It seems to me that people are really missing the big picture. As far as I see it, those were the best two teams playing, and that might as well been the championship! I think the system is a mess... and if they really want it to work move teams around so you get the best teams in the finals! How sad this entire thing is!
Hats off to a great game!
NORTH DAKOTA vs. MINNESOTA
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
-
east hockey
- Site Admin
- Posts: 7273
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 8:33 pm
- Location: Proctor, MN
While I think that Pairwise in general does a pretty good job of ranking teams, it has one drawback and one other point which leaves it open to suspicion:THEGunslinger wrote:It seems to me that people are really missing the big picture. As far as I see it, those were the best two teams playing, and that might as well been the championship! I think the system is a mess... and if they really want it to work move teams around so you get the best teams in the finals! How sad this entire thing is!
Hats off to a great game!
1. It provides no reward for momentum. A game won in the first week of the season means the same as winning that game during the playoffs. Had momentum been figured in, North Dakota would have been seeded higher, as had Boston College. Minnesota would have been seeded lower. Heck, even PS2 and PS3 take momentum into account.
2. That "good wins" bonus ; what the heck does that mean, how is it calculated, and why are they so private about how it works? It can lead to charges of "back room tactics" as it's now handled, despite what they claim at uscho.com.
Lee
Message Board arsonist since 2005
Egomaniac since 2006
Egomaniac since 2006
-
Blue Breeze
- Posts: 931
- Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 1:31 pm
I agree on both points. No way is UND a 3 seed if the committee takes away all the pointless numbers and places them on merit. Minnesota also wouldn't be the #1 overall and neither team would end up in the same region. I'd also add another factor. Teams can be helped by a loss. That just doesn't make sense to me. If a team loses to a team and they in turn become a TUC, the loss helps them more than a win would. That's garbage IMO, which is why I would prefer the KRACH system places teams. I'd prefer they not take these computer systems into account whatsoever, but if they're going to, use one with less flaws.east hockey wrote:While I think that Pairwise in general does a pretty good job of ranking teams, it has one drawback and one other point which leaves it open to suspicion:THEGunslinger wrote:It seems to me that people are really missing the big picture. As far as I see it, those were the best two teams playing, and that might as well been the championship! I think the system is a mess... and if they really want it to work move teams around so you get the best teams in the finals! How sad this entire thing is!
Hats off to a great game!
1. It provides no reward for momentum. A game won in the first week of the season means the same as winning that game during the playoffs. Had momentum been figured in, North Dakota would have been seeded higher, as had Boston College. Minnesota would have been seeded lower. Heck, even PS2 and PS3 take momentum into account.
2. That "good wins" bonus ; what the heck does that mean, how is it calculated, and why are they so private about how it works? It can lead to charges of "back room tactics" as it's now handled, despite what they claim at uscho.com.
Lee