Opponents and Others 2023-24

BearLover

upprdeck
Next week

Cornell needs to take care and sweep but we get barely anything for that in the PWR

Umass-prov. 1 game series one will lose

STC vs WMU. root for WMU sweep
CC vs Omaha again need one to sweep and still not clear that does enough. Omaha sweeping Ndak last week not good for Cornell.

Still that would move us to 15th for sure.

I do not see a path for Cornell to get an at-large bid. I think it might be impossible to get into the top 14 at this point.

Especially when you consider the competition from below. UNH and Northeastern right now are better than their season record.

UNH is right behind Cornell in RPI. Their path to the HE title is Lowell, Maine, BU, BC. They just shut out Lowell twice, they are 2-1 vs. Maine this year, they've beaten BU (granted, early in the season), and recently held BC to a 1-0 game. They don't get a title without luck, but they are playing well enough right not to put them in a position where they can leverage some luck once getting to the semis.

Likewise, Northeastern has a Merrimack, BU, BC, Maine (with potentially UNH in there somewhere). They have beaten all but UNH this year (and those games were early in the season). Again, they still need luck to get to a title. But the reality is that the #7 team in HE is still a potential contender. The conference is just that deep.

So many things have to go well for Cornell for an at-large bid, that it would just be easier to win the ECAC title and be done with it. So let's do that.

pjd8

BearLover

upprdeck
Next week

Cornell needs to take care and sweep but we get barely anything for that in the PWR

Umass-prov. 1 game series one will lose

STC vs WMU. root for WMU sweep
CC vs Omaha again need one to sweep and still not clear that does enough. Omaha sweeping Ndak last week not good for Cornell.

Still that would move us to 15th for sure.

I do not see a path for Cornell to get an at-large bid. I think it might be impossible to get into the top 14 at this point.

Especially when you consider the competition from below. UNH and Northeastern right now are better than their season record.

UNH is right behind Cornell in RPI. Their path to the HE title is Lowell, Maine, BU, BC. They just shut out Lowell twice, they are 2-1 vs. Maine this year, they've beaten BU (granted, early in the season), and recently held BC to a 1-0 game. They don't get a title without luck, but they are playing well enough right not to put them in a position where they can leverage some luck once getting to the semis.

Likewise, Northeastern has a Merrimack, BU, BC, Maine (with potentially UNH in there somewhere). They have beaten all but UNH this year (and those games were early in the season). Again, they still need luck to get to a title. But the reality is that the #7 team in HE is still a potential contender. The conference is just that deep.

So many things have to go well for Cornell for an at-large bid, that it would just be easier to win the ECAC title and be done with it. So let's do that.

Even assuming UNH and Northeastern lose, I’m not even sure it’s mathematically possible for Cornell to get an at-large bid. They’d need to pass both UMass and Providence, but those teams play each other next round and I don’t think it will be possible for the winner to drop below Cornell.

It’s definitely possible, just unlikely.

BearLover

upprdeck
Next week

Cornell needs to take care and sweep but we get barely anything for that in the PWR

Umass-prov. 1 game series one will lose

STC vs WMU. root for WMU sweep
CC vs Omaha again need one to sweep and still not clear that does enough. Omaha sweeping Ndak last week not good for Cornell.

Still that would move us to 15th for sure.

I do not see a path for Cornell to get an at-large bid. I think it might be impossible to get into the top 14 at this point.

that may be true. Easy enough to get to 15, but after that?

upprdeck

BearLover

upprdeck
Next week

Cornell needs to take care and sweep but we get barely anything for that in the PWR

Umass-prov. 1 game series one will lose

STC vs WMU. root for WMU sweep
CC vs Omaha again need one to sweep and still not clear that does enough. Omaha sweeping Ndak last week not good for Cornell.

Still that would move us to 15th for sure.

