It’s time once again for what we like to call Bracketology — college hockey style. It’s a weekly look at how the NCAA tournament might look if the season ended today.
More than that, it’s a look into the thought process behind selecting and seeding the NCAA tournament teams.
This is the fourth installment of Bracketology, and we’ll be bringing you a new one every week, until we make our final picks just before the field is announced.
Here are the facts:
• Sixteen teams are selected to participate in the national tournament.
• There are four regional sites (East – Worcester, Massachusetts, Northeast – Amherst, Massachusetts, Midwest – Grand Rapids, Mich., West – Minneapolis, Minn.)
• A host institution which is invited to the tournament plays in the regional for which it is the host, and cannot be moved.
• Seedings will not be switched, as opposed to years past. To avoid undesirable first-round matchups, including intraconference games (see below), teams will be moved among regionals, not reseeded.
Here are the NCAA’s guidelines on the matter, per a meeting of the Championship Committee:
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 likelihood of playoff-type atmosphere at each regional site. For the model, the following is a basic set of priorities:
• The top four teams as ranked by the committee are the four 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.
• Host institutions that qualify will be placed at home.
• No. 1 seeds are placed as close to home as possible in order of their ranking 1-4.
• Conference matchups in first round are avoided, unless five or more teams from one conference are selected, then the integrity of the bracket will be preserved.
• Once the six automatic qualifiers and 10 at-large teams are selected, the next step is to develop four groups from the committee’s ranking of 1-16. The top four teams are the No. 1 seeds. The next four are targeted as No. 2 seeds. The next four are No. 3 seeds and the last four are No. 4 seeds. These groupings will be referred to as “bands.”
Additionally, the NCAA recently clarified its selection criteria to include a bonus factor for “good” nonconference wins, which are wins against non-league opponents in the top 15 of the Ratings Percentage Index.
Given these facts, here are the top 16 of the current PairWise Rankings (PWR), and all conference leaders, based on winning percentage (Sacred Heart, Michigan, Bemidji State, Cornell, Boston College and Denver) (through all games of Monday, February 14, 2005):
1 Denver
2 Boston College
3 Colorado College
4 Minnesota
5 Michigan
6 Cornell
7 Wisconsin
8 Ohio State
9t Harvard
9t North Dakota
9t Boston University
9t New Hampshire
13t Massachusetts-Lowell
13t Northern Michigan
15 Colgate
16t Dartmouth
16t Maine
24 Bemidji State
— Sacred Heart
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 all of the conference leaders, based on winning percentage.
From there, we can start looking at the bubble in a more detailed fashion.
Breaking ties in the PWR using head-to-head comparisons among the tied teams, the 16 teams in the tournament, in rank order, are:
1 Denver
2 Boston College
3 Colorado College
4 Minnesota
5 Michigan
6 Cornell
7 Wisconsin
8 Ohio State
9 Boston University
10 New Hampshire
11 Harvard
12 North Dakota
13 Massachusetts-Lowell
14 Northern Michigan
15 Bemidji State
16 Sacred Heart
All ties were broken because of individual comparison wins.
The main differences from last week are that Northern Michigan is in the tournament and Denver now is the overall No. 1 seed.
Step Two
Now it’s time to assign the seeds.
No. 1 Seeds — Denver, Boston College, Colorado College, Minnesota
No. 2 Seeds — Michigan, Cornell, Wisconsin, Ohio State
No. 3 Seeds — Boston University, New Hampshire, Harvard, North Dakota
No. 4 Seeds — Massachusetts-Lowell, Northern Michigan, Bemidji State, Sacred Heart
Step Three
Place the No. 1 seeds in regionals. Because of the fact that Minnesota is hosting a regional, the Gophers are placed first.
We now place the other No. 1 seeds based on proximity to the regional sites.
No. 4 Minnesota is placed in the West Regional in Minneapolis.
No. 1 Denver is placed in the Midwest Regional in Grand Rapids
No. 2 Boston College is placed in the Northeast Regional in Amherst.
No. 3 Colorado College is then placed in the East Regional in Worcester.
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 (except for host schools, which must be assigned to their home regionals).
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 are played by No. 1 v. No. 8, No. 2 v. No. 7, No. 3 v. No. 6 and No. 4 v. No. 5.
So therefore:
No. 2 Seeds
No. 5 Michigan is placed in No. 4 Minnesota’s Regional, the West.
No. 6 Cornell is placed in No. 3 Colorado College’s Regional, the East
No. 7 Wisconsin is placed in No. 2 Boston College’s Regional, the Northeast.
No. 8 Ohio State is placed in No. 1 Denver’s Regional, the Midwest.
No. 3 Seeds
Our bracketing system has one Regional containing seeds 1, 8, 9, and 16, another with 2, 7, 10, 15, another with 3, 6, 11, 14 and another with 4, 5, 12 and 13.
Therefore:
No. 9 Boston University is placed in No. 6 Cornell’s Regional, the East, as the host.
