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 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11
Men's hockey / Re: 2017's here.
« on: March 01, 2017, 05:52:51 pm »
As a Hobart fan, I hate to point this out but I believe the NCAA data this week had a typo. The data released showed Hobart with a RNK of .500 (2-2-2)....but when Geneseo dropped out of the rankings I believe this should have been updated to 1-2-2...or .400.

Hobart has played Babson twice (1-0-1), Trinity once (0-0-1) and Utica twice (0-2-0).

I was under the impression that the old "once ranked, always ranked" system was changed several years ago....correct?


I could be wrong, but I think they RNK uses last week's ranked teams until the final ranking.  I'm sure Mr. Webb can answer that question better.

Men's hockey / Re: 2017's here.
« on: February 15, 2017, 04:39:51 pm »
I would still love an explanation of how Endicott's schedule rates out as being so strong.  The eye test doesn't seem to give Endicott nearly the respect that the NCAA does.

Women's hockey / Re: ECAC West Tiebreaker?
« on: February 05, 2017, 11:47:11 am »
OK, so let's resurrect this topic for the 2016/2017 season.  With a split next weekend a distinct possibility, I thought I'd ask the annual question of what are the ECAC West tiebreaking procedures this year?

Men's hockey / Re: Attrition
« on: October 29, 2016, 09:20:31 am »
Then we agree to disagree.  This is Div III hockey, not Little League.  The coach gets to run his program to get the best possible outcome (wins), until the Administration tells him otherwise.  You're asking a coach whose job depends on results (certainly the case in Norwich) to take an inferior roster because the incumbent kid is entitled?  How very 2016...

Men's hockey / Re: Attrition
« on: October 28, 2016, 09:07:42 am »
Maybe "attrition" or cuts are not fair, but then these aren't 10 year old midget hockey players either.  These are twenty-something year old men.  Life is not necessarily fair.  If playing time was guaranteed, would you get the same effort from them?  When these players were making their decisions, did Norwich's winning history play a part?  Of course it did.  If the coaches no long think this player is sufficiently contributing to that winning, what are they supposed to do?

I'm sure that for any player that Norwich is recruiting, Norwich is not their only option.  They made a decision to go to Northfield.  I'm sorry for the players that it doesn't work out for, but this isn't kindergarten and everyone doesn't get a participation trophy.  These aren't young kids being duped by evil adults.  These are young adults who have to know they are receiving a sales pitch and make their decision accordingly.

Men's hockey / Re: 2016 Bracketology
« on: March 07, 2016, 02:09:30 pm »
Undoubtedly the scheduling constraints were "encouraged" from administration, but we all know that where there's a will, there's a way. And I've got to believe Emery has as much credibility with his administration as any coach in the SUNYAC ... i.e. we're talking only a few hundred extra dollars per trip.

It's more than a few hundred dollars because none of their out of conference trips are overnight (except the Middlebury/Williams weekend every other year).  I think if Emery really had his choice, he'd play a Babson or a Hobart.  It seems any fundraising the team does is for charitable purposes so I'm not sure raising funds by the team itself is an option either.

As I contradict myself, the baseball and softball teams make long trips to Florida or South Carolina each year so who knows. 

Men's hockey / Re: 2016 Bracketology
« on: March 07, 2016, 11:44:02 am »
If indeed SOS was the tipping point between PSU and Williams ... Interestingly and coincidentally, Plattsburgh made a conscious decision a few years back to schedule much closer to home, which excluded some of the ECAC/W (Elmira) teams.

Conversely, the NESCAC has done exactly the opposite, and scheduled Home and Home series with the highest SOS league teams (ECAC/W), whereas a few years back, (and until Trinity got hosed) the NESCAC as a whole didn't have much to do with teams from outside their geographic area. (There are some interesting "elitist" threads on USCHO about this topic)

Emery may want to re-think his scheduling strategy.

Some of this was forced on Plattsburgh with the addition of Morrisville and Canton to the schedule.  Also, the thought (and hope) was that Middlebury and Norwich (and probably up and coming Castleton as well) were strong enough opponents that SOS would still be strong.  Also, the travel restriction was probably not his doing alone... don't you think that nudge came from upstairs?

P.S. Webb - I  hope I speak for the few of us that still follow D3 ... we really appreciate your time, effort and expertise.

Without a doubt.... just wish you weren't so damn accurate this year!

Men's hockey / Re: 2016 Bracketology
« on: March 06, 2016, 09:35:18 pm »
I've been following this process for a long time now and I still don't understand what is significant for SOS.  .538 is significant over .525?  I'm not saying I think Plattsburgh is getting in, I'm just looking for more information on what is significant in each of the criteria...

Men's hockey / Re: 2016 Bracketology
« on: March 06, 2016, 01:10:00 pm »
Despite Plattsburgh's destruction last night (although Plattsburgh did outshoot the Knights), are they still seriously in the mix for Pool C?

I thought the Plattsburgh game looked a lot like the Oswego @ Plattsburgh regular season game earlier in the year.  There was a stretch where Fitchburg either drained a 3 or walked in for a layup.  Defense completely deserted the Cards for a significant stretch.  They also had several careless unforced turnovers, especially late.  Finally, why run the clock all the way down to 15 seconds, call timeout, then take a two point shot? 

It was a very frustrating end to a very exciting season.

Women's hockey / Re: 2016 Bracketology
« on: March 05, 2016, 01:21:25 pm »
Just to make the bubble teams a little nervous.... Utica leads Elmira 4-0 at the end of two.  2 breakaway goals (one shorthanded) and a power play.  Utica goalie played an amazing first period (Emira outshot the Pioneers 16-7 in the first), but the second was all Utica as they outshot Elmira 12-6 and chased the starting goaltender 5 minutes into the second period...

Final is 5-1 Utica.  I think Elmira needs either Plattsburgh or Adrian to win their AQ or they are in a dogfight with Adrian for a Pool C.

Women's hockey / Re: 2016 Bracketology
« on: March 04, 2016, 06:43:22 am »
Pretty easy Bracketology again this week with the awful Elmira @ Adrian first round matchup.  The only discussion on the "other board" is the Norwich SID trying to convince us that Norwich will be in line for a Pool C bid if Amherst beats Middlebury.  I don't see it, as for them to be in competition, both Middlebury and Norwich would both lose again.  What do you think?

Men's hockey / Re: 2016 Bracketology
« on: March 01, 2016, 03:40:12 pm »

Men's East

Men's West

We're going to need these updated for the current week!  The NCAA's links are still *&%$#@^ broken.... ;D

I'd love to see how Endicott got themselves ranked... it's not to help out anyone else in the region.  Their only game against a ranked team is a win over Babson.

East Region / Re: MBB: State University of New York Athletic Conference
« on: February 29, 2016, 07:31:01 pm »
The two first round games in Plattsburgh will be played, according to the Cardinals athletics website, on Friday evening.  The Trinity / Johnson & Wales game will tip at 5:30 with Plattsburgh and Fitchburg State playing at 7:30.

East Region / Re: MBB: State University of New York Athletic Conference
« on: February 27, 2016, 07:51:55 pm »
Those who have "done the math" and rated the Pool C contenders (see the Pool C board under Multi-regional topics) suggest that Oswego is still in pretty good shape to this point. I think there would have to be a few more upsets to really put them in trouble.

I do take pause however given Plattsburgh's situation in previous year.

The Lakers were #5 in the east on Wednesday.  Is one win over Plattsburgh worth that much?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11