For Q

It never fails.

An ECAC team gets into the national discussion on which team might be the best in all the land, and the cacophony, especially from out west, is that, of course, there's no way that loser EZAC team could possibly be the best. THEY HAVEN'T PLAYED NE1!!!

Please.

In this case, the team in question is obviously Quinnipiac. There aren't too many other teams out there with the best record in the country and a 19-game unbeaten streak that are still unbeaten in league play. They've earned the right to be in the discussion, but don't tell that to many WCHA fans (most of whom are soon to be either Big Ten or NCHC fans) or even some Hockey East fans.

In fact, I got a tweet earlier last week that basically laid it out like this - "other than the fact that they swept Nebraska-Omaha at home, why should I be impressed with Quinnipiac?"

Ugh.

Let's break this down. Who's got the best record in the nation? Again, that's Quinnipiac.

It's not enough by itself, of course. Niagara has the third best record, but no one is touting them as the third best team in the country. That's because, excuse the repetition, they actually haven't played anyone. KRACH tells us that their strength of schedule is 58th out of 59 teams in the country - only Army has played an easier schedule. So while 17-4-5 Niagara has the nation's third best record and are in the hunt for what could be Atlantic Hockey's first ever at-large bid, they're being pegged as a team that might be in the Top 15, if that. That's fair.

Does Quinnipac deserve similar treatment?

According to KRACH, Quinnipiac has played the 33rd most difficult schedule to date nationally. In a world where there are 59 teams, 33rd is... pretty plain, yes. But then again, Minnesota, who has been number one for a few weeks now, and who many thought would drop down in favor of the Q, is only 27th themselves - yet no one ever asks who THEY'VE played.

Why is that? The answer is pretty simple. They play in the WCHA, which is recognized as a difficult league regardless of the year. They're the place where Herb Brooks won national championships. If they have a similar record to Quinnipiac, they must be better, because they're Minnesota and they play in the WCHA.

That's pretty lame. Determining the top team in the nation shouldn't have anything to do with what a program has done in the past, or the reputation of their conference alone - only what they're doing right now. Right now, the Gophers are one of the best teams in the country, there's no doubt. But look at the metrics - all of those mathematical methods for comparing all of the nation's teams against each other.

Who's #1 in KRACH? Quinnipiac. Who's #1 in the Pairwise, as we get into the month of February? Quinnipiac, and they don't lose a single Pairwise comparison with anyone, including the Gophers. Ratings Percentage Index? Quinnipiac. It's all there - that pretty much concludes the major metrics of comparison right there.

Need more? OK. As we did two years ago when a similar complaint was levied against Yale for having the temerity to lay claim to the title of the best team in the nation, check out the extended list of computer rankings for college hockey as compiled by the Markhams over at rpihockey.net. KASA is basically KRACH 2.0 - it takes into account the impact of home ice advantage when calculating KRACH. The Q's still #1. They're #1 in HEAL. Then they're #2 in four other rankings. Yes, every possible metric is saying that Quinnipiac is either best in the nation or second best, and the ones that say they're second best are the ones you've never heard of.

The fact of the matter is, the ECAC is in an up year. No, they're nowhere near the level they were at in November when certain ECAC backers were claiming that this was the year for five NCAA tournament teams, but three teams in the tournament is looking like a stronger likelihood than it usually ever does, and four doesn't appear to be outside the realm of possibility, which is almost never said about the ECAC (and hasn't happened in quite some time). This is a tough league this season with some very good teams.

In fact, it's such a good league that teams like Cornell and Harvard, who were consensus top-level picks, are struggling to keep their heads above water. Are they underperforming? Sure they are. But that's not the only reason they're in 11th and 12th right now - the league is just very competitive from top to bottom.

That makes it all the more impressive that Quinnipiac has functionally, if not mathematically, clinched the #1 seed in the ECAC tournament with a month left to play. That makes it all the more impressive that they still haven't tasted defeat in league play - and should be a huge boost to their national credentials.

But for some reason, it's not enough. For some reason, a team that's not even in first place in their conference is supposed to be best in the nation.

We know better. Rand Pecknold and his charges are the real deal - for 19 straight games, against some solid competition from within the league and without, they've found ways to win most nights and have at least walked away with a draw. How hard is that to do? The next highest unbeaten streak right now is SIX - and most people think six in a row without losing is pretty good.

Get used to it.

(By the way... we told you Quinnipiac was going to be good.)

Arguing With Math

So, the other day I was reading USCHO looking for some insight, and I found this.

Hard to argue with the math, which shows ECAC Hockey leading the way

Oh, really? Well, allow me to retort.

The argument that the ECAC "leads the way" nationally in this final season under the current structure is predicated apparently on one item alone - the league boasts the best non-conference record in the nation. That is true - the ECAC is 21-12-7 in non-conference play thus far, a national best .613. Eliminating AHA from the mix, you have a record against the "big three" of 11-8-3. Not bad at all.