No. 10 New Hampshire is placed in No. 8 Ohio State’s Regional, the Midwest.
No. 11 Harvard is placed in No. 7 Wisconsin’s Regional, the Northeast.
No. 12 North Dakota is placed in No. 5 Michigan’s Regional, the West.
No. 4 Seeds
One more time, taking No. 16 v. No. 1, No. 15 v. No. 2, etc.
No. 16 Sacred Heart is sent to Denver’s Regional, the Midwest.
No. 15 Bemidji State is sent to Boston College’s Regional, the Northeast.
No. 14 Northern Michigan is sent to Colorado College’s Regional, the East.
No. 13 Massachusetts-Lowell is sent to Minnesota’s Regional, the West.
The brackets as we have set them up:
West Regional:
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Minnesota
North Dakota vs. Michigan
Midwest Regional:
Sacred Heart vs. Denver
New Hampshire vs. Ohio State
East Regional:
Northern Michigan vs. Colorado College
Boston University vs. Cornell
Northeast Regional:
Bemidji State vs. Boston College
Harvard vs. Wisconsin
Our first concern is avoiding intra-conference matchups. We have none. Our tournament is set.
Or is it? Let’s look at that bracket integrity thing a bit.
We can do one thing that might make it a little more palatable for those looking for bracket integrity. What if we put No. 1 Denver in the East Regional instead of No. 3 Colorado College? Why, you ask? No. 9 Boston University has to play in the East Regional, and to have 1, 8, 9 and 16 in one bracket would make sense from an integrity standpoint.
If we did this, then our brackets would look like this:
West Regional:
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Minnesota
North Dakota vs. Michigan
Midwest Regional:
Northern Michigan vs. Colorado College
Harvard vs. Cornell
East Regional:
Sacred Heart vs. Denver
Boston University vs. Ohio State
Northeast Regional:
Bemidji State vs. Boston College
New Hampshire vs. Wisconsin
We would have to switch Harvard and North Dakota because of the ECACHL-ECACHL matchup, giving us:
West Regional:
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Minnesota
Harvard vs. Michigan
Midwest Regional:
Northern Michigan vs. Colorado College
North Dakota vs. Cornell
East Regional:
Sacred Heart vs. Denver
Boston University vs. Ohio State
Northeast Regional:
Bemidji State vs. Boston College
New Hampshire vs. Wisconsin
Which one do we choose? I have to lean with the first scenario, just because Denver should get to be “closer” to home as the overall No. 1.
Bracketing the Frozen Four, if all four number-one seeds advance, then the top overall seed plays the No. 4 overall, and No. 2 plays No. 3. Therefore, the winners of the Midwest and West Regionals face each other in one semifinal (Denver and Minnesota’s brackets), while the winners of the East and Northeast Regionals (Colorado College and Boston College’s brackets) play the other semifinal.
But …
Bonus Time
We know there is a bonus component to the criteria, the NCAA’s tweak to the system which rewards “good” nonconference wins.
Without official word on the size of the bonuses, we take these numbers: .003 for a good road win, .002 for a good neutral-ice win and .001 for a good home win.
Now remember, nonconference wins against conference opponents do not count toward the bonus. For example, when Alaska-Anchorage defeated Minnesota in the Nye Frontier Classic, that didn’t count.
Our seedings are now:
1 Denver
2 Boston College
3 Colorado College
4 Minnesota
5 Michigan
6 Cornell
7 Wisconsin
8 Harvard
9 North Dakota
10 Boston University
11 New Hampshire
12 Ohio State
13 Massachusetts-Lowell
14 Northern Michigan
15 Bemidji State
16 Sacred Heart
Not much of a change, except that Ohio State falls all the way to 12 from 8.
So, our new brackets, using bracket-filling as above, have a few changes.
West Regional:
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Minnesota
Ohio State vs. Michigan
Midwest Regional:
Sacred Heart vs. Denver
North Dakota vs. Harvard
East Regional:
Bemidji State vs. Boston College
Boston University vs. Wisconsin
Northeast Regional:
Northern Michigan vs. Colorado College
New Hampshire vs. Cornell
We just need to switch Ohio State, but with whom? It’s easy to switch out Ohio State with UNH, since the teams are tied in PairWise wins, but it’s easier to take North Dakota out with Ohio State. It’s a tough call.
What if we tried what we did above? Send Denver to Amherst and CC to Grand Rapids?
We would get:
West Regional:
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Minnesota
Ohio State vs. Michigan
Midwest Regional:
Northern Michigan vs. Colorado College
New Hampshire vs. Cornell
East Regional:
Bemidji State vs. Boston College
Boston University vs. Wisconsin
Northeast Regional:
Sacred Heart vs. Denver
North Dakota vs. Harvard
Now if we switch Ohio State with New Hampshire, the brackets still ring true to form. What if we approached it a different way? What if we considered switching Michigan and Cornell?
