Hockey pairwise update: Selection Sunday Eve edition
Saturday’s championship (and 3rd place) games caused a couple of changes to the final Pairwise rankings. Michigan had already locked up the #2 overall seed, but there were still a few spots up for grabs entering play on Saturday, and in a couple instances, teams could have ended up as high as #3 overall, and as low as #10 or #11. Here are Saturday’s results:
CCHA championship: Western Michigan beat Michigan
CCHA 3rd place: Miami beat BG
Atlantic Hockey championship: Air Force beat RIT
ECAC championship: Union beat Harvard
ECAC 3rd place: Cornell beat Colgate
Hockey East championship: BC beat Maine
WCHA championship: North Dakota beat Denver
As a result of these…er...results, here are the final Pairwise rankings:
- Boston College
- Michigan
- Union
- North Dakota
- Miami
- Ferris State
- Minn.-Duluth
- Minnesota
- Boston University
- Maine
- Denver
- Mass.-Lowell
- Cornell
- Western Michigan
- Michigan State
- Air Force
The bracketing starts by placing the top four teams in the closest regional, then doing the #2, #3, and #4 seeds so that there are no intraconference matchups in the first round, and to try and have “bracket integrity,” meaning the first round has 1 vs. 16, 2 vs. 15, etc. and the second round would have 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, etc. The two things that can draw things away from bracket integrity are 1) host schools, which in this case means Minnesota, which must be placed in St. Paul, and 2) attendance considerations, so that a couple of 2 or 3 seeds might be switched to ensure better attendance at regionals, and to prevent things like an Eastern regional from having mostly Western teams. With that in mind, here is the bracket I have come up with:
Worcester, MA
1. Boston College
16. Air Force
7. Minn.-Duluth
9. Boston University 10. Maine
St. Paul, MN
4. North Dakota
14. Western Michigan
8. Minnesota
10. Maine 9. Boston University
Green Bay, WI
2. Michigan
13. Cornell
6. Ferris State
11. Denver
Bridgeport, CT
3. Union
15. Michigan State
5. Miami
12. Mass.-Lowell
EDIT: switched BU and Maine to keep the 8-9 and 7-10 matchups in the first round.
This is pretty much the bracket I posted yesterday, but with Western and State switched as a result of Western winning the CCHA. It is also possible that Michigan (along with Cornell) could get put in St. Paul for better bracket integrity. That would basically switch the Michigan-Cornell game with the North Dakota-Western game. I really don’t think this will happen though, since you’d be giving the #2 seed a more distant regional, a more difficult than expected first round game, and a host school in the second round. That’s a trifecta of screwing that I don’t think even the NCAA selection committee is capable of. Plus, the attendance setup is probably better with Michigan in Green Bay and North Dakota in St. Paul.
The Cornell matchup is pretty much a given in the first round. I mentioned this in comments to another post this morning, but that is a pretty tough matchup. Cornell has six shutouts on the year (including their game Saturday), and simply don’t give up a lot of goals (only gave up more than three goals six times all year). They have also had 10 of their last 20 games go to overtime, so be prepared for a close, white-knuckle finish.
So there is my bracket prediction. We’ll find out how right I am tomorrow at noon on ESPNU when the brackets are announced. Go Blue!
March 17th, 2012 at 11:09 PM ^
Everyone else is positive that Michigan will go to Green Bay, and there is good seeding and decent attendance reasons to do that, but I'm still a bit paranoid. The committee has thrown curveballs on location before, and while North Dakota will send thousands to St. Paul their fans will also probably bring better attendance to Green Bay than Michigan will.
I've seen how they travel to Duluth, and with St. Paul set for attendance I can't discount this possibility.
Incredibly, MSU and Miami get a great bracket in return for gagging in their key games. A regional with Lowell (who is pretty good) and Union (who, despite our performance against them, is not) is a great opportunity to make Tampa. This is like Colorado Springs from a few years ago all over again.
Edit: I'll be shocked if UMD isn't in Green Bay for attendance purposes, bracket integrity or otherwise.
March 17th, 2012 at 11:16 PM ^
I agree that the committee would try to put them in Green Bay, but to do so really screws up the bracket. Since #8 Minnesota has to go to St. Paul, that means #1 BC gets paired with the second-highest #2 seed. Also, you'd also have to move Denver to avoid a UMD-Denver matchup in the first round. They would have to be moved either to Worcester or Bridgeport (probably Worcester), which leaves one of the Eastern regionals with only one Eastern team. The attendance gain in Green Bay is not worth the loss of bracket integrity and the attendance loss in an Eastern regional.
March 17th, 2012 at 11:18 PM ^
Just going by what the committee has seen as priorities in the past, I am a little afraid that we might end up in St Paul:
Worcester: 1 Boston College v 16 Air Force, 7 Minnesota-Duluth v 10 Maine
Bridgeport: 3 Union v 15 Michigan State, 6 Ferris State v 12 Massachusetts-Lowell
Green Bay: 4 North Dakota v 14 Western Michigan, 5 Miami v 11 Denver
St Paul: 2 Michigan v 13 Cornell, 8 Minnesota v 9 Boston University
I hope it doesn't happen that way, but I am paranoid enough that I think it will happen that way.
March 17th, 2012 at 11:29 PM ^
I was going to disagree with you, but then I realized you were Alton. I have a hard time believing neither Michigan nor UMD would be in Green Bay, but as you say the committee has pulled this before. And perhaps they can justify it by assuming that the combination of North Dakota and Western will draw more fans than Michigan will--an assumption I cannot completely dispute.