I do not see a path for Cornell to get an at-large bid. I think it might be impossible to get into the top 14 at this point.

that may be true. Easy enough to get to 15, but after that?

gotta have one of the NCHC teams drop basically.

chimpfood

upprdeck

BearLover

upprdeck
Next week

Cornell needs to take care and sweep but we get barely anything for that in the PWR

Umass-prov. 1 game series one will lose

STC vs WMU. root for WMU sweep
CC vs Omaha again need one to sweep and still not clear that does enough. Omaha sweeping Ndak last week not good for Cornell.

Still that would move us to 15th for sure.

I do not see a path for Cornell to get an at-large bid. I think it might be impossible to get into the top 14 at this point.

that may be true. Easy enough to get to 15, but after that?

gotta have one of the NCHC teams drop basically.

Looks impossible to catch any of them. Ergo, impossible to get into the top 14.

One must wonder how things would've shaken out if at least a few ECAC teams other than Cornell and Q had even decent OOC records

It's not impossible, or else Cornell wouldn't show up here with >0% odds

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

whatever you think of the methodology for picking winners for each game - it proves it's possible to happen.

adamw
It's not impossible, or else Cornell wouldn't show up here with >0% odds

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

whatever you think of the methodology for picking winners for each game - it proves it's possible to happen.

Yup—thanks. It probably involves UMD and Cornell both losing in their conference finals, at a minimum. I’m not sure how else Cornell gains enough RPI to overtake that many teams.

The question is how high does 3 wins take us with the finals loss to Quin?

rough guessing with the PWR tool

Omaha-cc play if one sweeps the loser ends up around .5495
WMU sweeps. SC cloud goes into the .5370 range
Prov wins Umass falls to .5466


if we sweep we only move up to .5475.

Maybe 3 more win gets up a touch higher. but that last loss may knock us back down to far?

Interesting the chn model gives us a 2% chance of an at-large. I wonder what it is if we sweep Harvard, win the semi and lose the final to qpac. That is, how much of it is in our hands vs totally out of our control.

Win the next 2 and then we have our answer on what needs to happen.

If you want to get into the NCAAs and do well you have to beat teams all better than the next few we have to play anyway.

upprdeck

Obamna-cc play if one sweeps the loser ends up around .5495

FIFY

As much as this weekend scares me, and it really shouldn't....we need to survive and advance. What I like is we are young and desperate, playing for survival. The Q, when they get to LP, are in. Playing for a SEED and not a SPOT in the tourney are very different things and I like our chances! Don't play down to inferior teams and take care of business. Hopefully the health issues are behind us.

Our chance of at-large is up to 4% after last night’s games according to the probability matrix

CU2007
Our chance of at-large is up to 4% after last night’s games according to the probability matrix

Hope spring eternal!

Minn D winning one probably helps

mass - prov not sure if the Mass win helps us or Prov win helps us.

Omaha needs to lose to maybe catch them

St cloud losing helps more than WMU losing, I think

Leagues having the 1 game playoffs hurts us with no teams losing twice.

I would think we want to play Colgate next rd for PWR?

I would have to think that Quin/BU/Mass getting as far as they can is much needed to try and get some more quality bonus.

Still hard to see how to get to 14th and lose the final game.

UMass up 2-0 on PC early in HEA.

Ohio State eliminated, so one less possibility of an autobid going to a lower ranked team.

Fewer...

Trotsky
Fewer...

UNO 2, CC 1 after 2.

And Michigan leading the Goofers 2-0 after 2.

ugarte
UNO 2, CC 1 after 2.

Final: UNO 3 CC 1

Trotsky

ugarte
UNO 2, CC 1 after 2.

Final: UNO 3 CC 1

I think, but I'm not sure, that that does it for our at large chances.

Could be wrong.

Dafatone

Trotsky

ugarte
UNO 2, CC 1 after 2.

Final: UNO 3 CC 1

I think, but I'm not sure, that that does it for our at large chances.

Could be wrong.

On Twitter Adam said as much

scoop85

Dafatone

Trotsky

ugarte
UNO 2, CC 1 after 2.

Final: UNO 3 CC 1

I think, but I'm not sure, that that does it for our at large chances.

Could be wrong.