Apparently, we're supposed to care that Dartmouth was #1 in the PairWise Rankings before last week's games, too.

OK, now before we start, let's be frank. We don't seek to pile on our own league here. In fact, we defend our league where we can - for example, two seasons ago when the larger college hockey world howled at the audacity of Yale claiming to be the top team in the nation (which they were for several weeks), the Bulldogs had few more fervent defenders than us.

But... seriously. Let's cut the crap.

First, the easy one. The PairWise are a complete joke in October, worthless in November, an oddity in December, intriguing in January, worth pondering in February, and vital in March. Let's see... yes, it's November.

Now, the more complex one.

This far into the early part of the season, if you want a general indication of which teams are doing well and which ones aren't, your best bet is actually... the polls. Yes, there are always a few jokers in there who don't know what they're talking about (see also whoever it was who had Union as the top team in the nation following the Dutchmen's tie with UConn, despite the existence of a Boston College team which is now 28-1 in its last 29 games). But by and large, it's good enough for its purpose this early in the season. Meaningless, of course, but at least an indicator.

And what do we have here! Five ranked ECAC teams? Inconceivable! Yes, Union, Dartmouth, Cornell, Harvard, and Quinnipiac are all ranked in the Top 20. That's a full quarter of the ranking. Heck, Hockey East only has three. But who are these teams playing outside of their own conference?

#1 BC: 1 CCHA
#2 DU: 1 Hockey East, 1 AHA
#3 UNH: 2 WCHA
#4 Minnesota: 2 CCHA, 1 AHA

Are we seeing a trend here?

#5 Miami: 2 ECAC, 2 Hockey East

Aha! Finally, a top team that has played against the ECAC. And... the final scores were Miami 3, Colgate 0 and Miami 5, Colgate 1. Way to go, Raiders. You let the whole conference down.

#6 Notre Dame: 2 Hockey East, 2 WCHA
#7 North Dakota: 1 CCHA, 2 Hockey East
#8 Union: No ranked non-conference opponents
#9 Western Michigan: 2 ECAC. 2 AHA

OK, what do we have here... oh, St. Lawrence beat WMU in overtime 4-3, then lost the next night 3-2. A split, not too shabby. But let's cut to the chase here. The ECAC is 5-5-1 against currently ranked teams. .500 isn't too bad, of course, but the only way to get there is to include Colgate's 10-3 win over now-#20 Niagara, and we aren't really seeking to compare the ECAC to Atlantic Hockey are we?

Cornell's sweep of Colorado College is about the only real noteworthy event for the league in nonconference play thus far. It's the only matchup that has taken place all season between a ranked ECAC team and another team that's ranked. And now they're being jumped in league play so far. The other four ranked ECAC teams? Their non-conference resumes don't include a single ranked team to date.

St. Lawrence's overtime win over Western Michigan probably ranks as the league's non-conference victory of the year - it is the only time an ECAC team has beaten a team in the Top 10 with the exception of Dartmouth's win over Union in league play.

The bottom line is that the ECAC may be doing well outside the conference, but the majority of the success is coming against the middle and bottom third of the national strata, and the league's standard-bearers aren't exactly collecting impressive non-conference wins.

We don't want to put down our league, but facts are facts - since day one here at WaP, we've said the ECAC no longer deserves to be part of a "Big Four" grouping with the WCHA, CCHA, and Hockey East. It's more college hockey's only example of a "mid-major." However, it's fair to say that, early on, there are more teams that are likely to be able to make a national splash. All five of the league's currently ranked teams have shown brushes of greatness this season. Throw St. Lawrence into that mix as well - that's half the league (and a good reason why RPI is going to probably struggle to overcome their putrid league start).

But are all six of those teams going to be there at the end? Of course not. History tells us that once the league season begins in earnest, we'll be stabbing each other in the back and bringing each other down to size. Heck, it's already beginning, just ask Cornell and St. Lawrence. In the end, the league is going to be extremely fortunate to get three teams into the tournament, and four is almost certainly out of the question. Five and six will be impossible.

So let's give credit where credit is due - the ECAC certainly does have more that its usual share of teams that could do well on a national level this season. But "leading the way?" Child, please.

Tonight's Podcast: Brian Sullivan, Bryan Brutlag, Ed Lass

This week's edition of "follow the bouncing podcast" takes place tonight, Tuesday the 7th of December at 8pm. You can listen in by clicking "Listen to Without a Peer" over to the right.

We'll have three special guests on the podcast this week. First up, USCHO's Brian Sullivan joins us to talk about the first half of the ECAC season, as well as the exciting news within the league that the Yale Bulldogs are the consensus #1 team in the nation. A Boston University alum, he's also uniquely positioned to give us insight into the upcoming clash in Troy between the #15 Engineers and the #7 Terriers.

