After the results of March 15

First things is first. For those of you looking at the PWR and the RPI, you will see that Colorado College is at .5000 in the RPI, but it is not a TUC. Why? The actual RPI is .49996, so rounding up, it’s .5000.

It’s important, why? Ask Wisconsin, you’ll see later.

It’s real simple this time of year. If you’re on the bubble, you must win to keep your standing or move up. If you lose, you move down.

On the losing side, no one knows this better than Rensselaer. A loss, you move down. The Engineers lost and went down.

On the winning side, you’re Union so you know what happens. Union wins, the Dutchmen move up.

We mentioned in the column this past week that Boston University has a double-edged sword. Defeat Merrimack, but watch your TUC record go down because Merrimack would drop as a TUC. That’s exactly what happened on Friday night.

What to watch for on Saturday night? Ohio State is right at .5000 in the RPI, Nebraska-Omaha is on the precipice of falling out at .5015 and Holy Cross is at .5025 and Air Force at .5022. Should Nebraska-Omaha fall out and Colorado College does not become a TUC once again, that negates a lot of things for Wisconsin, since it was 2-0 against Nebraska-Omaha, but 0-2 against CC.

Ohio State falling out would benefit Notre Dame. And a Holy Cross and Air Force loss could see those two teams falling out of TUC range.

Then you have Michigan at .4995 and Connecticut at .4990. There is some impact there on the PWR also.

So Saturday is an interesting night all around.

Here’s what I think it looks like right now, and let me tell you, it’s carnage in the brackets.

Providence
16 Wisconsin vs. 1 Quinnipiac
12 St. Cloud State vs. 6 Boston College

Grand Rapids
13 Western Michigan vs. 2 Minnesota
9 Yale vs. 7 Minnesota State

Toledo
14 Union vs. 3 Miami
11 Niagara vs. 5 North Dakota

Manchester
15 Notre Dame vs. 4 Massachusetts-Lowell
10 New Hampshire vs. 8 Denver

90 COMMENTS

    • BC stands between BU and an at large bid. This seems like a good time for the Terriers to step it up for one game. A win against BC should be enough to move in top sixteen.

    • BC stands between BU and an at large bid. This seems like a good time for the Terriers to step it up for one game. A win against BC should be enough to move in top sixteen.

  1. Jayson fun piece, and I am an ECAC fan, but have to challenge Quinnipiac being number one after the loss to Harvard and the home loss to Cornell, even if they win the series and take the conference. Also granted RPI lost, a little interesting to put Union in.

    • You can challenge it all you want, but it won’t change anything. Quinnipiac will be the #1 overall seed in the NCAAs under just about every scenario imaginable at this point.

  2. Jayson fun piece, and I am an ECAC fan, but have to challenge Quinnipiac being number one after the loss to Harvard and the home loss to Cornell, even if they win the series and take the conference. Also granted RPI lost, a little interesting to put Union in.

    • You can challenge it all you want, but it won’t change anything. Quinnipiac will be the #1 overall seed in the NCAAs under just about every scenario imaginable at this point.

  3. I just don’t understand the mentality that Western Michigan must go to Grand Rapids. Notre Dame is not that much farther away, and would be a natural 2-15 matchup with Minnesota. I never like crying for the Irish, but shipping them to the east coast and breaking up bracket integrity just because WMU is 60 miles closer to the tournament site doesn’t make any sense to me.

    • I would guess it is as Baz says. They’re joining hockey east so why not put them in the east? When they joined Notre Dame said fan attendance wouldn’t be a problem due to the alumni out east.

    • Well, first, closer is closer. Even if it is only 60 miles. But I’d also be willing to bet that another rationale for shipping Notre Dame East is attendance… I’d be willing to bet that their fans travel better than Western Michigan’s, and that they have a MUCH better fan base out East.

