March 5, 2008
Not So Fast ... Or, How to Mess With Brackets Without Really Trying
New 'Rule' That Would Exclude Minnesota-Duluth, is a Mirage Says Committee Chair
by Adam Wodon/Managing Editor
The Internet was abuzz Tuesday as word began to spread that the latest revision to the NCAA Division I Men's Ice Hockey Championships Handbook contained a new provision.
Now, there have been a lot of changes, tweaks, etc... to the selection criteria and process over the years, and we've religiously followed them all. But this one was new to us.
Tipped off by CHN reporters Brett Gobe and Ron Ayers, it seems that the handbook contained the following new line: "To be considered during the at-large selection process, a team must have an overall won-lost record of .500 or better."
Notwithstanding the merits and wisdom of such an idea, this was brand new to men's ice hockey. And this would be particularly relevant this year.
There are numerous teams sitting on the bubble who are teetering around the .500 mark, but thanks to outstanding strengths of schedule, are on the verge of making the NCAA tournament nonetheless. Most prominently is Minnesota-Duluth, currently tied for 13th in the Pairwise with a 12-14-6 record.
Others around there are Minnesota (14-13-9) — which happens to be the school that employs committee chair Joel Maturi, the school's athletic director — Boston University (15-15-4), Wisconsin (15-14-7), and Providence (14-13-5), home to another committee member, AD Bob Driscoll.
The question ... would the committee disregard the raw numbers, and indeed implement this supposed new rule and throw out the bid of Minnesota-Duluth?
More than likely, this will shake itself out in the conference tournament playoffs, and not be a factor. Despite the incredible strength of schedule disparity this year that currently plants eight WCHA teams in the tournament, it's not likely to wind up that way in the end.
But here's the rub ... the rule doesn't really exist.
As word spread around the Internet on Tuesday, we called the actual chair of the committee, Joel Maturi. He said he hadn't heard of this provision. Taken somewhat aback, we asked where it came from, and he promised to check on it and get back to us.
We were waiting until Maturi's final confirmation until we ran this story, but given the prominence this supposed "fact" had achieved, it seemed now was the time to get this out there.
Though still waiting for Maturi's final word, as of Tuesday night, Maturi told CHN that it appears that wording is "boilerplate" NCAA language, and was inserted into the February 2008 revision of the handbook by mistake (UPDATE: This mistake has now been confirmed by Marc Bedics at the NCAA, who said that an updated handbook, eliminating the sentence in question, will be distributed shortly). Odd that this happened, and that it wasn't in the 2007 handbook, but you have to assume the committee chair would've known had this rule passed.
We'll update the story as more information comes in Wednesday from the NCAA and Maturi.
Again, there may be merits to such a rule. Most other NCAA sports have such a thing. But at this time, there is no such rule for NCAA men's ice hockey. And as it stands right now, Minnesota-Duluth would make the NCAA tournament — though again, that's likely to change anyway as the conference tournaments get in gear, making this, perhaps, much ado about nothing.
Seems that some are trying to change the rules mid stream.
Mar 5 2008, 2:07 am by Melvin, Grand Forks
Not the case at all Melvin. It seems like the "rule" never really existed to begin with. It certainly has never been a rule before. And it's also never happened that a sub-.500 team qualified at-large via the Pairwise.
Mar 5 2008, 8:48 am by CHN Editor
While it is unclear whether or not this rule exists, I agree with it. Why should a team with a losing record make it into the Tourney even if they have a strong schedule? You have to win a majority of the games on your schedule, end of story.
Also, doesn't anybody think that there will be some subjectivity with the selection committee? Just as the NCAA Basketball committee doesn't always go by the numbers (ask Syracuse last year), the hockey committee shouldn't just take 7 or 8 teams from one conference even if the computers say they should.
Mar 5 2008, 10:27 am by CJ, Providence
CJ ... there is no subjectivity in the system. We go through this every year with people insisting that the committee will do subjective things. This is absolutely not true. For over a decade, college hockey has used this system, and it has not wavered from it for the purpose of selecting teams. There's a reason why every year that all the web sites can accurately figure out the field -- because it's easy to do given the rules that are used. Check our archives for all sorts of past articles on the topic. Search for "Pairwise."
Mar 5 2008, 10:38 am by CHN Editor
I received confirmation from the NCAA this morning that the wording is a mistake. There is NO SUCH RULE.
