Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - spwood

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]
Women's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: March 01, 2014, 07:35:43 pm »
As Norwich also need OT to win a QF game, it's been a strange weekend in women's hockey.  Bracketology should be interesting this week.....

Women's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: February 27, 2014, 01:45:40 pm »
Yup. As mentioned on the men's discussion last sure seems counterintuitive to have a loss to a good team hurt you much more than one to a lesser team.

Plattsburgh's men had a team that was a perfect example of this a few years ago.  They were a .500 team in SUNY play (barely earning a QF home game), but they went unbeaten (or nearly unbeaten) in their tough non-conference schedule.  Most fans thought they were toast due to their overall schedule, but they turned out to be a highly rated Pool C candidate.  The system is not perfect, but no one has come up with that perfect system yet.

Women's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: February 27, 2014, 10:29:14 am »
With the win over Middlebury tonight, Norwich likely jumps to #2 in the East and would host Elmira in a QF game while Middlebury travels to Plattsburgh.

Yup.  Considering the Pool C situation is there really any way this becomes anything other than elementary?  Even if Midd or NU gets upset in conference tournament all its going to do is slide everyone in Pool C down a peg and I think the pecking order there will be pretty straightforward.

Is this why we didn't need (get) a Bracketology this week? ;D

Women's hockey / Re: ECAC West Tiebreaker?
« on: February 24, 2014, 10:50:40 am »
According to an ECAC Twitter feed, Plattsburgh State has won the toss and elected to receive the ECAC West tournament hosting rights.

Steve Wood

Women's hockey / Re: ECAC West Tiebreaker?
« on: February 23, 2014, 08:23:35 pm »
So now that the seemingly inevitable has happened, when will we know something?

Women's hockey / ECAC West Tiebreaker?
« on: February 22, 2014, 08:37:09 am »
There is conflicting information in Plattsburgh about the ECAC West tie-breaking procedures.  Most of the fans were under the impression that record against common opponents was one of the criteria.  However, news started making the rounds that is no longer considered and hosting for the ECAC West playoffs may come down to a coin toss.  I have three questions:

1.  When did the rules change?  I had the impression from people who would know that Plattsburgh had the tie breaker advantage.  I fully admit that my impression could have been wrong because now I can't remember where that impression came from.

2.  If there's going to be a coin toss, how will it be conducted?  Not to be paranoid or anything, but the way this information has come out has me a little paranoid toward the ECAC.  Probably unfounded, but what can I say?  I'm getting old?

3.  This was an entirely foreseeable possibility the way the ECAC West is constructed.  How do you implement tie breaking procedures that can easily end in a coin toss?  That seems to be horribly bad planning by the league.  Also, if you make a change this big, as the NCAA did with its selection criteria this year, you should make it as public as possible.

OK, rant over.  Any answers would be appreciated!

Men's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: February 20, 2014, 08:29:02 am »
St. Thomas over UWEC even though UWEC wins H2H?

Note: I haven't looked at any numbers just a quick thought there.

Yea, UWEC's RNK is killing them (1-5-0). Getting swept by UWSP really did a tune on their resume. St. Thomas also holds a good sized advantage in WIN and COP, not to mention last 25% record.

EDIT: There is actually a pretty strong case to be made for St. Thomas to move ahead of Adrian for 3W.

I agree, UWEC's RNK really killed them. They have a very strong D group this season. Goaltending was able shine against the weaker competition. Really shine. But, when faced with the challenge of the tougher competition they were not able to step up with the challenge. Not the same as last season. Too bad they didn't roll through their depth a little and see what more they would have had to bring to the table.

Yeah, apparently it's better to have no games with ranked teams (see Utica)..... ???

Women's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: February 20, 2014, 08:28:03 am »
As a Plattsburgh fan (with last year's experience), I'd hate to face either team a third time.  Oh well, line 'em up I guess.  The ladies know what they have to do!  I do feel this team is susceptible to a hot goaltender.  And to me, that's more likely to come from Middlebury than Norwich.

Women's hockey / 2/10/14 Poll
« on: February 10, 2014, 03:31:36 pm »
I would love to know which voter get Elmira a #1 vote....they were badly outshot this weekend in both games and were voted #1 over two one loss teams that have both beaten the Eagles.... ???

Men's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: February 10, 2014, 12:50:17 pm »
Being nitpicky here, but it really changes your analysis.  Technically, Geneseo I believe controls its own destiny in SUNY due to having more conference wins than Plattsburgh does.  Assuming you added Geneseo as the SUNYAC rep, would Plattsburgh replace Norwich in your analysis?

Women's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: February 06, 2014, 02:00:01 pm »
No easy match-ups out there, is there?  Which Pool C is the most vulnerable to being bumped if when an upset occurs?  There aren't any of those eastern teams I want to see for a third (or possibly fourth) time in a season.....see Plattsburgh v. Middlebury 2012/13.

Men's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: January 28, 2014, 08:52:27 am »
I like having less teams ranked.  That really messed with the Regional Rankings.  The #14 and #15 teams in the East (which were never in contention for a bid), could have a big impact on record against ranked teams.  Question, is there any provision to include the games against auto bid teams that aren't in the regional rankings?  It does seem that teams that are going to be in the NCAA tourney should be included in the criteria...

Men's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: January 20, 2014, 10:35:14 pm »
As do I, but I was thinking of the fuel the folks living on the grassy knoll will have at year end...

Men's hockey / Re: 2014 Bracketology
« on: January 20, 2014, 04:23:25 pm »
Finally....I was beginning to think I wasn't wanted :'(!  It took awhile to get my account activated.  I am curious.  If ranked teams can become unranked, doesn't this make the selection process even more secret since the last ranking isn't published?  It gives the selection committees even more ways to manipulate who it puts up for at-large consideration.  To me, this doesn't make things better...

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11]