On Twitter Adam said as much

Was just coming here to say that I've just been running more numbers - and yeah, can't see any way for Cornell now. Would've been very possible if Omaha lost. That was the ballgame.

adamw

scoop85

Dafatone

Trotsky

ugarte
UNO 2, CC 1 after 2.

Final: UNO 3 CC 1

I think, but I'm not sure, that that does it for our at large chances.

Could be wrong.

On Twitter Adam said as much

Was just coming here to say that I've just been running more numbers - and yeah, can't see any way for Cornell now. Would've been very possible if Omaha lost. That was the ballgame.

Just win, baby.

If you don't win it
You shoont be in it

BearLover
There are some YouTube videos with yours of college hockey facilities. For example, UMass, which provides its players 24-hour access to a rink and gym exclusive to the hockey team:
[youtu.be]

Contrast with the Cornell men’s team, which shares its ice with the women’s team, figure skating team, club team, intramurals, and recreational skaters, and which has a couple exclusive bikes and treadmills.

I believe we know the order of priority which is men's then women's hockey then everybody else.

At least the PWR prob matrix gives us a 30% chance to get in..

Beat the Dart goalie and see what happens vs Q.

adamw

scoop85

Dafatone

Trotsky

ugarte
UNO 2, CC 1 after 2.

Final: UNO 3 CC 1

I think, but I'm not sure, that that does it for our at large chances.

Could be wrong.

On Twitter Adam said as much

Was just coming here to say that I've just been running more numbers - and yeah, can't see any way for Cornell now. Would've been very possible if Omaha lost. That was the ballgame.

So it's impossible for us to best Western Michigan?

marty

adamw

scoop85

Dafatone

Trotsky

ugarte
UNO 2, CC 1 after 2.

Final: UNO 3 CC 1

I think, but I'm not sure, that that does it for our at large chances.

Could be wrong.

On Twitter Adam said as much

Was just coming here to say that I've just been running more numbers - and yeah, can't see any way for Cornell now. Would've been very possible if Omaha lost. That was the ballgame.

So it's impossible for us to best Western Michigan?

Not without winning both in Placid. Can play with it on CHN YATC tool: [www.collegehockeynews.com]

Win out get the 11 seed is the goal

Fogarty out at Princeton

Denver wins, so still a shot at a #3 seed.

I wonder what combo does it? I played with variations and couldnt find it

Denver has to win. Michigan has to lose.

YUP. MSU/DENVER

After that the RIT/AIC and the BU/BC gane didnt seem to matter

[www.prohockeyrumors.com]

For those worried about how "small time" the ECACs in LP felt, here's what the St. Louis NCAA regional (Michigan, Michigan State, North Dakota and Western Michigan) site looks like:

"The center features four rinks: a "feature" rink with 2,500 tip-up seats and a four-sided HD video scoreboard..."

Sounded like they didn't have another option for a "western" site.

I find it crazy that the committee or whoever is responsible couldn't find another site in the midwestern US. There has to be a ton of better arenas willing to do this event at a tolerable cost.

Iceberg
I find it crazy that the committee or whoever is responsible couldn't find another site in the midwestern US. There has to be a ton of better arenas willing to do this event at a tolerable cost.

Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals? The Eastern sites are close enough that dedicated fans could commute between Soringfield and Providence to see all six games, but not in the West, but if they were all in one place, it might improve the attendance of both sets of games.

Some AHL sites in the Midwest: Chicago, Cleveland, Grand Rapids, Des Moines, Milwaukee, Rockford.

ECHL rinks in the area are in Kalamazoo, Toledo, Cincinnati, Iowa City, Indianapolis, Fort Wayne, and Kansas City.

FWIW al lot of the ECHL rinks are pretty small (5000 seats).

Iceberg
I find it crazy that the committee or whoever is responsible couldn't find another site in the midwestern US. There has to be a ton of better arenas willing to do this event at a tolerable cost.

I think it has to do with who the host(s) is (are). In this case, the Midwest Regional is hosted by Lindenwood University and the St. Louis Sports Commission.