Cornell and Michigan are separated by one PairWise win — in which Michigan defeats Cornell head-to-head. It’s a 2-1 win for Michigan there. Cornell wins the RPI battle, and is so close. And how I would love to get Michigan in Grand Rapids for attendance purposes.
I’m going to go that way.
Here are my brackets this week:
West Regional:
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Minnesota
Ohio State vs. Cornell
Midwest Regional:
Northern Michigan vs. Colorado College
New Hampshire vs. Michigan
East Regional:
Bemidji State vs. Boston College
Boston University vs. Wisconsin
Northeast Regional:
Sacred Heart vs. Denver
North Dakota vs. Harvard
What if we took these numbers: .005 for a good road win, .003 for a good neutral win and .001 for a good home win?
We’ve got changes, all right. Dartmouth is in the tournament and Northern Michigan is out. Our seedings:
1 Denver
2 Boston College
3 Colorado College
4 Minnesota
5 Michigan
6 Cornell
7 Wisconsin
8 New Hampshire
9 North Dakota
10 Harvard
11 Ohio State
12 Boston University
13 Dartmouth
14 Massachusetts-Lowell
15 Bemidji State
16 Sacred Heart
West Regional:
Dartmouth vs. Minnesota
Ohio State vs. Michigan
Midwest Regional:
Sacred Heart vs. Denver
North Dakota vs. New Hampshire
East Regional:
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Colorado College
Boston University vs. Cornell
Northeast Regional:
Bemidji State vs. Boston College
Harvard vs. Wisconsin
We have to worry about one intraconference matchup, that of Ohio State/Michigan. We do the same thing as above and switch the higher seed. So Michigan switches with New Hampshire. That solves it.
So our new brackets are:
West Regional:
Dartmouth vs. Minnesota
Ohio State vs. New Hampshire
Midwest Regional:
Sacred Heart vs. Denver
North Dakota vs. Michigan
East Regional:
Massachusetts-Lowell vs. Colorado College
Boston University vs. Cornell
Northeast Regional:
Bemidji State vs. Boston College
Harvard vs. Wisconsin
That’s it for this week.
Let’s take a look at Bracketology a little more closely.
On Saturday night after all the games were done except for one, and using the 3-2-1 bonus, the Big Green of Dartmouth sat in the No. 13 seed. This was at 11:30 p.m. ET on Saturday night. Two hours later, the Big Green were No. 16 in the PairWise.
With just one game, a 1-0 win by Alaska-Fairbanks over Michigan State, the Big Green dropped four spots in the PairWise. What happened? Or more specifically, why did a game between UAF and Michigan State affect Dartmouth, of all teams?
Remember one simple rule about the PairWise — it’s not just what you do, it’s what the teams you played did, and who they played that matter.
Dartmouth hasn’t played either of these two teams this season. So that’s not the reason the Big Green dropped. But as we said before, it’s the teams that you played and the teams that that team has played. In this case the one team that made the difference? St. Lawrence.
As of 11:30 p.m. ET, St. Lawrence was still a TUC, as the Saints’ RPI was above .500. Then Michigan State, which St. Lawrence played earlier on in the season, lost. As a result, St. Lawrence’s RPI fell under .500, and in turn, the Saints were no longer a TUC.
How did that affect Dartmouth? Dartmouth is 2-0 against SLU this season. As we pointed out last week with Wisconsin and St. Cloud, two games makes a huge difference.
As a result Dartmouth had comparisons that it had won turn into losses.
With New Hampshire, Dartmouth went from a 3-1 criteria win to a 2-2 tie, which when broken by the RPI, went UNH’s way. With Maine, Dartmouth went from a 2-1 criteria win to a 2-1 criteria loss, having the Common Opponents criterion turned the other way. With Wisconsin, Dartmouth went from a 2-1 criteria win to a 2-1 loss, with the TUC criterion turning the other way.
That’s three comparison wins that were taken away from Dartmouth when St. Lawrence dropped out. Three wins that would have had them as the No. 12 seed right now.
I’ve gotten a few emails this week asking which team that is in the most danger of losing its bid right now. There are two, and they’re obvious — Massachusetts-Lowell and Northern Michigan.
UML has a big weekend with BC coming up that will either keep the River Hawks in the tournament, or drop them out at the moment. Here’s why.
If the River Hawks get swept, their RPI will drop and that will endanger their comparison win over Colgate. It can also turn the comparison win they have over Maine and Dartmouth. It’s very shaky at the moment for the River Hawks as they’ve lost a lot of ground in the last few weeks.
NMU has only two games left against TUCs and those are this weekend against Michigan Tech. The Wildcats are barely hanging on to their comparison against BU and UNH, both of which have at least four games against TUCs left. Two losses by NMU this weekend would also lose the comparison they have won at the moment against Dartmouth. Needless to say, an NMU sweep this weekend would help, but getting swept could be disastrous for the Wildcats.
