Author Topic: 2012 DIII Bracketology  (Read 4121 times)

Offline Matt R

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
2012 DIII Bracketology
« on: February 20, 2012, 11:48:30 am »
Well, it's that time of year again. I am not going to get into detail about how the process works, if you are unsure you can check out Josh's column for the men's bracketology. The process is the same. The difference for the women's tourney is it is an 8 team field made of up 5 AQ's and 3 Pool C spots.

First let's take a look at the current NCAA Rankings.

WOMEN
1 Rochester Institute of Technology
2 Norwich
3 Middlebury
4 Amherst
5 Elmira
6 Plattsburgh State
7 Manhattanville
8 Bowdoin
9 Trinity (Connecticut)

West Region
1 Gustavus Adolphus
2 Wisconsin-River Falls
3 Concordia-Moorhead
4 Wisconsin-Superior
5 St. Thomas
6 Lake Forest
7 St. Scholastica

Next let's apply the AQ's

ECAC East- Norwich
ECAC West- RIT
NESCAC- Middlebury
MIAC- Gustavus Adolphus
NCHA- Wis. River Falls

Next we will take the top three remaining teams from each region to compare them for Pool C purposes.

East
1-Amherst
2-Elmira
3-Plattsburgh

West
1- Concordia-Moorhead
2- Wis. Superior
3- St. Thomas

Amherst vs. Concordia-Moorhead
This one isn't really close at all, Amherst takes it fairly easily.

Next we will compare Elmira and Concordia.
This one is much closer as SOS is a wash, Elmira has a significant lead in Win% while Concordia has an advantage in record vs. ranked teams. Having said that, Elmira still comes out on top based on their strong Win%.

Lastly, let's compare Plattsburgh and Concordia.
Plattsburgh has the lead in Win% and SOS while Concordia takes record vs. Ranked teams. After reviewing secondary criteria with this the edge has to go to Plattsburgh.

Which leaves us with a field consisting of:

East
1- RIT
2- Norwich
3- Middlebury
4- Amherst
5- Elmira
6- Plattsburgh

West
1- Gustavus Adolphus
2- Wis. River Falls

NCAA Quarterfinals
Plattsburgh @ RIT
Amherst @ Middlebury
Elmira @ Norwich
UWRF @ GAC

The PSU/RIT winner will play the Amherst Midd winner while the WRF/GAC winner will play the Elmira/Norwich winner in the NCAA Semi's.

Offline Derek Dunning

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 41
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Norwich SID
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2012, 04:25:49 pm »
Matt,

I know that in past year's the NCAA has tried to the best of their ability to avoid intra-conference matchups in the first round when they could.

That was part of the reason why Norwich didn't play Manhattanville in the NCAA Play-In Round last year and instead got the bye to the Frozen Four.

As long as that rule is still in place, I think there might be some adjustments to the pairings you posted.

RIT hosts Amherst
Norwich hosts Elmira
Middlebury hosts Plattsburgh

Now obviously we lose a little bit of bracket integrity with RIT having to play the No. 4 seed instead of the lowest seed and Middlebury as the No. 3 seed hosting the lowest seed.

The counter arguement that was presented to me that also might factor in to the process is the NCAA might also want to avoid having three teams from one conference in the Frozen Four, which could happen in the scenario I described.

Tomorrow's NCAA rankings will be interesting since Middlebury went 0-1-1 on the week to the No. 2 ranked and No. 6 ranked teams in last week's poll.

I have a feeling Amherst might jump ahead of Middlebury tomorrow. Other than that, I don't think there will be any changes in the East teams at least.


Offline Matt R

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2012, 09:59:59 pm »
Matt,

I know that in past year's the NCAA has tried to the best of their ability to avoid intra-conference matchups in the first round when they could.

That was part of the reason why Norwich didn't play Manhattanville in the NCAA Play-In Round last year and instead got the bye to the Frozen Four.

As long as that rule is still in place, I think there might be some adjustments to the pairings you posted.

RIT hosts Amherst
Norwich hosts Elmira
Middlebury hosts Plattsburgh

Now obviously we lose a little bit of bracket integrity with RIT having to play the No. 4 seed instead of the lowest seed and Middlebury as the No. 3 seed hosting the lowest seed.

