We’re at that time of the year where one thing is on everyone’s minds.
Will my team make the NCAA tournament? Where does it sit in the PairWise Rankings (PWR)?
Those of you that are veterans of the college hockey scene know that it is all about the PairWise Rankings. This is USCHO’s numerical approach that simulates the way the NCAA Division I men’s ice hockey committee chooses the teams that make the NCAA tournament.
Since USCHO began the PairWise Rankings, we have correctly identified all of the teams that have been selected to the NCAA tournament.
Five of the last six years, I am the only prognosticator to have correctly predicted the exact brackets for the NCAA tournament, meaning that I have predicted how the committee thought when putting together the brackets.
With that in mind, it’s time once again to do what we like to call Bracketology, college hockey style. It’s our weekly look at how I believe the NCAA tournament might look like come selection time, using what we know now.
It’s a look into the possible thought processes behind selecting and seeding the NCAA tournament teams.
This is not a be-all, end-all analysis of the bracket. I am trying to give you, the reader, an idea of what the committee might be thinking and not exactly what they are thinking.
This is the next installment of Bracketology for 2017, and we’ll be bringing you a new one every week until we make our final picks before the field is announced on March 19.
If you want to skip the inner workings and get to the results of the analysis, then click here.
Here are the facts:
• Sixteen teams are selected to participate in the national tournament.
• There are four regional sites (East – Providence, R.I.; Northeast – Manchester, N.H.; Midwest – Cincinnati, Ohio; West – Fargo, N.D.).
• A host institution that is invited to the tournament plays in the regional for which it is the host and cannot be moved. The host institutions this year: Brown in Providence, New Hampshire in Manchester, Miami in Cincinnati and North Dakota in Fargo.
• Seedings will not be switched. To avoid undesirable first-round matchups, including intra-conference games (see below), teams will be moved among regionals, not reseeded.
Here are the NCAA’s guidelines on the matter, from the 2015 pre-championship manual:
In setting up the tournament, the committee begins with a list of priorities to ensure a successful tournament on all fronts, including competitive equity, financial success and the likelihood of a playoff-type atmosphere at each regional site. For this model, the following is a basic set of priorities:
1. Once the six automatic qualifiers and 10 at-large teams are selected, the next step is to develop four groups from the committee’s rankings of 1-16. The top four teams are No. 1 seeds and will be placed in the bracket so that if all four teams advance to the Men’s Frozen Four, the No. 1 seed will play the No. 4 seed and the No. 2 seed will play the No. 3 seed in the semifinals. The next four are targeted as No. 2 seeds. The next four are No. 3 seeds and the last four are No. 4 seeds.
2. Step two is to place the home teams. Host institutions that qualify will be placed at home.
3. Step three is to fill in the bracket so that first-round conference matchups are avoided, unless it corrupts the integrity of the bracket. If five or more teams from one conference are selected to the championship, then the integrity of the bracket will be protected (i.e., maintaining the pairing process according to seed will take priority over avoidance of first-round conference matchups). To complete each regional, the committee assigns one team from each of the remaining seeded groups so there is a No. 1, No. 2, No. 3 and No. 4 seed at each regional site.
Given these facts, here is the top 16 of the current PairWise Rankings (PWR), and the conference leaders through all games of January 31:
1 Minnesota-Duluth
2 Denver
3 Boston University
4 Western Michigan
5 Penn State
6 Union
7 Minnesota
8 Harvard
9 North Dakota
10 Boston College
11 Providence
12 Vermont
13 Massachusetts-Lowell
14 St. Lawrence
15 Ohio State
16 St. Cloud State
18 Wisconsin
28 Bemidji State
29t Canisius
Current conference leaders based on winning percentage:
Atlantic Hockey: Canisius
Big Ten: Wisconsin (wins tiebreaker on better record vs Ohio State)
ECAC Hockey: Union
Hockey East: Boston College
NCHC: Minnesota-Duluth (wins tiebreaker for most conference wins)
WCHA: Bemidji State
Notes
• Bracketology assumes that the season has ended and there are no more games to be played — i.e., the NCAA tournament starts tomorrow.
• Because there are an uneven amount of games played inside each conference, I will be using winning percentage, not points accumulated, to determine the current leader in each conference. This team is my assumed conference tournament champion after applying the tiebreakers.
Step one
From the committee’s report, choose the 16 teams in the tournament.
