really have the easiest path to Atlantic City? MOre people are picking Cornell in 2 but not Union.

Since 20 Jan RPI is 8-5-2.  Union hammered them 3 times but all of those games were prior to that run.  The Engineers are perceived as more dangerous than Dartmouth; that's why fewer people are picking Union to sweep.

As for us, who knows?  Nothing is impossible and nothing is easy for this team.

[RichH]

Do we really have the easiest path to Atlantic City? MOre people are picking Cornell in 2 but not Union.

Since 20 Jan RPI is 8-5-2.  Union hammered them 3 times but all of those games were prior to that run.  The Engineers are perceived as more dangerous than Dartmouth; that's why fewer people are picking Union to sweep.

As for us, who knows?  Nothing is impossible and nothing is easy for this team.

Let's not forget that Cornell won late at Thompson, Dartmouth took them to OT at Lynah, and their coach has a history of making sure his teams "get physical" to use a nice euphemism.  I'm not expecting a cakewalk.  And I really hope our skaters don't take the bait when it does turn rough.

[Trotsky]

And I really hope our skaters don't take the bait when it does turn rough.

The secret to playing any Bob Gaudet team, all the way back to his Brown days, is not to get frustrated and take the retaliation penalty.  The way to punish them for all the late hits and cheap shots and general cheese is to put the puck in the net.

[Jim Hyla]

Here's Ken Schott's choices:

RPI (No. 10) at Union (No. 1) — Union wins series in 3 by scores of 2-3, 4-2 and 5-2.
Quinnipiac (No. 5) at Colgate (No. 4) — Quinnipiac wins in 3 by scores of, 3-1, 2-5 and 3-2.
Yale (No. 6) at Harvard (No. 3) — Yale wins in 3 by scores of 4-1, 1-2 and 5-3.
Dartmouth (No. 9) at Cornell (No. 2) — Cornell wins in 2 by scores of 3

CHN picks all higher seeds in 3.

USCHO picks:

Union in 3. ( 4-2, 1-2 (OT), 4-1).
Cornell in 2. (4-1, 6-2)
Yale in 3  (4-2, 3-4, 5-4 (OT)
Colgate in 3 (3-1, 3-4, 5-3).

INCH doesn't pick, but here's their analysis.

Why do these analysts try to pick scores? Nobody does that in anything other than football, and that's simply for gambling entertainment purposes.

For fun?

Our score predictions concern me a little.  3 to undefined?

My bad. I didn't copy correctly. His scores are: Cornell wins in 2 by scores of 3-1 and 1-0.

[jtn27]

Why do these analysts try to pick scores? Nobody does that in anything other than football, and that's simply for gambling entertainment purposes.

Because you look like a genius if you get it right, but if you get it wrong you can just say "Well the odds weren't in my favor. Of course I got it wrong."