The counter arguement that was presented to me that also might factor in to the process is the NCAA might also want to avoid having three teams from one conference in the Frozen Four, which could happen in the scenario I described.

Tomorrow's NCAA rankings will be interesting since Middlebury went 0-1-1 on the week to the No. 2 ranked and No. 6 ranked teams in last week's poll.

I have a feeling Amherst might jump ahead of Middlebury tomorrow. Other than that, I don't think there will be any changes in the East teams at least.

While it does state in the NCAA manual that teams from the same conference do not need to play each other in the NCAA Quarters, it does not say that there should be any effort to prevent it from happening. Looking back through the year, there are several instances of teams from the same league facing off in the first round (most have actually been Plattsburgh vs Elmira).

Also, Norwich received the first round bye last year solely because RIT was forced to play Adrian due to the requirement to limit flights in the first round. Norwich was the next highest seed in line and was awarded the bye. It had nothing to due with Manhattanville.

Having said that, it's entirely possible they do that this year, but I would be very very shocked if they do, for two reasons. The first, as you mentioned they will not want 3 teams from the same conference in the FF. Secondly, to my knowledge, and taking a look at every years NCAA first round match-ups, they have never gone out of their way to avoid these match-ups before.

Additionally, we likely wont have to worry about this because, as always, there will be an upset somewhere and a team not currently in the discussion will snag an AQ.

Offline Matt R

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2012, 02:53:24 pm »
Alright everyone, here we go with this week's edition of projecting the field.

Here are my projections for this week's NCAA Rankings

East
1- RIT
2- Norwich
3- Amherst
4- Middlebury
5- Plattsburgh
6- Elmira
7- Manhattanville
8- Bowdoin
9- Trinity

West
1- GAC
2- UWRF
3- Concordia MN
4- UWS
5- St. Thomas
6- Adrian
7- Lake Forest

Now let's add the AQ's

ECAC East-  Norwich
ECAC West-  RIT
NESCAC- Middlebury
NCHA- UWRF
MIAC- GAC

Now let's review out Pool C teams

East
1- Amherst
2- Plattsburgh
3- Elmira

West
1- Concordia MN
2- UWS
3- St. Thomas

First, we look at Amherst and Concordia and we see it's not even close. Amherst grabs the first spot.

Next we match up Plattsburgh and Concordia. (see above) Plattsburgh grabs the 2nd spot.

Lastly we review Elmira and Concordia and this really isn't close either as the Eagles snag the 3rd spot.

It appears that Concordia's tie combined with Augsburg poor record really crushed their numbers across the board.

At this point, Elmira is in, but they need to be rooting very hard for GAC, Norwich and potentially UWRF to not get upset or they will likely be golfing in March.

Which brings us to a field of.

EAST
1- RIT
2- Norwich
3- Amherst
4- Middlebury
5- Plattsburgh
6- Elmira

WEST
1- GAC
2- UWRF

NCAA Quarterfinals
Elmira @ RIT
Middlebury @ Amherst
UWRF @ GAC
Plattsburgh @ Norwich

Offline NittanyLion95

  • Junior Varsity
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #4 on: February 28, 2012, 04:32:03 pm »
Elmira didn't drop following their loss to Potsdam?  The NCAA page isn't working very well, so I can't go look at the raw numbers.  Does this surprise anyone?

Offline Derek Dunning

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 41
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Norwich SID
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #5 on: February 28, 2012, 06:41:14 pm »
Elmira didn't drop following their loss to Potsdam?  The NCAA page isn't working very well, so I can't go look at the raw numbers.  Does this surprise anyone?

At first I was surprised...But, after looking at the numbers, Elmira still beats Plattsburgh in the comparison.

Elmira vs. Plattsburgh
WIN 0.7885 1 0.7400 0
SOS 0.5349 0 0.5563 1
H2H 1- 1- 0 0 1- 1- 0 0
COP 17- 4- 1 1 15- 4- 3 0
RNK 4-4-1 1    4-5-2 0
Pts: 3 1

Elmira takes winning percentage, record vs. ranked teams and common opponents currently.

It actually doesn't look like Plattsburgh can pass Elmira in the rankings unless the Cardinals win the ECAC West, which would get them into the tournament anyway. Plattsburgh can't take winning percentage and common opponents away without winning both games. A loss in the semifinals or championship would keep their numbers below Elmiras.

