HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Dr. Tim Newman" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Dr. Tim Newman
Date:
Tue, 28 Mar 2000 08:00:32 -0600
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (79 lines)
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, John Whelan wrote:
 
> >> (one of their 27 wins was against Division II Alabama-Huntsville,
> >> games against whom are not considered for NCAA selection) or .700,
 
> Tim Newman replies:
> > Just a minor clarification here.  Alabama-Huntsville is (or at
> > least has repeatedly claimed to be) Division I in hockey this year,
> > although ineligible for the NCAA post-season.  And yes, games against UAH
> > do not count toward the NCAA selection formula, although I believe I read
> > that games against UAH _did_ count toward the minimum number of D-I games
> > necessary to be tourney-eligible.   This is the second and final year
> > of the probationary period for UAH following departure from Division II.
> > BTW,  Alabama-Huntsville IS eligible for the D-I tourney in 2001, I
> > understand.
>
> UAH, Wayne State, Bemidji State, Findlay, Mercyhurst and Bentley are
> all in the same position, making a transition from Division II to
> Division I.  (Most will be eligible in 2000-2001; one or two in
> 2001-2002, according to USCHO.)  Wayne State also claimed (on their
> website) earlier in the season that they were already Division I (but
> not tournament-eligible) during their probationary period; I emailed
> someone at the NCAA for a clarification, and was told explicitly that
> WSU was Division II this past season.
 
WSU is in a different position than Bemidji and UAH.  WSU is in the FIRST
year of the transition from D-II to D-I.  Bemidji and UAH are in the
SECOND year. I believe that Mercyhurst is in the same situation as
Bemidji and UAH.  Hopefully someone from Erie can help us out on that one.
 
The report that I read indicated that teams in the first
year of transition were technically still D-II but ineligible for the D-II
tourney.  Teams in the second year were technically D-I but ineligible for
the D-I tourney.  My understanding was that in the second year of the
transition, a team has to follow D-I rules on scholarships, scheduling,
etc., while in the first year of the transition, the D-II rules are
followed.
 
It would be nice to get clarification from the NCAA about exactly what is
the status of teams in the second year of transition?  Are they D-I for
some rules but D-II for others?  Even if games against such teams don't
count for ranking in the tourney-selection criteria, do games against such
teams count toward the number of games necessary to be
tournament-eligible?  In a number of years, for example, Army played about
15 to 18 D-I games.  As a result, Army was not tournament-eligible.
However, it was my understanding that the teams that played Army COULD
count their games against Army toward the minimum number of D-I games
necessary to be tourney-eligible.  For example, if Colgate scheduled 19
games against ECAC and other D-I schools and 3 games against Army, it was
my understanding that Colgate became tourney-eligible.  The games against
Army might not be used in computing Colgate's ranking for the tourney, but
Colgate would still be tourney eligible.
 
 
 
> Also, the Selection Committee announced after a conference call in
> January that Air Force would be considered a Team Under Consideration
> only if they finished .500 or above *and* played 20 or more Division I
> teams.  This was an issue because their regular season schedule
> included only 19 Division I opponents, not including UAH, BSU and
> Findlay.  (AFA did play Niagara in the CHA semifinals, but finished
> the season a game below .500.)
 
AFA's D-I record was below .500, so this is correct for NCAA tournament
purposes.  AFA's overall record was above .500, though.  Just want to keep
that straight.
 
Also, I don't see where announcing that AFA had to have 20+ D-I games plus
a .500 record clarifies the status of the Bemidji or UAH games.  Finally,
does this ruling mean that games against AFA by other D-I teams would not
count as games against a TUC (which impacts one or more tourney-ranking
criteria) or does it mean that AFA was strictly ineligible for the
tourney?
 
Tim Newman
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2