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 will wind up come selection time.
It’s a look into what are the possible thought processes behind selecting and seeding the NCAA tournament teams.
We’ll keep bringing you a new one every week until we make our final picks before the field is announced.
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 — Toledo, Ohio; West — Grand Rapids, Mich.)
• A host institution which is invited to the tournament plays in the regional for which it is the host, and cannot be moved. There are four host institutions this year: Brown in Providence, New Hampshire in Manchester, Bowling Green in Toledo and Michigan in Grand Rapids.
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 five automatic qualifiers and 11 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.”
Given these facts, here is the top 16 of the current PairWise Rankings (PWR), and the conference leaders (through all games of Feb. 5, 2013):
1 Quinnipiac
2 Minnesota
3t Miami
3t Boston College
5 New Hampshire
6 Western Michigan
7 Yale
8 St. Cloud State
9t Niagara
9t North Dakota
11 Denver
12t Minnesota State
12t Boston University
12t Alaska
15t Dartmouth
15t Notre Dame
Here are the current conference leaders based on winning percentage:
Atlantic Hockey: Niagara
CCHA: Miami
ECAC Hockey: Quinnipiac
Hockey East: Boston College
WCHA: St. Cloud 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 who the current leader in each conference is. This team is my assumed conference tournament champion.
Step one
From the committee’s report, choose the 16 teams in the tournament.
We break ties in the PWR by looking at how the teams rank in the Ratings Percentage Index, and add in any current league leaders that are not currently in the top 16. There are none.
From there, we can start looking at the ties and bubbles in a more detailed fashion.
The ties and bubbles consist of Miami and Boston College at 3, Niagara and North Dakota at 9, Minnesota State, Boston University and Alaska at 12 and Dartmouth and Notre Dame at 15.
We break all of our ties based upon the RPI.
Therefore the 16 teams in the tournament, in rank order, are:
1 Quinnipiac
2 Minnesota
3 Miami
4 Boston College
5 New Hampshire
6 Western Michigan
7 Yale
8 St. Cloud State
9 Niagara
10 North Dakota
11 Denver
12 Minnesota State
13 Boston University
14 Alaska
15 Dartmouth
16 Notre Dame
Step two
Now it’s time to assign the seeds.
No. 1 seeds — Quinnipiac, Minnesota, Miami, Boston College
No. 2 seeds — New Hampshire, Western Michigan, Yale, St. Cloud State
No. 3 seeds — Niagara, North Dakota, Denver, Minnesota State
No. 4 seeds — Boston University, Alaska, Dartmouth, Notre Dame
Step three
Place the No. 1 seeds in regionals.
No. 1 Quinnipiac is placed in the East Regional in Providence.
No. 2 Minnesota is placed in the West Regional in Grand Rapids.
No. 3 Miami is placed in the Midwest Regional in Toledo.
No. 4 Boston College is placed in the Northeast Regional in Manchester.
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 are 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
We must assign New Hampshire, a host school, first.
No. 5 New Hampshire is placed in No. 4 Boston College’s regional, the Northeast Regional.
No. 8 St. Cloud State is placed in No. 1 Quinnipiac’s regional, the East Regional.
No. 7 Yale is placed in No. 2 Minnesota’s regional, the West Regional.
No. 6 Western Michigan is placed in No. 3 Miami’s regional, the Midwest Regional.
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.
No. 9 Niagara is placed in No. 8 St. Cloud State’s regional, the East Regional.
No. 10 North Dakota is placed in No. 7 Yale’s regional, the West Regional.
No. 11 Denver is placed in No. 6 Western Michigan’s regional, the Midwest Regional.
No. 12 Minnesota State is placed in No. 5 New Hampshire’s regional, the Northeast Regional.
No. 4 seeds
One more time, taking No. 16 vs. No. 1, No. 15 vs. No. 2, etc.
No. 16 Notre Dame is sent to No. 1 Quinnipiac’s regional, the East Regional.
No. 15 Dartmouth is sent to No. 2 Minnesota’s regional, the West Regional.
No. 14 Alaska is sent to No. 3 Miami’s regional, the Midwest Regional.
No. 13 Boston University is sent to No. 4 Boston College’s regional, the Northeast Regional.
The brackets as we have set them up:
West Regional (Grand Rapids):
15 Dartmouth vs. 2 Minnesota
10 North Dakota vs. 7 Yale
Midwest Regional (Toledo):
14 Alaska vs. 3 Miami
11 Denver vs. 6 Western Michigan
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
13 Boston University vs. 4 Boston College
12 Minnesota State vs. 5 New Hampshire
East Regional (Providence):
16 Notre Dame vs. 1 Quinnipiac
9 Niagara vs. 8 St. Cloud State
Our first concern is avoiding intra-conference matchups. We have two in Boston University vs. Boston College and Alaska vs. Miami.
To avoid this, we can switch Boston University with Alaska, with which it is tied in the PWR.
Our brackets are now:
West Regional (Grand Rapids):
15 Dartmouth vs. 2 Minnesota
10 North Dakota vs. 7 Yale
Midwest Regional (Toledo):
13 Boston University vs. 3 Miami
11 Denver vs. 6 Western Michigan
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Alaska vs. 4 Boston College
12 Minnesota State vs. 5 New Hampshire
East Regional (Providence):
16 Notre Dame vs. 1 Quinnipiac
9 Niagara vs. 8 St. Cloud State
We now have a bracket that does not have any intra-conference matchups.