What's even more surprising is that the St. Louis Sports Commission has partnered with the University of Vermont to host the 2025 Frozen Four in St. Louis. In large part, this is because UVM has "connections to the St. Louis Blues President, and UVM alum, Chris Zimmerman."

I bet there are lots of Vermont citizens who would be shocked to learn their state university chose Missouri as the place to host a tournament.

Swampy

Iceberg
I find it crazy that the committee or whoever is responsible couldn't find another site in the midwestern US. There has to be a ton of better arenas willing to do this event at a tolerable cost.

I think it has to do with who the host(s) is (are). In this case, the Midwest Regional is hosted by Lindenwood University and the St. Louis Sports Commission.

What's even more surprising is that the St. Louis Sports Commission has partnered with the University of Vermont to host the 2025 Frozen Four in St. Louis. In large part, this is because UVM has "connections to the St. Louis Blues President, and UVM alum, Chris Zimmerman."

I bet there are lots of Vermont citizens who would be shocked to learn their state university chose Missouri as the place to host a tournament.

vermont home game in st. louis has real extreme weather event vibes

jtwcornell91

Iceberg
I find it crazy that the committee or whoever is responsible couldn't find another site in the midwestern US. There has to be a ton of better arenas willing to do this event at a tolerable cost.

Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals? The Eastern sites are close enough that dedicated fans could commute between Soringfield and Providence to see all six games, but not in the West, but if they were all in one place, it might improve the attendance of both sets of games.

I wish. And think the the attendance griping would be resolved in part by having one east and one west regional like the 12 team days.

ugarte

Swampy

Iceberg
I find it crazy that the committee or whoever is responsible couldn't find another site in the midwestern US. There has to be a ton of better arenas willing to do this event at a tolerable cost.

I think it has to do with who the host(s) is (are). In this case, the Midwest Regional is hosted by Lindenwood University and the St. Louis Sports Commission.

What's even more surprising is that the St. Louis Sports Commission has partnered with the University of Vermont to host the 2025 Frozen Four in St. Louis. In large part, this is because UVM has "connections to the St. Louis Blues President, and UVM alum, Chris Zimmerman."

I bet there are lots of Vermont citizens who would be shocked to learn their state university chose Missouri as the place to host a tournament.

vermont home game in st. louis has real extreme weather event vibes

The 1999 Frozen Four in Anaheim was hosted by Alaska-Anchorage.

There’s some joke to be made about UVM getting tricked into thinking it was hosting Martin St. Louis.

sah67
For those worried about how "small time" the ECACs in LP felt, here's what the St. Louis NCAA regional (Michigan, Michigan State, North Dakota and Western Michigan) site looks like:

khiqpd1t6jqc1.jpeg

"The center features four rinks: a "feature" rink with 2,500 tip-up seats and a four-sided HD video scoreboard..."

And of course, placing the Western team that travels the best in this venue was a master-stroke. North Dakota fans must be so pissed.

Wish I had a ticket to sell.

Which is funnier, the NCAA holding a regional in an NHL practice facility, or an NHL team’s home arena being a college facility?

jtwcornell91
Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals?

This is actually brilliant.

jtwcornell91

Iceberg
I find it crazy that the committee or whoever is responsible couldn't find another site in the midwestern US. There has to be a ton of better arenas willing to do this event at a tolerable cost.

Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals? The Eastern sites are close enough that dedicated fans could commute between Soringfield and Providence to see all six games, but not in the West, but if they were all in one place, it might improve the attendance of both sets of games.

I think two sites, one East and one West with 8 teams each would be fun and draw well.

marty

jtwcornell91

Iceberg
I find it crazy that the committee or whoever is responsible couldn't find another site in the midwestern US. There has to be a ton of better arenas willing to do this event at a tolerable cost.

Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals? The Eastern sites are close enough that dedicated fans could commute between Soringfield and Providence to see all six games, but not in the West, but if they were all in one place, it might improve the attendance of both sets of games.