Now, the only way things change is if the committee ranks Oswego or Potsdam. If the committee ranked one of those two teams, it would give Plattsburgh a boost numbers wise that would hurt Elmira.

It's crazy to think that technically, if you go by the numbers, Elmira could still get into the tournament over Plattsburgh should they both be looking for Pool C's even with Elmira losing in the play-in game and Plattsburgh possibly making the ECAC West finals.

Offline Derek Dunning

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 41
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Norwich SID
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #6 on: February 28, 2012, 07:05:00 pm »
Elmira didn't drop following their loss to Potsdam?  The NCAA page isn't working very well, so I can't go look at the raw numbers.  Does this surprise anyone?

At first when I looked at the rankings I was surprised, but after careful review of the numbers, Elmira is still correctly listed ahead of Plattsburgh.

Elmira vs Plattsburgh
WIN 0.7885 1 0.7400 0
SOS 0.5349 0 0.5563 1
H2H 1- 1- 0 0 1- 1- 0 0
COP 17- 4- 1 1 15- 4- 3 0
RNK 4-4-1 1 4-5-2   
PTS 3 1

Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pwc/d-iii-women-east/team-by-team/#ixzz1niyuT5Bl

Elmira takes winning percentage, record vs. NCAA ranked teams and common opponents currenty.

It actually doesn't look like Plattsburgh can pass Elmira in the rankings unless the Cardinals win the ECAC West, which would get them into the tournament anyway. Plattsburgh can't take winning percentage and common opponents away without winning both games. A loss in the semifinals or championship would keep their numbers below Elmira's.

Now, the only way things change is if the committee ranks Oswego or Potsdam. If the committee ranked one of those two teams it would give Plattsburgh a boost numbers wise that would hurt Elmira.

It's crazy to think that technically, if you go by the numbers, Elmira could still get into the tournament over Plattsburgh should they both be looking for Pool C's even with Elmira losing in the play-in game and Plattsburgh possibly making the ECAC West finals.

Offline Scott Bridges

  • Junior Varsity
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #7 on: February 28, 2012, 11:06:41 pm »
Elmira didn't drop following their loss to Potsdam?  The NCAA page isn't working very well, so I can't go look at the raw numbers.  Does this surprise anyone?
It's crazy to think that technically, if you go by the numbers, Elmira could still get into the tournament over Plattsburgh should they both be looking for Pool C's even with Elmira losing in the play-in game and Plattsburgh possibly making the ECAC West finals.
It's not crazy; the selection looks at the entire season for at large bids.  Making it one game farther in the conference playoffs doesn't have too much bearing when you're looking at 25-27 games. It might look sort of odd on its face, but when you look at the selection criteria it makes perfect sense.

Offline Derek Dunning

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 41
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Norwich SID
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #8 on: February 29, 2012, 11:09:01 am »
Elmira didn't drop following their loss to Potsdam?  The NCAA page isn't working very well, so I can't go look at the raw numbers.  Does this surprise anyone?
It's crazy to think that technically, if you go by the numbers, Elmira could still get into the tournament over Plattsburgh should they both be looking for Pool C's even with Elmira losing in the play-in game and Plattsburgh possibly making the ECAC West finals.
It's not crazy; the selection looks at the entire season for at large bids.  Making it one game farther in the conference playoffs doesn't have too much bearing when you're looking at 25-27 games. It might look sort of odd on its face, but when you look at the selection criteria it makes perfect sense.

Which is exactly what I just said? ;)

Offline Steve Wiitala

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 281
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • D3hockey.com Computer Rankings Specialist
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #9 on: February 29, 2012, 02:36:31 pm »
Elmira didn't drop following their loss to Potsdam?  The NCAA page isn't working very well, so I can't go look at the raw numbers.  Does this surprise anyone?

Losing to an unranked team costs you a lot less than losing to a ranked team.  That is one of the counter-intuitive features of criteria.  If you are going to lose games, lose them to bad teams.  You will be better off.
D3hockey.com computer rankings specialist

Offline Matt R

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2012 DIII Bracketology
« Reply #10 on: March 05, 2012, 10:03:12 am »
The field is set

Concordia @ RIT
Plattsburgh @ Middlebury
Amherst @ Norwich
UWRF @ GAC