RPI senior Bryan Brutlag has been serving admirably as the on-ice captain for the last five games in the absence of John Kennedy (who has maintained his role as captain behind the RPI bench). He has scored in each of his two games against the Engineers' traditional rivals from Commonwealth Avenue, notching an assist as a sophomore in the Denver Cup loss two years ago, and scoring a goal as a junior in the victory at Agganis Arena last season. We'll ask him about the clash with BU, and get his thoughts on the team's play to date.

As a special treat, we will also talk to one of my fellow BlogTalkRadio hosts in a bit of a non sequitur conversation. Ed Lass, a local sports maven and Siena basketball devotee (and long-time personal friend of mine) will join us to talk about the Capital District sports scene and how RPI and Union hockey relate to other sports offerings in the area. We'll also talk about the Engineers heading to the Times Union Center in Albany. Don't worry, we'll explain.

Last week, Chip Malafronte of the New Haven Register gave us a solid primer on the Yale Bulldogs, and as expected, much of what he told us turned out to be very, very true this past weekend. Catch back up on demand with the player below until tonight's podcast airs - then you can listen to that one demand below. If you want to go back and relive any of our podcasts, just click "Listen to Without a Peer" in the upper right corner.

Listen to internet radio with Without a Peer on Blog Talk Radio

What the... ??

You may have noticed that we didn't include links to the USCHO recaps in the link dump that comes at the end of the weekend wraps. There's a reason for that. In the case of the Niagara game, there just wasn't one. But in the case of the RIT game... wow. It was so god-awful that I had to spare the casual reader from encountering it. It was so bad, in fact, that it requires a fisking... but I'll try to minimize the exposure. If you really want to see it, here it is. We are not responsible for seizures or strokes caused by reading this moronic screed.

Let's start at the top. Holy paragraphic headlines, Batman.

RPI continues to roll; tops cross-state engineering rival RIT in front of surprisingly large crowd

Buh? Yes that's 15 words (16 if you include "cross" and "state" as being separate) in a headline. Now, in the internet age, short headlines aren't necessarily a requirement - headlines have always been meant to be concise in print to grab a reader's attention - but this is really a bridge too far. That's almost the first sentence right there. A better answer would have been to leave it as "RPI continues to roll," and if you HAD to, make a sub-head with the rest of it.

It gets worse, though.

We won't reprint all of it, but in a game recap, the author manages to spend the first SEVEN paragraphs talking about attendance at Houston Field House and the fact that the Yankees were playing Texas in Game 6 of the ALCS at the same time.

At some point, the reader has to start asking himself... is this a game recap, or a commentary on crowd size?

The author does include the score relatively early on, but only in passing and in the THIRD paragraph.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute defeated the Rochester Institute of Technology 4–1 and joined Union, who defeated Niagara, in making it a sweep for two ECAC clubs from the capital district over two Atlantic Hockey sides from western New York on Friday.

Uh... first, why is the Union game relevant here? If someone wants to learn about the Union game, they can check out Dan Greene's recap, or even better, pick up the Gazette in the morning and read King Ken's words of wisdom. Second... "Capital District," of course, is a proper noun.

From there, it's more inane commentary on how many people were in the stands. This should have been either part of a sidebar commentary, or part of its own article. If someone's looking for information about the game, they have to read down quite a ways to get to it. I fell asleep in the fifth paragraph or so.

As an addendum, RIT's Chris Lerch - who was at the game broadcasting for WITR-FM - commented on the article that he thought the Field House looked "half full." But we can at least understand where he's coming from on that one. He was standing up on the catwalk during the game, and the only part of the stands you can see from that vantage point is the south side, AKA the library side, which was maybe only 3/4 full and dead as a doornail as is their norm. The north side, which was packed on Friday night, isn't visible from the catwalk. With no band on the non-existent stage to the east and the colorless construction zone (with no seating yet) filling up the west, Mr. Lerch can absolutely be excused for thinking that the Field House looked empty, especially considering that A) he had just broadcast a game from a building with 10,000 people in it the previous week and B) RIT's rink is so small and their tickets so coveted that they tend to jam it completely full (and more so) every night.

But the author of this piece, presumably sitting in the press box, didn't have that problem.

Seth Appert is actually the one who segues into actually talking about the game through his own words, but then the author drops this one:

One of those collisions was started by Chase Polacek only three and a half minutes into the game when he threw a monster hip-check on Jeff Smith right in front of his own bench, charging his teammates and the student section up in the process.

Or John Kennedy. One of the two. They're easy to mix-up, of course. One's a defenseman, one's a forward. One's 6'0" 205, the other's 5'8" 190. One's known for big hits, one's known for scoring goals. One is black, one is white. Oh, I know! They're both seniors. That must have been it.