I think two sites, one East and one West with 8 teams each would be fun and draw well.

Possibly a problem getting four days Thursday through Sunday at right-sized arenas?

Al DeFlorio
Possibly a problem getting four days Thursday through Sunday at right-sized arenas?

Possibly, but the NC$$ could book years in advance.

Just go back to straight seeds at campus sites. Please.

³² Michigan Tech at ¹ BC
²¹ RIT at ² BU
¹⁴ UMass at ³ Denver
¹³ Western Michigan at ⁴ Michigan State
¹² Cornell at ⁵ Maine
¹¹ Omaha at ⁶ North Dakota
¹⁰ Michigan at ⁷ Minnesota
⁹ Quinnipiac at ⁸ Wisconsin

Even funnier, give the top 6 seeds to the 6 conference champions to piss everyone off.

Trotsky

Al DeFlorio
Possibly a problem getting four days Thursday through Sunday at right-sized arenas?

Possibly, but the NC$$ could book years in advance.

Just go back to straight seeds at campus sites. Please.

³² Michigan Tech at ¹ BC
²¹ RIT at ² BU
¹⁴ UMass at ³ Denver
¹³ Western Michigan at ⁴ Michigan State
¹² Cornell at ⁵ Maine
¹¹ Omaha at ⁶ North Dakota
¹⁰ Michigan at ⁷ Minnesota
⁹ Quinnipiac at ⁸ Wisconsin

Even funnier, give the top 6 seeds to the 6 conference champions to piss everyone off.

This is the way.

You want half of the D1 teams to make the tournament?

25% is already high. Check some other sports. Basketball is 19%.

CU77
You want half of the D1 teams to make the tournament?

25% is already high. Check some other sports. Basketball is 19%.

lol there are 16 teams. the 16 seed happens to be 32 in pairwise.

Swampy

Iceberg
I find it crazy that the committee or whoever is responsible couldn't find another site in the midwestern US. There has to be a ton of better arenas willing to do this event at a tolerable cost.

I think it has to do with who the host(s) is (are). In this case, the Midwest Regional is hosted by Lindenwood University and the St. Louis Sports Commission.

What's even more surprising is that the St. Louis Sports Commission has partnered with the University of Vermont to host the 2025 Frozen Four in St. Louis. In large part, this is because UVM has "connections to the St. Louis Blues President, and UVM alum, Chris Zimmerman."

I bet there are lots of Vermont citizens who would be shocked to learn their state university chose Missouri as the place to host a tournament.

I believe the st Louis coalition approached uvm, and not the other way around iirc. And I've not heard any locals talking about this up here. I don't think anyone cares.

(Current Vermont citizen living 25 minutes from campus)

Trotsky

jtwcornell91
Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals?

This is actually brilliant.

Only downsides I can imagine would be finding enough practice facilities for 8 teams plus enough hotel blocks

abmarks

Trotsky

jtwcornell91
Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals?

This is actually brilliant.

Only downsides I can imagine would be finding enough practice facilities for 8 teams plus enough hotel blocks

Good point. They used to do it with six teams (over two days) back in the 90s.

jtwcornell91

abmarks

Trotsky

jtwcornell91
Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals?

This is actually brilliant.

Only downsides I can imagine would be finding enough practice facilities for 8 teams plus enough hotel blocks

Good point. They used to do it with six teams (over two days) back in the 90s.

Although they seemed to limit the locations to New England and the upper midwest (Mich, Minn, and ND).

Jeff Hopkins '82

jtwcornell91

abmarks

Trotsky

jtwcornell91
Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals?

This is actually brilliant.

Only downsides I can imagine would be finding enough practice facilities for 8 teams plus enough hotel blocks

Good point. They used to do it with six teams (over two days) back in the 90s.

Although they seemed to limit the locations to New England and the upper midwest (Mich, Minn, and ND).

Albany could handle it with Union and RPI being local. Worcester would also work, as you've got Holy Cross there and a lot of schools within 45 minutes (Providence, Brown, BC). Even UNH is only a two hour drive away. Both locations are relatively easy to get to for most eastern programs. And for western teams, flying to to Boston and getting to Worcester is probably about as easy a trip as you'll get without being in a major city.