March 18th, 2012 at 12:03 AM ^
Hi, Stephen. I agree that either North Dakota or Minnesota-Duluth will be in Green Bay. I don't think you can justify both of them being there (because 4 v 7 in the second round would be wrong), and I question whether UMD would bring any more fans than North Dakota would. You're in Duluth, so you might have a better feel for that, but nobody travels quite like North Dakota.
So we are left with 2 options to make that happen:
Option 1: 2-Michigan in Green Bay, 4-North Dakota in St Paul. 7-Minnesota Duluth in Green Bay, 8-Minnesota in St Paul, and #1 Boston College stuck with #6 Ferris State.
Option 2: 2-Michigan in St Paul, 4-North Dakota in Green Bay. 8-Minnesota in St Paul, #1 Boston College playing #7 Minnesota-Duluth.
Unfortunately for Michigan, option 2 looks like it gives slightly better bracket integrity. I hope I'm wrong.
March 17th, 2012 at 11:29 PM ^
That would be just brutal for Michigan, which is why I don't think it happens. However, it's pretty well-thought out, and if the committee doesn't go with my bracket, I'd bet they go with yours. It has better second round bracket integrity than mine. Also, you made me reconsider whether Maine or BU would end up in Worcester. I think you're right that they'll keep the 8-9 and 7-10 pairings, so I'm switching them in my bracket.
March 18th, 2012 at 12:08 AM ^
As I've looked at the possibilies more and more, I've moved away from us in Green Bay and into St. Paul is just as likely. The only negative thing about this bracket is that the attendance in Bridgeport would be atrocious. But would the NCAA sacrifice one region attendance for more bracket integrity. I'm not sure. If we do get sent to St. Paul, I expect the 4 seeds to be shuffled from what is above.
Worcester: 1 Boston College v 15 Michigan State, 7 Minnesota-Duluth v 10 Maine
Bridgeport: 3 Union v 14 Western Michigan, 6 Ferris State v 12 Massachusetts-Lowell
Green Bay: 4 North Dakota v 13 Cornell, 5 Miami v 11 Denver
St Paul: 2 Michigan v 16 Air Force, 8 Minnesota v 9 Boston University
March 17th, 2012 at 11:36 PM ^
I will respect an ECAC hockey team in the tournament when they can actually win something. Maybe I'm wrong here but it seems to me like they're the Big East of hockey, high scoring teams who play bad defense and take advantage of a weak conference.
March 17th, 2012 at 11:43 PM ^
The EZAC does occasionally win some games and make some noise, but the Big East at least knows what it is. It doesn't get free mathematical trips to the national championship game based on a lousy schedule; they get weeded out pretty well.
March 17th, 2012 at 11:56 PM ^
The ECAC is a pretty weak conference, especially this year. We beat St. Lawrence 10-3 early in the year, and they just missed a .500 record in the ECAC. However, Cornell is at least a solid defensive team (ranked 12th overall, albeit against a weak schedule), and has some good wins on their resume (1-0-1 against both Union and at Colorado College). They're comparitively weak offensively, but this sets up as a 2-1 or 2-0 kind of game, and there have been a rash of #4 seeds winning in the first round lately, so on the whole I wish Harvard had won so that we would have played them instead.
March 18th, 2012 at 12:02 AM ^
I'm glad we get an ECAC team but I don't think Cornell is a pushover by any means. Close games tend to be random games, and we've lost our share of those in the past.
I think we have a good chance to make a run, but (like three years ago) a good chance to flame out. Your point about #1 seed upsets is well-made.
At least the big east wins some BCS games sometimes. A ECAC team hasn't even made the frozen four since '03. I expect Cornell and Union to both lose in their regionals
I've always found the committee's obsession with bracket integrity maddening considering the wild swings in pwr ranking that occur just about weekly. The pwr is a decent mechanism for picking the field of 16 teams in that its transparency has removed all controversy over who gets left out, and I suppose it's generally useful to establish clusters of teams as 1 through 4 seeds. But the bottom line is that most years, beyond the clear 1 or 2 standout teams (NoDak last year, BC this year) and the AHA champ on the other end, the margin between any two teams in the middle of the pack is almost nonexistent. When North Dakota can arrive in St. Paul for the Final Five with the realistic possibility of finishing as a 4 seed or a 1 seed, it seems a bit ridiculous to sacrifice attendance in order to keep a 7 vs. 10 matchup intact instead of, for example, a 7 vs. 9 or 12. As Michigan fans, would we feel a substantially different level of anxiety over facing any of these teams in the tournament: Ferris (#6), Denver (#11), BU(#9), Miami(#5), Western(#14), Duluth (#7)? These teams seem about equally scary to me.
With Minnesota hosting (and actually qualifying!), bracket integrity will be shot no matter what the committee does this year, which pleases me. Needless to say I would not send BU out west or Duluth out east in order to preserve an 8-9 or 7-10 matchup, though I fully expect the committee to do this.
March 18th, 2012 at 10:46 AM ^
One thing I haven't heard anyone bring up is the relative sizes of the arenas.
The Resch Center in Green Bay has a capacity of approx. 10,000. The Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul seats around 18,000. While it's certainly possible that Minnesota fans sell out the X on their own, coming close to filling up Resch isn't as hard as if it was an NHL arena. Does the committee really think it needs ND there to sell, say, 8-9k tickets in GB? Or might they gain just as much in attendance from placing ND in St. Paul and ensuring they sell all 18,064 seats there.
I dunno, at this point, I'm grasping for straws as to why Michigan should go to GB.
I fully expect our first round matchup to be in Guam with the Frozen Four on Jupiter.
March 18th, 2012 at 12:12 PM ^
Green Bay here we come!
March 18th, 2012 at 12:52 PM ^
So, you were 100% correct in your bracket prediction. That's awesome.
Holy crap. Props. That's impressive.
Comments