Polls and NPI 2026

[Trotsky]

After the Brown win we are 6 in NPI with, and I swear I am not making this up, 9 in SOS, I believe entirely on the strength of having played the NPI #1 Dartmouth (cf. Colgate at 7 in SOS).  My ignorant guess is once Dartmouth loses a few we will dip into the mid teens if we keep up our rate of play and beat the teams we ought.

[pjd8]

I'm looking at Dartmouth's remaining schedule, and I'm not seeing a lot of teams they "should" lose to. Certainly, they'll drop a few, but I think the only real challenges they have left are us, Q, and maybe (probably not) their two remaining Hockey East games. And I don't see them dropping all five of those. They'll probably win as many of those as they drop games to lesser opponents that they should beat. And they will be stoked to return to Lynah this year.

CHN's Power Ratings has Cornell at 1 for SOS. Colgate is 6. Yale is 3 (from four games, including D and Q). But losing to D didn't help SLU (58) as they have too many other games against lesser opponents diluting the effect.

Having played two UMass games has helped us. Q and BU will help too. But that's about it.

We will share in some of Dartmouth's riches, and we'll need it. Once we beat them in Lynah, I will feel much better about them continuing to have a great season.

Because if we beat them in Lynah, we can beat them in Lake Placid.

[BearLover]

I'm looking at Dartmouth's remaining schedule, and I'm not seeing a lot of teams they "should" lose to. Certainly, they'll drop a few, but I think the only real challenges they have left are us, Q, and maybe (probably not) their two remaining Hockey East games. And I don't see them dropping all five of those. They'll probably win as many of those as they drop games to lesser opponents that they should beat. And they will be stoked to return to Lynah this year.

CHN's Power Ratings has Cornell at 1 for SOS. Colgate is 6. Yale is 3 (from four games, including D and Q). But losing to D didn't help SLU (58) as they have too many other games against lesser opponents diluting the effect.

Having played two UMass games has helped us. Q and BU will help too. But that's about it.

We will share in some of Dartmouth's riches, and we'll need it. Once we beat them in Lynah, I will feel much better about them continuing to have a great season.

Because if we beat them in Lynah, we can beat them in Lake Placid.

Overindexing on tiny sample sizes IMO. I doubt Dartmouth is an especially good team. Top 4 in the ECAC sure, but there's nothing impressive about their talent or who they've played so far. If the offsides no-call goes our way we probably tie them, and their other games are against very weak opposition. They have a worse team talent-wise on paper than they've had the past two seasons when they were what, like high-20s in the PWR at best?   

[Trotsky]

It does not mean anything in November, but I'd rather be 3 than 53.

[Trotsky]

I just found a database of polls back to 1970.  Kid in the candy store.  Cornell results on TBRW soon to be expanded considerably.

[Trotsky]

As promised.

Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data.  I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.

It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance.  I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.

[Jim Hyla]

As promised.

Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data.  I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.

It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance.  I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.

I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.

I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.

[Trotsky]

As promised.

Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data.  I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.

It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance.  I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.

I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.

I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.

Thank you so much, Jim.

It's really always the work of a handful of weird amateurs that saves these things.  It sure won't be Cornell which would just Lost Ark it and then pulp it in 2040 for an extra $35.  TBH I wouldn't even donate it to them; they don't deserve it.  We need a privately run Cornell Hockey Museum with the university's grubby collaborationist mitts as far away from it as Heidegger from personal accountability.

[Jim Hyla]

As promised.

Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data.  I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.

It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance.  I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.

I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.

I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.

Thank you so much, Jim.

It's really always the work of a handful of weird amateurs that saves these things.  It sure won't be Cornell which would just Lost Ark it and then pulp it in 2040 for an extra $35.  TBH I wouldn't even donate it to them; they don't deserve it.  We need a privately run Cornell Hockey Museum with the university's grubby collaborationist mitts as far away from it as Heidegger from personal accountability.

Okay, I'll let you fund it.

Until then I'm going to try and scan things that maybe someone/somewhere could host.

Maybe Adam would like to host copies of old Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter.

[Trotsky]

As promised.

Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data.  I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.

It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance.  I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.

I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.

I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.

Thank you so much, Jim.

It's really always the work of a handful of weird amateurs that saves these things.  It sure won't be Cornell which would just Lost Ark it and then pulp it in 2040 for an extra $35.  TBH I wouldn't even donate it to them; they don't deserve it.  We need a privately run Cornell Hockey Museum with the university's grubby collaborationist mitts as far away from it as Heidegger from personal accountability.

Okay, I'll let you fund it.

Until then I'm going to try and scan things that maybe someone/somewhere could host.

Maybe Adam would like to host copies of old Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter.

Hell, I'll host the pdfs on TBRW.

For funding, well if only Cornell had alumni who were rich.

[adamw]

As promised.

Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data.  I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.

It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance.  I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.

I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.

I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.

I would love these files. Or access at least. You're right about UNH and RPI. Jim Finke was going to send me his stuff, but he passed away and I'm not sure what happened to it.

[chimpfood]

I have a few questions about the quality win bonus for Adam or anyone else who might know:

1. Why does the bonus exist in the first place? Why is beating #1 and losing to #60 better than the other way around?

2. Why do schools that don't benefit from the QWB (any non-NCHC/B1G/HE schools, ivies especially) let it exist still?

3. Is the quality win bonus larger with the new NPI? Looking at some of the bonuses less than halfway through the season it seems larger than I remember in the past with the RPI, but maybe I'm just wrong.

[Trotsky]

Cornell holds at 17 in USCHO and drops to 16 in USA Hockey, while settling into 14 in NPI.

[adamw]

I have a few questions about the quality win bonus for Adam or anyone else who might know:

1. Why does the bonus exist in the first place? Why is beating #1 and losing to #60 better than the other way around?

2. Why do schools that don't benefit from the QWB (any non-NCHC/B1G/HE schools, ivies especially) let it exist still?

3. Is the quality win bonus larger with the new NPI? Looking at some of the bonuses less than halfway through the season it seems larger than I remember in the past with the RPI, but maybe I'm just wrong.

1 and 2 - who knows. It's all arbitrary philosophical decisions - going back to my argument against home site Regionals.

3 - it may just appear that way in terms of how we're presenting it. it's not as straightforward to calculate now that the whole thing is a recursive, iterative process. I don't think it has much more, if any, weight than in the past.

[BearLover]

5 ECAC teams in the top 14 of the NPI.