It would restrict regionals to a few sites, but as a fan, there are advantages to cycling through a few regular places.

How many teams are even remotely close to St. Louis?

Dafatone
How many teams are even remotely close to St. Louis?

Lindenwood, which is precisely why the regional is there.

The smaller cities and smaller arenas may be hungrier for the NCAA's business. Springfield MA is an 8,000-seat arena and Midwest regional site Centene Community Center in Maryland Heights, Missouri [first time I heard the site name I mentally placed in Maryland], I believe the largest of their four rinks is 3,500 (one is outdoors, covered). Syracuse, Binghamton and Glens Falls and have 4,000+ and could bid for NCAA hockey regionals. Or Lake Placid.

billhoward
The smaller cities and smaller arenas may be hungrier for the NCAA's business. Springfield MA is an 8,000-seat arena and Midwest regional site Centene Community Center in Maryland Heights, Missouri [first time I heard the site name I mentally placed in Maryland], I believe the largest of their four rinks is 3,500. Syracuse, Binghamton and Glens Falls and have 4,000+ and could bid for NCAA hockey regionals. Or Lake Placid.

Don't forget Elmira... I believe their rink is approx 4K.

On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

pjd8

Jeff Hopkins '82

jtwcornell91

abmarks

Trotsky

jtwcornell91
Now that they're doing the regionals on Thursday-Saturday and Friday-Sunday, couldn't one site bid to host both regionals?

This is actually brilliant.

Only downsides I can imagine would be finding enough practice facilities for 8 teams plus enough hotel blocks

Good point. They used to do it with six teams (over two days) back in the 90s.

Although they seemed to limit the locations to New England and the upper midwest (Mich, Minn, and ND).

Albany could handle it with Union and RPI being local. Worcester would also work, as you've got Holy Cross there and a lot of schools within 45 minutes (Providence, Brown, BC). Even UNH is only a two hour drive away. Both locations are relatively easy to get to for most eastern programs. And for western teams, flying to to Boston and getting to Worcester is probably about as easy a trip as you'll get without being in a major city.

It would restrict regionals to a few sites, but as a fan, there are advantages to cycling through a few regular places.

My point was that although they could pull it off in New England or the upper midwest, it would be much more difficult to expand the footprint of the tournament beyond the same few sites.

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

The way I read it he was against giving teams like UMass a home advantage because they are 4 seeds. He was in favor, I think, of giving home ice advantage to hosts only if they were 1 or 2 seeds for any regional. That is, if they were in the top 8 of the total 16 field. But this argument was for the current 4 neutral sites with 16 teams in the field.

If he has other more current ideas not expressed on eLynah, I've not read those.

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

Stage 1: That's crazy.
Stage 2: That's unfair.
Stage 3: That will never work.
Stage 4: It was my idea all the time.

Adam is at about Stage 3.2

if regionals were best of 3 I bet more places would try to host it.

that would add an extra week as well to the whole thing

best of 3
best of 3
final 4

upprdeck
if regionals were best of 3 I bet more places would try to host it.

that would add an extra week as well to the whole thing

best of 3
best of 3
final 4

It would also increase the conflicts with their "normal" activities.

what normal activities, school?

best of 3. thur-sat. fri-sun miss no more time than bball schools will

upprdeck
what normal activities, school?

best of 3. thur-sat. fri-sun miss no more time than bball schools will

I meant the normal activities held in the arenas / training facilities.

for all this talk of smaller rinks wanting regionals more, if memory serves, there's been decent to excellent ticket historically for regionals in Manchester, Providence and Worcester, all of which are well north of the 5k seat mark. Granted attendance would vary depending upon how many of the local schools are playing there, but those have to be better venue choices than 3k-5k seat rinks, and better choices than rinks the size of Albany or larger.