Mar 5 2008, 10:43 am by CHN Editor
No such rule, except that it is in the handbook.
I know we're just hockey fans but do you think we're that dumb?
Mar 5 2008, 1:01 pm by TUMHBG, Concord, NH
TUMHBG ... I'm not sure what you don't understand here. The wording was put into the handbook by mistake. It's not supposed to be there. Thus, it's not an actual rule that applies to men's ice hockey. They are sending out a corrected handbook today.
Mar 5 2008, 1:05 pm by CHN Editor
No such rule, except that it is in the handbook. I know we're just hockey fans but do you think we're that dumb?
Mar 5 2008, 1:01 pm by TUMHBG, Concord, NH
yes...we do. Learn to read!
Mar 5 2008, 1:15 pm by AY, St. Paul, MN
KRACH should be exclusively used anyway.
Mar 5 2008, 2:13 pm by Chris, Grand Forks
You know this can't be rule with two commitee member schools on the verge of possibly making the tourament with loosing records, thier schools would be kicked out by vertue of thier record, ie.. Minn and Prov.
Mar 5 2008, 2:26 pm by nd jg
There IS such a rule, but it's part of NCAA boilerplate language for OTHER sports, not men's ice hockey. It was inadvertently included during a Cut & Paste session. Everyone calm down... there's no story here. To quote Captain Barbosa, "What are you lookin' at? Go back to work!"
Mar 5 2008, 4:47 pm by Nelson, Lansing MI
AY, St. Paul, MN
That's right, just keep drinking the Kool-Aid troll. The NCAA should man-up and run the rules that are written - as the above article points out, this is not some far-fetched typo but common language among NCAA sports. That and learn to proofread.
Mar 5 2008, 7:11 pm by TUMHBG, Concord, NH
"TUMHBG ... I'm not sure what you don't understand here. The wording was put into the handbook by mistake. It's not supposed to be there. Thus, it's not an actual rule that applies to men's ice hockey. They are sending out a corrected handbook today."
How honorable of you to imply that it is a lack of understanding on my part. I'm just not as simply convinced as some people are. Call me skeptical.
Mar 5 2008, 7:14 pm by TUMHBG, Concord, NH
TUMHBG ... feel free to be skeptical all you want. But believe me, if I thought anything was fishy, I'd say so. I've dealt with the people involved for a while, called them all on the phone, and I know what was said and how things came down. They made a mistake. The explanations made perfect sense. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Mar 5 2008, 7:26 pm by CHN Editor
If UMD played in any other league than the WCHA, they'd be well over .500. We need the best teams in the tournament, not the teams that play in subpar leagues with subpar schedules. As things stand right now, UMD most definitely deserves to be in.
Mar 5 2008, 7:29 pm by Kevin, Minneapolis
Use the KRACH. It avoids the plethora of problems with Pairwise. How did the rule "accidentally" get written in, anyway? Is there an explanation besides "we don't know."
Mar 5 2008, 10:17 pm by
Yes, the explanation is out there, and just an unfortunate error. They were re-working all the handbooks trying to make the uniform in structure, and copied/pasted a lot of stuff - many sports have that rule, but hockey doesn't, and it should've been removed from the hockey handbook before printing. Just an honest error.
Mar 5 2008, 10:22 pm by CHN Editor
Let's make it 9 with a WCHA tournament win by MTU.....
Go Tech.....
Mar 5 2008, 10:37 pm by JB, Houghton
It seems funny that this wasn't caught in the proofreading, as TUMHBG said. However, there is no reason to play with the rules as they are written, which he also commented. This makes no sense - typos happen, especially in our electonically (i.e. cut-and-paste) world. Besides, as this article points out, but apparently few are literate enough to notice, this is a moot point. Unless the top teams all lose in the opening round of their playoff series and the seventh and eighth place teams in the WCHA make it deep into the playoffs, they will NOT make the tourney. Stop being dumb, learn the playoff selection rules, and SHUT UP! Besides...who wants to get beat up on the ice and on the scoreboard by the SIOUX?!?
Mar 6 2008, 1:27 am by RK, Billings, MT formerly Mandan, ND
Exactly! Just like those Sioux beat up BC in the semifinal of the Frozen Four in April. Oh... no wait... never mind.
Mar 7 2008, 10:53 am by Micah, Boston MA
Micah,
Nice.
Mar 12 2008, 3:04 pm by JM, Minneapolis
Comment on this Article