We break ties in the PWR by looking at the individual comparisons among the tied teams, and add in any current league leaders that are not currently in the top 16. The only teams that are not are Wisconsin, Canisius and Bemidji State.
From there, we can start looking at the ties and bubbles in a more detailed fashion.
The ties and bubbles consist of none this week.
We break all of our ties based upon the RPI.
Therefore, the 16 teams in the tournament, in rank order, are:
1 Minnesota-Duluth
2 Denver
3 Boston University
4 Western Michigan
5 Penn State
6 Union
7 Minnesota
8 Harvard
9 North Dakota
10 Boston College
11 Providence
12 Vermont
13 Massachusetts-Lowell
14 Wisconsin
15 Bemidji State
16 Canisius
Step two
Now it’s time to assign the seeds.
No. 1 seeds: Minnesota-Duluth, Denver, Boston University, Western Michigan
No. 2 seeds: Penn State, Union, Minnesota, Harvard
No. 3 seeds: North Dakota, Boston College, Providence, Vermont
No. 4 seeds: Massachusetts-Lowell, Wisconsin, Bemidji State, Canisius
Step three
Place the No. 1 seeds in regionals.
No. 1 Minnesota-Duluth is placed in the West Regional in Fargo
No. 2 Denver is placed in the Midwest Regional in Cincinnati.
No. 3 Boston University is placed in the Northeast Regional in Manchester.
No. 4 Western Michigan is placed in the East Regional in Providence.
Step four
Now we place the other 12 teams so as to avoid intra-conference matchups if possible.
Begin by filling in each bracket by banding groups. Remember that teams are not assigned to the regional closest to their campus sites by ranking order within the banding (unless you are a host school, in which case you must be assigned to your home regional).
If this is the case, as it was last year, then the committee should seed so that the quarterfinals are seeded such that the four regional championships would be played by No. 1 vs. No. 8, No. 2 vs. No. 7, No. 3 vs. No. 6 and No. 4 vs. No. 5.
So therefore:
No. 2 seeds
No. 8 Harvard is placed in No. 1 Minnesota-Duluth’s regional, the West Regional.
No. 7 Minnesota is placed in No. 2 Denver’s regional, the Midwest Regional.
No. 6 Union is placed in No. 3 Boston University’s regional, the Northeast Regional.
No. 5 Penn State is placed in No. 4 Western Michigan’s regional, the East Regional.
No. 3 seeds
Our bracketing system has one regional containing seeds 1, 8, 9, and 16; another with 2, 7, 10 and 15; another with 3, 6, 11 and 14; and another with 4, 5, 12 and 13.
North Dakota is a host, therefore they are placed first in this pod:
No. 9 North Dakota is placed in No. 8 Harvard’s regional, the West Regional.
No. 10 Boston College is placed in No. 7 Minnesota’s regional, the Midwest Regional.
No. 11 Providence is placed in No. 6 Union’s regional, the Northeast Regional.
No. 12 Vermont is placed in No. 5 Penn State’s regional, the East Regional.
No. 4 seeds
One more time, taking No. 16 vs. No. 1, No. 15 vs. No. 2, etc.
No. 16 Canisius is sent to No. 1 Minnesota-Duluth’s regional, the West Regional.
No. 15 Bemidji State is sent to No. 2 Denver’s regional, the Midwest Regional.
No. 14 Wisconsin is sent to No. 3 Boston University’s regional, the Northeast Regional.
No. 13 Massachusetts-Lowell is sent to No. 4 Western Michigan’s regional, the East Regional.
The brackets as we have set them up:
East Regional (Providence):
13 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 4 Western Michigan
12 Vermont vs. 5 Penn State
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston University
11 Providence vs. 6 Union
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
15 Bemidji State vs. 2 Denver
10 Boston College vs. 7 Minnesota
West Regional (Fargo):
16 Canisius vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
9 North Dakota vs. 8 Harvard
Our first concern is avoiding intraconference matchups. We have none this week.
Now let’s look at maximizing attendance and getting teams closer to their campuses.
One change we can make it swapping Bemidji State and Canisius, putting both of them closer to its campuses. Not much to balk about this week as Bemidji State is 28 and Canisius is 29.
East Regional (Providence):
13 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 4 Western Michigan
12 Vermont vs. 5 Penn State
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston University
11 Providence vs. 6 Union
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
16 Canisius vs. 2 Denver
10 Boston College vs. 7 Minnesota
West Regional (Fargo):
15 Bemidji State vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
9 North Dakota vs. 8 Harvard
What else? We can continue to move teams closer to their home locations.