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

I'm sure there's some more context given the situation this year, but the brother Wodon will explain his reasoning in due time here as he typically does

Iceberg

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

I'm sure there's some more context given the situation this year, but the brother Wodon will explain his reasoning in due time here as he typically does

The couple of times I’ve listened to the CHN podcast recently, I’ve been very impressed with how smart and eloquent the coaches who were guests on the podcast have sounded: first Carle of Denver and now Mayotte of CC.

abmarks
for all this talk of smaller rinks wanting regionals more, if memory serves, there's been decent to excellent ticket historically for regionals in Manchester, Providence and Worcester, all of which are well north of the 5k seat mark. Granted attendance would vary depending upon how many of the local schools are playing there, but those have to be better venue choices than 3k-5k seat rinks, and better choices than rinks the size of Albany or larger.

If attendance is low Albany doesn't use the upper deck. The facility is fine for regional play.

Women's NCAA bball is there this weekend.

marty

abmarks
for all this talk of smaller rinks wanting regionals more, if memory serves, there's been decent to excellent ticket historically for regionals in Manchester, Providence and Worcester, all of which are well north of the 5k seat mark. Granted attendance would vary depending upon how many of the local schools are playing there, but those have to be better venue choices than 3k-5k seat rinks, and better choices than rinks the size of Albany or larger.

If attendance is low Albany doesn't use the upper deck. The facility is fine for regional play.

Women's NCAA bball is there this weekend.

Works for me, Marty.

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

LOL - I've literally explained how this is not contradictory a dozen times already. I'm not in the mood to explain it again.

adamw

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

LOL - I've literally explained how this is not contradictory a dozen times already. I'm not in the mood to explain it again.

the podcast was the first time that I personally have heard you support teams playing at their home rinks but only as 1 or 2 seeds. If you have a link to an article or something explaining how this is better than just playing at the higher seeds all the time and doesn’t contradict what you said about the pairwise deciding home games I would love to read it, my mind really is open, just right now I don’t see how the current regional system (or the one with the reforms you mentioned) is better than just playing at the higher seed.

chimpfood

adamw

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

LOL - I've literally explained how this is not contradictory a dozen times already. I'm not in the mood to explain it again.

the podcast was the first time that I personally have heard you support teams playing at their home rinks but only as 1 or 2 seeds. If you have a link to an article or something explaining how this is better than just playing at the higher seeds all the time and doesn’t contradict what you said about the pairwise deciding home games I would love to read it, my mind really is open, just right now I don’t see how the current regional system (or the one with the reforms you mentioned) is better than just playing at the higher seed.

Feel free to have your opinion - but what I am saying is not contradictory. There are numerous differences between top 8 teams getting home games, and what I'm proposing.

adamw

chimpfood

adamw

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

LOL - I've literally explained how this is not contradictory a dozen times already. I'm not in the mood to explain it again.

the podcast was the first time that I personally have heard you support teams playing at their home rinks but only as 1 or 2 seeds. If you have a link to an article or something explaining how this is better than just playing at the higher seeds all the time and doesn’t contradict what you said about the pairwise deciding home games I would love to read it, my mind really is open, just right now I don’t see how the current regional system (or the one with the reforms you mentioned) is better than just playing at the higher seed.

Feel free to have your opinion - but what I am saying is not contradictory. There are numerous differences between top 8 teams getting home games, and what I'm proposing.

Explain please. The only difference that I see is that you want teams to have to pay to have a chance at a home game and with your way we still get worse attendance most of the time.

chimpfood

adamw

chimpfood

adamw

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed. To me, this makes no sense to not just do home games for the first two rounds. Firstly, it shows that he has no issue with schools hosting NCAA games in their home rink and this system doesn’t eliminate home advantage, it just only gives it to schools that are willing to pay. Also, it contradicts a point that he previously centered his argument around, that the pairwise is not good enough to decide who gets home games. And yet, in his new ideal system, only one and two seeds would be able to play in their home regional, so home games would be decided by the pairwise. It seems like all logic eventually leads to the fact that home games in the tournament are the way to go and with the points that he is making and the opinions he is sharing I’m genuinely confused why he still opposes this. I don’t think he has any malicious intent at all I am just lost on how he could be so well informed on college hockey and be making the same arguments that support the home games, yet stand against them.

