pz

March 20th, 2010 at 11:05 PM ^

We do have the RPI tiebreaker on Alaska, but I'm not 100% sure if they have to assign the seed based on PWR or just determine whether a tourney berth exists. If we get a 3, it seems like we could plausibly end up in Ft. Wayne with Miami, since they'll be sticking as the top 1. I'd personally have a fresh matchup for the first round (and with our #1 seed if possible), particularly with regard to potentially playing Miami so soon again. http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pwr.php

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 3765

Blazefire

March 20th, 2010 at 11:08 PM ^

I find it really hard to believe they'd pair us up with Miami again so soon. That game was exciting for us, because it was a big win, but for the less engaged audience, it was a boring blow out. They'd want to mix it up a little bit more.

Joined: 04/17/2009

MGoPoints: 25038

pz

March 20th, 2010 at 11:14 PM ^

Miami is very unlikely because they try to do just about anything to keep away from same-conference first round matchups. So, if we're a 4, we're getting shipped, and to me there isn't much difference between the other 3 venues. Found more on the subjectivity 3/4 here: http://www.uscho.com/FAQs/?data=selection They could theoretically bump us to a 3 to keep us closer to home in Ft. Wayne, but then we'd have Miami as the region's 1-seed.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 3765

pz

March 20th, 2010 at 11:19 PM ^

From USCHO: "Though not in its stated list of guidelines, the committee has made a concerted effort in the two years the 16-team field has existed to maintain a strict bracket. In other words, teams are given overall seed numbers, 1-16. The brackets are arranged 1-6-8-9, 2-15-7-10, 3-14-6-11, 4-13-5-12." If we're 12 or 13, this would project us with the 4th #1 seed - likely BC. The other two teams would be UND and potentially Alaska. Seems most likely that this would happen in Worcester, but of course, they're always making caveats about moving teams around to maximize gate revenues, etc, etc.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 3765

ckersh74

March 20th, 2010 at 11:21 PM ^

when it comes to seeding. They're not going to move someone who is #13 in the PWR to a #3 seed and drop someone else. #1-4 are #1 seeds, #5-#8 are #2 seeds, #9-#12 are #3 seeds and the last four teams in the tournament, PWR-wise, are #4 seeds. Plain and simple. They don't jockey the seeds up and down. What they WILL do is move the bands around so that they don't get inter-conference matchups in the first round unless completely unavoidable. Once your seed is set, you may get jockeyed around the regions when it comes time to put the bracket together, but that's it. If you're #12 in the PWR, you're a #3 seed and that part of the discussion is over. It's just a matter of which region you're a #3 seed in. And for the record, I was responding to the post two posts below this one.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 41629

pz

March 20th, 2010 at 11:57 PM ^

that since we're right on the border of 3/4 and there is a private "quality win factor" used to determine overall seedings - which is why the PWR on USCHO isn't necessarily gospel - they could put us at one or another knowing full well what the implication would be for the matchups. That criteria most seriously affects the selection committee's interpretation of the RPI, which would be the tiebreaker in this case, making it relevant. Thus, a bump.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 3765