Can we make it better?
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Attendance, attendance, attendance.
Where can we get better attendance?
One obvious spot is to get Western Michigan to Grand Rapids so we can draw better there.
We swap the entire matchup of WMU-Denver and Yale-North Dakota.
West Regional (Grand Rapids):
15 Dartmouth vs. 2 Minnesota
11 Denver vs. 6 Western Michigan
Midwest Regional (Toledo):
13 Boston University vs. 3 Miami
10 North Dakota vs. 7 Yale
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Alaska vs. 4 Boston College
12 Minnesota State vs. 5 New Hampshire
East Regional (Providence):
16 Notre Dame vs. 1 Quinnipiac
9 Niagara vs. 8 St. Cloud State
Is there anything else that we can do?
There is one more switch which I would like to make: swapping Alaska and Dartmouth.
West Regional (Grand Rapids):
14 Alaska vs. 2 Minnesota
11 Denver vs. 6 Western Michigan
Midwest Regional (Toledo):
13 Boston University vs. 3 Miami
10 North Dakota vs. 7 Yale
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
15 Dartmouth vs. 4 Boston College
12 Minnesota State vs. 5 New Hampshire
East Regional (Providence):
16 Notre Dame vs. 1 Quinnipiac
9 Niagara vs. 8 St. Cloud State
I need some more attendance in Providence, but the hands are a little tied. I want to bring Yale back to Providence, but there is limited movement as there are three WCHA teams in the third seeded band, so we have to move entire matchups. And that would mean moving North Dakota out of Toledo, which would decrease the attendance in Toledo. Niagara could draw well in Toledo, though.
I could bring BU back to Providence, but I can’t do that without creating a CCHA-CCHA matchup in either of the western brackets.
So maybe the question becomes which team should I bring back, Boston University or Dartmouth?
Manchester will do OK with both Boston College and New Hampshire. Getting Dartmouth there would be nice, but would having BU in Providence make attendance better than bringing Dartmouth back east?
If we hadn’t made the Dartmouth move but instead brought BU back east, what would we have? We would have to make some switches to avoid an intraconference matchup.
West Regional (Grand Rapids):
16 Notre Dame vs. 2 Minnesota
11 Denver vs. 6 Western Michigan
Midwest Regional (Toledo):
15 Dartmouth vs. 3 Miami
10 North Dakota vs. 7 Yale
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Alaska vs. 4 Boston College
12 Minnesota State vs. 5 New Hampshire
East Regional (Providence):
13 Boston University vs. 1 Quinnipiac
9 Niagara vs. 8 St. Cloud State
I’m a little happier with this attendance situation. But there is one huge question here. This is not protecting the No. 1 seed, as has been the case in years past.
The committee has shown a pattern of protecting the No. 1 seed, leaving the 1-16 matchup in place.
Now, you can argue that in years past, the 16 seed was always the Atlantic Hockey autobid, thus, there was the perception that this autobid should always play the overall No. 1 seed. But this year, the 16 seed is not the AHA autobid.
So what do you do?
Decisions, decisions, decisions.
I think if you’re the committee, you cannot “slight” Atlantic Hockey and make this move. You have to protect the No. 1 seed as in the past.
So we don’t go this way. We stay with this.
West Regional (Grand Rapids):
14 Alaska vs. 2 Minnesota
11 Denver vs. 6 Western Michigan
Midwest Regional (Toledo):
13 Boston University vs. 3 Miami
10 North Dakota vs. 7 Yale
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
15 Dartmouth vs. 4 Boston College
12 Minnesota State vs. 5 New Hampshire
East Regional (Providence):
16 Notre Dame vs. 1 Quinnipiac
9 Niagara vs. 8 St. Cloud State
I really wish there could be some more moves made but this is about the best I can get it while keeping in place the principles of how the bracket is created.
That is about all we can do with this bracket.
So that is it. My bracket for the week.
See you here next week for the next Bracketology.
Here’s a summary of everything that we have covered.
This week’s brackets
Grand Rapids
14 Alaska vs. 2 Minnesota
11 Denver vs. 6 Western Michigan
Toledo
13 Boston University vs. 3 Miami
10 North Dakota vs. 7 Yale
Manchester
15 Dartmouth vs. 4 Boston College
12 Minnesota State vs. 5 New Hampshire
Providence
16 Notre Dame vs. 1 Quinnipiac
9 Niagara vs. 8 St. Cloud State
Conference breakdowns
WCHA — 5
CCHA — 4
ECAC — 3
HEA — 3
AHA — 1
On the move
In: Minnesota State
Out: Massachusetts-Lowell
Attendance woes?
I am OK at the present moment, though I wish Toledo was a little stronger.
Last week’s brackets
Grand Rapids
14 Notre Dame vs. 2 Minnesota
9 St. Cloud State vs. 8 Western Michigan
Toledo
13 Denver vs. 4 Miami
10 North Dakota vs. 7 Massachusetts-Lowell
Manchester
15 Dartmouth vs. 3 New Hampshire
12 Alaska vs. 6 Boston College
Providence
16 Niagara vs. 1 Quinnipiac
11 Boston University vs. 5 Yale
Interesting …
Niagara is so high in the PWR right now because of its RPI and that the Teams Under Consideration criteria is not in play with Niagara, with only four games played against TUCs at the moment.