LOL - I've literally explained how this is not contradictory a dozen times already. I'm not in the mood to explain it again.

the podcast was the first time that I personally have heard you support teams playing at their home rinks but only as 1 or 2 seeds. If you have a link to an article or something explaining how this is better than just playing at the higher seeds all the time and doesn’t contradict what you said about the pairwise deciding home games I would love to read it, my mind really is open, just right now I don’t see how the current regional system (or the one with the reforms you mentioned) is better than just playing at the higher seed.

Feel free to have your opinion - but what I am saying is not contradictory. There are numerous differences between top 8 teams getting home games, and what I'm proposing.

Explain please. The only difference that I see is that you want teams to have to pay to have a chance at a home game and with your way we still get worse attendance most of the time.

Well, for one thing, 4-team regionals are different from series at campus sites because you get the mix of fans coming together in a tournament atmosphere.

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed.

I don't think any school would bid to host under these conditions.

I like the lacrosse system: round 1 at higher seed, round 2 at 2 regional sites (2 games per site, same day).

CU77

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed.

I don't think any school would bid to host under these conditions.

I like the lacrosse system: round 1 at higher seed, round 2 at 2 regional sites (2 games per site, same day).

That doesn't solve the host home field advantage issue though. It just changes it to a QF problem. A team could be road round one and then be the "road" team at home the next.

The issue is what is the best way to balance competing issues: attendance/atmosphere and fairness being primary.

Maybe the conferences should have to host on a rotating basis. That theoretically shares the cost and responsibilities across member schools. Guarantee the host conference that the team that wins their autobid will be there. It's important to find a way to get away from the same handful of schools hosting because they are the only ones willing or in proximity to willing arena partners.

CU77

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed.

I don't think any school would bid to host under these conditions.

If they put their mind to it, I'm sure they could come up with conditions under which schools would bid. But having conferences host in the better solution.

Chris '03

CU77

chimpfood
On the CHN podcast today Adam said that he supports teams being able to host regionals in their own rinks but should only play there if they are a one or two seed.

I don't think any school would bid to host under these conditions.

I like the lacrosse system: round 1 at higher seed, round 2 at 2 regional sites (2 games per site, same day).

That doesn't solve the host home field advantage issue though. It just changes it to a QF problem. A team could be road round one and then be the "road" team at home the next.

If you win the first game, you have beaten a 1 or 2 seed (in hockey terminology) on the road, and have taken their place. If you buy that, then Adam's criterion is satisfied.

Among the names in the transfer portal is UCONN’s Matthew Wood, a 1st round draftee in the 2022 NHL draft. Rumored to be looking at Minnesota/Wisconsin/NoDak. If he leaves a big loss for a Huskies program trying to gain relevance.

2-0 Q just like that.

After weathering BC’s pressure at the end of the 1st period, QU scores twice in 35 seconds to go up 2-0 just 2 minutes into the 2nd period. Please don’t tell me they’re going to win it again?

scoop85
After weathering BC’s pressure at the end of the 1st period, QU scores twice in 35 seconds to go up 2-0 just 2 minutes into the 2nd period. Please don’t tell me they’re going to win it again?

BC scores right away after a phantom penalty call on QU to make it 2-1. Boy did they ever need that.

I would be so pissed if I was a Q fan.

3-3 Q-BC after 2

Al DeFlorio
3-3 Q-BC after 2

And Q scores with 2 seconds left on their PP to go back up 4-3.

For all of BC’s offensive ability, their defense is pillow soft.

This is a great game. Will the Q tournament OT magic continue?

chimpfood
This is a great game. Will the Q tournament OT magic continue?

Hope not!

Jeff Hopkins '82

chimpfood
This is a great game. Will the Q tournament OT magic continue?

Hope not!

Screw BU, QU, too.