  4. I just don’t understand the mentality that Western Michigan must go to Grand Rapids. Notre Dame is not that much farther away, and would be a natural 2-15 matchup with Minnesota. I never like crying for the Irish, but shipping them to the east coast and breaking up bracket integrity just because WMU is 60 miles closer to the tournament site doesn’t make any sense to me.

    • I would guess it is as Baz says. They’re joining hockey east so why not put them in the east? When they joined Notre Dame said fan attendance wouldn’t be a problem due to the alumni out east.

    • Well, first, closer is closer. Even if it is only 60 miles. But I’d also be willing to bet that another rationale for shipping Notre Dame East is attendance… I’d be willing to bet that their fans travel better than Western Michigan’s, and that they have a MUCH better fan base out East.

  5. It will be irrelevant after tonight, one way or the other, but do we actually know whether the .5000 TUC rule is exclusive of rounding? Has there been an example where we know what the Committee does for a team which had an RPI of 0.49995 or more and it made a difference?

  6. Where are the WCHA fans that were whining about UND being with Minnesota??? Wisconsin would love toplay Quinnipiac, Go Lowell!!

  7. It will be irrelevant after tonight, one way or the other, but do we actually know whether the .5000 TUC rule is exclusive of rounding? Has there been an example where we know what the Committee does for a team which had an RPI of 0.49995 or more and it made a difference?

  8. Where are the WCHA fans that were whining about UND being with Minnesota??? Wisconsin would love toplay Quinnipiac, Go Lowell!!

  9. WCHA is rich in talent…atop the league stands a team with a pairwise of 12 (they dropped this week after winning)!! I can buy the Gophs being ahead of said team, but so is DU, UND, and MN-State Mankato!! No love for SCSU.

    • Joe, they show team records in the PWR. SCSU’s 14 losses stick out like the proverbial sore thumb. You have to look down to #19 in PWR, to find a team with more losses. The PWR takes the whole season into account, and as odd as it seems, the Huskies can’t afford another bad loss (or 2!) to AA, or they could end the season outside the NCAA field.

    • I guess they should have done a little better in the non-conference part of thier schedule. Just because scsu won some wcha games doesn’t mean they deserve a higher spot.

  10. WCHA is rich in talent…atop the league stands a team with a pairwise of 12 (they dropped this week after winning)!! I can buy the Gophs being ahead of said team, but so is DU, UND, and MN-State Mankato!! No love for SCSU.

    • Joe, they show team records in the PWR. SCSU’s 14 losses stick out like the proverbial sore thumb. You have to look down to #19 in PWR, to find a team with more losses. The PWR takes the whole season into account, and as odd as it seems, the Huskies can’t afford another bad loss (or 2!) to AA, or they could end the season outside the NCAA field.

    • I guess they should have done a little better in the non-conference part of thier schedule. Just because scsu won some wcha games doesn’t mean they deserve a higher spot.

    • You clearly do not know the system. SCSU’s win had NOTHING to do with it dropping last night in the pairwise. It’s all about the TUC cliff right now; there’s a cluster of teams (there is ALWAYS a cluster of teams) near the 0.5000 RPI mark. Those at or above that line are TUCs. Those below it are not.

      CC lost and dropped out. A UNO loss to Mankato tonight will cause them to drop out as well. Should CC win tonight, they’ll climb back in. The exact same thing happened with Merrimack.

      And arguing that win margin should matter is beyond stupid. By that logic, beating a team by two due to an ENG is somehow “better” than beating the same team by a goal. There’s also the sportsmanship angle; any system rewarding teams for running up the score is an awful system to implement – just look at college football for evidence of this.

    • respect your take on it, but come on guys (you and joe erickson)…it’s the same system EVERY team is measured against. you’re not special. and you’re not measured any differently. you had opportunities to jump in the rankings against certain teams. and you didn’t do it. and lose ground versus other. and you did. (next year, don’t get swept by NMU. (or even UNH for that matter.)) sweeps hurt. bad. that’s just the way it is. just going to have to deal with it. btw…you know who swept Minny and BC this year? nobody.