For example, Minnesota to Fargo, Penn State to Cincinnati and Harvard to Providence in a three-way swap.
East Regional (Providence):
13 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 4 Western Michigan
12 Vermont vs. 8 Harvard
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston University
11 Providence vs. 6 Union
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
16 Canisius vs. 2 Denver
10 Boston College vs. 5 Penn State
West Regional (Fargo):
15 Bemidji State vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
9 North Dakota vs. 7 Minnesota
And then I will make one more swap – this time a whole matchup because I think it works better that way. Vermont/Harvard swapping with Providence/Union.
East Regional (Providence):
13 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 4 Western Michigan
11 Providence vs. 6 Union
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston University
12 Vermont vs. 8 Harvard
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
16 Canisius vs. 2 Denver
10 Boston College vs. 5 Penn State
West Regional (Fargo):
15 Bemidji State vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
9 North Dakota vs. 7 Minnesota
And that looks like it to me.
My bracket for the week.
Or is it?
Let’s take this another way. What is we started right away with putting Western Michigan in Cincinnati and Denver in Providence?
East Regional (Providence):
15 Bemidji State vs. 2 Denver
10 Boston College vs. 7 Minnesota
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston University
11 Providence vs. 6 Union
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
13 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 4 Western Michigan
12 Vermont vs. 5 Penn State
West Regional (Fargo):
16 Canisius vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
9 North Dakota vs. 8 Harvard
We make two moves here for attendance reasons. Cansius/Bemidji and then Harvard/Minnesota.
East Regional (Providence):
16 Canisius vs. 2 Denver
10 Boston College vs. 8 Harvard
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston University
11 Providence vs. 6 Union
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
13 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 4 Western Michigan
12 Vermont vs. 5 Penn State
West Regional (Fargo):
15 Bemidji State vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
9 North Dakota vs. 7 Minnesota
I still want Providence in Providence.
East Regional (Providence):
16 Canisius vs. 2 Denver
11 Providence vs. 6 Union
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston University
10 Boston College vs. 8 Harvard
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
13 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 4 Western Michigan
12 Vermont vs. 5 Penn State
West Regional (Fargo):
15 Bemidji State vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
9 North Dakota vs. 7 Minnesota
Now what do think of this bracket?
Do we go with the first one or the second one?
Let’s look and see.
It comes down to this, in my eyes:
Do you want BC in Manchester, Canisius in Providence and both Penn State and WMU in Cincinnati or Vermont in Manchester, Lowell in Providence and only Penn State in Cincinnati.
Wow, that is tough isn’t it?
I think I have to go with both Western Michigan and Penn State in Cincinnati.
So I choose:
East Regional (Providence):
16 Canisius vs. 2 Denver
11 Providence vs. 6 Union
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston University
10 Boston College vs. 8 Harvard
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
13 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 4 Western Michigan
12 Vermont vs. 5 Penn State
West Regional (Fargo):
15 Bemidji State vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
9 North Dakota vs. 7 Minnesota
And these are the kinds of decisions the committee has to make when considering how to put together the bracket. This is a tough one.
See you here in a few weeks for the next Bracketology.
Here’s a summary of everything that we have covered.
This week’s brackets
East Regional (Providence):
16 Canisius vs. 2 Denver
11 Providence vs. 6 Union
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston University
10 Boston College vs. 8 Harvard
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
13 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 4 Western Michigan
12 Vermont vs. 5 Penn State
West Regional (Fargo):
15 Bemidji State vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
9 North Dakota vs. 7 Minnesota
Conference breakdowns
Hockey East — 5
NCHC — 4
Big Ten — 3
ECAC Hockey — 2
WCHA — 1
Atlantic Hockey – 1
Movement
In: Wisconsin, Providence
Out: Ohio State, Cornell
Last Week’s Bracket
East Regional (Providence):
14 Boston College vs. 3 Penn State
10 Massachusetts-Lowell vs. 6 Union
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
13 Harvard vs. 4 Boston University
11 Cornell vs. 5 Western Michigan
Midwest Regional (Cincinnati):
16 Canisius vs. 2 Denver
9 Vermont vs. 8 Ohio State
West Regional (Fargo):
15 Bemidji State vs. 1 Minnesota-Duluth
12 North Dakota vs. 7 Minnesota
