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.
This is the next installment of our Bracketology, and we’ll be bringing you a new one every week until we make our final picks before the field is announced on March 20. Make sure to check out our other entries on the Bracketology Blog, where we’ll keep you entertained, guessing and educated throughout the rest of the season.
Here are the facts:
• Sixteen teams are selected to participate in the national tournament.
• There are four regional sites (East — Bridgeport, Conn.; Northeast — Manchester, N.H.; Midwest — Green Bay, Wis.; West — St. Louis)
• 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 three host institutions this year, Yale in Bridgeport, New Hampshire in Manchester and Michigan Tech in Green Bay. St. Louis’ host is the CCHA, not a specific team.
• Seedings will not be switched, as opposed to years past. 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, 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. 22, 2011):
1 Yale
2 North Dakota
3 Boston College
4t Merrimack
4t Denver
6 Michigan
7 Minnesota-Duluth
8t Union
8t Nebraska-Omaha
10 Notre Dame
11t New Hampshire
11t Miami
11t Rensselaer
14 Wisconsin
15 Western Michigan
16t Boston University
16t Dartmouth
— Rochester Institute of Technology
Current conference leaders based on winning percentage:
Atlantic Hockey: RIT
CCHA: Michigan (Michigan wins tiebreaker over Notre Dame via conference wins)
ECAC: Union
Hockey East: New Hampshire
WCHA: North Dakota
Notes
• The 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 the individual comparisons among the tied teams, and add in any current league leaders that are not currently in the top 16. The only team that is not is RIT.
From there, we can start looking at the ties and bubbles in a more detailed fashion.
We break all of our ties based upon the RPI.
Therefore the 16 teams in the tournament, in rank order, are:
1 Yale
2 North Dakota
3 Boston College
4 Merrimack
5 Denver
6 Michigan
7 Minnesota-Duluth
8 Union
9 Nebraska-Omaha
10 Notre Dame
11 New Hampshire
12 Miami
13 Rensselaer
14 Wisconsin
15 Western Michigan
16 RIT
Step two
Now it’s time to assign the seeds.
No. 1 seeds — Yale, North Dakota, Boston College, Merrimack
No. 2 seeds — Denver, Michigan, Minnesota-Duluth, Union
No. 3 seeds — Nebraska-Omaha, Notre Dame, New Hampshire, Miami
No. 4 seeds — Rensselaer, Wisconsin, Western Michigan, RIT
Step three
Place the No. 1 seeds in regionals. Following the guidelines, there is one host team in this grouping, Yale, so Yale must be placed in its home regional, the East Regional, Bridgeport.
We now place the other No. 1 seeds based on proximity to the regional sites.
No. 1 Yale is placed in the East Regional in Bridgeport.
No. 2 North Dakota is placed in the Midwest Regional in Green Bay.
No. 3 Boston College is placed in the Northeast Regional in Manchester.
No. 4 Merrimack is placed in the West Regional in St. Louis.
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.
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
No. 8 Union is placed in No. 1 Yale’s regional, the East Regional.
No. 7 Minnesota-Duluth is placed in No. 2 North Dakota’s regional, the Midwest Regional.
No. 6 Michigan is placed in No. 3 Boston College’s regional, the Northeast Regional.
No. 5 Denver is placed in No. 4 Merrimack’s regional, the West 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.
We have to place New Hampshire, the Northeast Regional host, first.
Therefore:
No. 11 New Hampshire is placed in No. 6 Michigan’s regional, the Northeast Regional.
No. 9 Nebraska-Omaha is placed in No. 8 Union’s regional, the East Regional.
No. 10 Notre Dame is placed in No. 7 Minnesota-Duluth’s regional, the Midwest Regional.
No. 12 Miami is placed in No. 5 Denver’s regional, the West Regional.
No. 4 seeds
One more time, taking No. 16 vs. No. 1, No. 15 vs. No. 2, etc.
No. 16 RIT is sent to No. 1 Yale’s regional, the East Regional.
No. 15 Western Michigan is sent to No. 2 North Dakota’s regional, the Midwest Regional.
No. 14 Wisconsin is sent to No. 3 Boston College’s regional, the Northeast Regional.
No. 13 Rensselaer is sent to No. 4 Merrimack’s regional, the West Regional.
The brackets as we have set them up:
West Regional (St. Louis):
13 Rensselaer vs. 4 Merrimack
12 Miami vs. 5 Denver
Midwest Regional (Green Bay):
15 Western Michigan vs. 2 North Dakota
10 Notre Dame vs. 7 Minnesota-Duluth
East Regional (Bridgeport):
16 RIT vs. 1 Yale
9 Nebraska-Omaha vs. 8 Union
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
14 Wisconsin vs. 3 Boston College
11 New Hampshire vs. 6 Michigan
Our first concern is avoiding intra-conference matchups. We have none.
This is about as perfect as we can get it.
But we can make one little switch, just to boost some attendance: Wisconsin and Rensselaer.
West Regional (St. Louis):
14 Wisconsin vs. 4 Merrimack
12 Miami vs. 5 Denver
Midwest Regional (Green Bay):
15 Western Michigan vs. 2 North Dakota
10 Notre Dame vs. 7 Minnesota-Duluth
East Regional (Bridgeport):
16 RIT vs. 1 Yale
9 Nebraska-Omaha vs. 8 Union
Northeast Regional (Manchester):
13 Rensselaer vs. 3 Boston College
11 New Hampshire vs. 6 Michigan
What else can we do for bracket integrity or attendance? Is there anything more we can do?
Nothing. It looks good from my standpoint.
I bet the committee wishes it was this easy come selection day.
More thoughts and education and plain wit on the blog. We’ll see you here next week for the next Bracketology.