  11. I just have an issue with SCSU at 12. Problem with “the system” is it can’t see the games. Do you really think any team that wins it’s conference is not a top seed?
    Also, SCSU losing ground because they beat UAA? It’s not like the game was 2-1. It was 6-1.

    • You clearly do not know the system. SCSU’s win had NOTHING to do with it dropping last night in the pairwise. It’s all about the TUC cliff right now; there’s a cluster of teams (there is ALWAYS a cluster of teams) near the 0.5000 RPI mark. Those at or above that line are TUCs. Those below it are not.

      CC lost and dropped out. A UNO loss to Mankato tonight will cause them to drop out as well. Should CC win tonight, they’ll climb back in. The exact same thing happened with Merrimack.

      And arguing that win margin should matter is beyond stupid. By that logic, beating a team by two due to an ENG is somehow “better” than beating the same team by a goal. There’s also the sportsmanship angle; any system rewarding teams for running up the score is an awful system to implement – just look at college football for evidence of this.

    • respect your take on it, but come on guys (you and joe erickson)…it’s the same system EVERY team is measured against. you’re not special. and you’re not measured any differently. you had opportunities to jump in the rankings against certain teams. and you didn’t do it. and lose ground versus other. and you did. (next year, don’t get swept by NMU. (or even UNH for that matter.)) sweeps hurt. bad. that’s just the way it is. just going to have to deal with it. btw…you know who swept Minny and BC this year? nobody.

  12. Because st cloud had some bad losses within the league and more on the non conference. Check it out. Swept by unh, northern mich, and there are more. Take a look. I do want to see scsu do well, but those losses hurt.

    • I agree with the UNH, and NMU tough losses, but we played best when the best were in front of us…i.e. the WHCA! Our head-to-head with MN STATE, UND and DU, says a lot! 7-2-1!!!

      • That may be, but again 9 losses in the division and 14 overall matter for the pairwise. Your probably lucky they caught du, and no dam when they weren’t playing well.

  13. Because st cloud had some bad losses within the league and more on the non conference. Check it out. Swept by unh, northern mich, and there are more. Take a look. I do want to see scsu do well, but those losses hurt.

    • I agree with the UNH, and NMU tough losses, but we played best when the best were in front of us…i.e. the WHCA! Our head-to-head with MN STATE, UND and DU, says a lot! 7-2-1!!!

      • That may be, but again 9 losses in the division and 14 overall matter for the pairwise. Your probably lucky they caught du, and no dam when they weren’t playing well.

    • The numbers say otherwise. Nobody that is close enough to catch them can pick up the necessary pairwise comparisons. Even if Minnesota, say, overtakes them in RPI, they won’t catch them in both TUC record AND Common Opponents Record.

    • post weekend brackets show Quinnipiac in #1 place still. I’m a little surprised. ECAC doesn’t seem as tough as WCHA.

  14. For those that commented on SCSU, I did some research…SCSU is 8-3-1 versus Gophers, UND, DU, and ‘Kato this year. And they are the #1 seed for Final Five. yet, they are PWR #12. Guess those non-conference games are weighted more than a stellar conference record!

    • No but they count they same. St Cloud had a great season but 4 and 5 non conference will hurt you. I wouldn’t worry about it though as there is no scary good team this year. As many points as the gophers have given up down the stretch I can’t believe they are still # 2.

      • Weakest college hockey season ever. The talent pool isn’t great this year, but watch out for BC next year. Their new freshmen are serious.

    • Don’t get carried away. They’re 7-2-1 against MSU, UND, and DU. They’re a mere 4-4 against Minnesota, UMD, Mi-Tech, and Wisconsin. You’ve skewed reality to make your team look better than it is.

    • Useful research: SCSU went 1-3 against TUCs outside the WCHA. That hurts. They were also swept by NMU which seriously damaged their RPI. Lastly they swept a bad UAH team which did nothing for them (sweeping a bad team won’t boost a team’s RPI much if at all).

    • The numbers say otherwise. Nobody that is close enough to catch them can pick up the necessary pairwise comparisons. Even if Minnesota, say, overtakes them in RPI, they won’t catch them in both TUC record AND Common Opponents Record.

    • post weekend brackets show Quinnipiac in #1 place still. I’m a little surprised. ECAC doesn’t seem as tough as WCHA.

  15. For those that commented on SCSU, I did some research…SCSU is 8-3-1 versus Gophers, UND, DU, and ‘Kato this year. And they are the #1 seed for Final Five. yet, they are PWR #12. Guess those non-conference games are weighted more than a stellar conference record!

    • No but they count they same. St Cloud had a great season but 4 and 5 non conference will hurt you. I wouldn’t worry about it though as there is no scary good team this year. As many points as the gophers have given up down the stretch I can’t believe they are still # 2.

      • Weakest college hockey season ever. The talent pool isn’t great this year, but watch out for BC next year. Their new freshmen are serious.

    • Don’t get carried away. They’re 7-2-1 against MSU, UND, and DU. They’re a mere 4-4 against Minnesota, UMD, Mi-Tech, and Wisconsin. You’ve skewed reality to make your team look better than it is.

    • Useful research: SCSU went 1-3 against TUCs outside the WCHA. That hurts. They were also swept by NMU which seriously damaged their RPI. Lastly they swept a bad UAH team which did nothing for them (sweeping a bad team won’t boost a team’s RPI much if at all).

  16. It’s quite simple everyone, the “system” is a BAD system. It’s antiquated, it’s awkward, it’s far to simplistic. The system itself is not flawed, that’s impossible it does what it is designed to do, what is flawed is that its the 21st Century and the Selection Committee is STILL utilizing it. So its a “bad” system to be using.

    But it should be pretty obvious why they continue to use this bad system, and the reason is because it is a system that spreads out the wealth the most. Year after year the WCHA is rated much higher in the other rating systems. The Massey ratings have WCHA teams rated #1, #3, #4, #6, #8, #9 & #19.
    So if the Massey System were used, the WCHA would get 3 #1 seeds, and possibly 6 of the Top 8 seeds in the tourney. Well, we all know this would be bad for Hockey as a whole, as we all saw the NCAA Selection Committee tweak how they placed teams in the NCAA tourney after the 2005 disaster. Well, the WCHA could be so good this year we might get 4 in again, unless they purposely go out of their way to try to stack the deck against the WCHA, forcing the best teams to play each other in the 2nd round, and sending the worst of the bunch out east to face the best teams out there.
    But to the SCSU whiners out there, even the Massey Rating system which seems favorable to WCHA teams, has 4 WCHA teams rated ahead of SCSU, with Wisconsin right behind them.

  17. It’s quite simple everyone, the “system” is a BAD system. It’s antiquated, it’s awkward, it’s far to simplistic. The system itself is not flawed, that’s impossible it does what it is designed to do, what is flawed is that its the 21st Century and the Selection Committee is STILL utilizing it. So its a “bad” system to be using.

    But it should be pretty obvious why they continue to use this bad system, and the reason is because it is a system that spreads out the wealth the most. Year after year the WCHA is rated much higher in the other rating systems. The Massey ratings have WCHA teams rated #1, #3, #4, #6, #8, #9 & #19.
    So if the Massey System were used, the WCHA would get 3 #1 seeds, and possibly 6 of the Top 8 seeds in the tourney. Well, we all know this would be bad for Hockey as a whole, as we all saw the NCAA Selection Committee tweak how they placed teams in the NCAA tourney after the 2005 disaster. Well, the WCHA could be so good this year we might get 4 in again, unless they purposely go out of their way to try to stack the deck against the WCHA, forcing the best teams to play each other in the 2nd round, and sending the worst of the bunch out east to face the best teams out there.
    But to the SCSU whiners out there, even the Massey Rating system which seems favorable to WCHA teams, has 4 WCHA teams rated ahead of SCSU, with Wisconsin right behind them.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here