The next thing to talk about, naturally, was this:

Polacek later continued his pursuit of a second consecutive nomination as a Hobey Baker finalist when he assisted on Rensselaer’s third goal at 15:46 of the second.

Um... what happened to the other two goals? They must not have been terribly important. But I'm glad to know that the Hobey Baker committee is going to say "boy, remember that assist he had against RIT in October? That was a big step right there." That's about as dumb as trying to sneak weed into a courthouse.

The main offensive story of the night

Not mentioned until the 12th paragraph...

was RPI freshman Brock Higgs breaking through and scoring his first two collegiate goals, each breaking a tie to put RPI ahead.

Yes, the first, of course, breaking that all so rare 0-0 tie in the first period.

The author actually does a decent job describing the goals of the game, but it got worse otherwise.

RIT coach Wayne Wilson was unhappy enough with his team’s performance to have them doing calisthenics drills in the public corridor outside their locker room as soon as they had shed their gear.

Yeah, because anyone who's ever milled about five minutes after a game has never seen a team, win, lose, or draw, doing calisthenics drills in the hallways. Wilson was obviously punishing them. Or maybe they had a game the next night and needed to make sure they weren't cramped up for it. That seems possible too, I don't know.

For those who are thinking and saying that RIT is not playing with the swagger and confidence of a program coming off its first Frozen Four appearance, remember that the Tigers started their 2009-10 campaign with five straight losses before dropping only six more the rest of the regular season.

Who is "thinking or saying" this instead of saying "where's the game recap?"

The author finishes... sort of... with the words of Coach Appert.

I haven’t made any decisions on that over the next couple of [non-conference] games, but at some point with what Bryce means to our program, he deserves an opportunity to get

And that's it! Good night from Houston Field House!

This guy is a "contributing editor." Scary.

Todd Milewski, International Man of Mystery (Media Pitstop #2)

For our second interview of the summer, we got the opportunity to sit down with another titan of the college hockey media world.

Todd Milewski is the executive editor of USCHO.com. The site is, for all intents and purposes, the grandfather of college hockey websites, having started publishing in the summer of 1996. The site revolutionized the way fans view the NCAA selection process when they began releasing the PairWise Rankings, a process of simple math that mimics the way the NCAA selection committee chooses at-large teams for the tournament. Today, the rankings, published weekly during the last third of the season, are closely watched at all levels of the sport, from the casual fans to the coaches. USCHO also publishes the most widely cited weekly national Top 20 poll in the college hockey world.

Milewski, a 1999 graduate of the University of Wisconsin, has been with USCHO for quite some time, serving a number of years as the site's WCHA writer. He has also covered the Wisconsin Badgers for USCHO and the Capital Times of Madison, Wis. Last season, Milewski became the executive editor at USCHO, and also works as a multimedia editor for madison.com.

Without a Peer: So... you primarily have covered Wisconsin, we primarily cover RPI. Probably the two teams that have been hardest hit by the importance of talent lost in the Great Youth Drain of 2010. Hug?

Todd Milewski: Sure, why not.

WaP: What's it going to be like for these teams this season? I mean, it seemed like no one saw this coming.

TM: If they really didn't see it coming, it's a little tough to understand. I think Wisconsin knew it was going to be a mass exodus. Maybe RPI was a little surprised, but this is what happens these days when you've got that kind of talent, like it or not. That's another subject altogether.

WaP: Does this brave new world make the elite talents somewhat less desirable than the solid talents that'll stick around for four years?

TM: I think it changes the game, but what I've heard coaches say is that you're willing to accept the reality that comes with having a player who's good enough to go after one year - as long as you've planned for it. Look at the backlog of players Wisconsin had commit over the last few years. That was for a reason. Now, it bit them last year because they may have expected more players to go, but if you're going to be in the hunt for the elite guys, you have to have Plans A, B and C, if not more.

WaP: Don Lucia has been accused of letting some blue chip talents de-commit and head elsewhere, but if you have guys returning that you thought were going to be gone, suddenly you don't have room for everyone.

TM: Exactly. I don't know how you can fault a coach for being prepared. If it went the other way, and they were grabbing players that were clearly not ready for this level just to fill out the team because more players left than expected, that coach would get the heat, too.

WaP: Seems like it might even the playing field a touch.

TM: I think it has. All of a sudden, some schools that didn't have a chance at upper-level recruits are in the mix.

WaP: So what are we looking at in the WCHA this season? Everything we've been hearing out here has it pegged as a battle between UND and SCSU at the top and a big mess below that. Is that fair?

TM: If it's like any of the last few seasons, North Dakota will start slow, pick up steam around the return from break and go on a tear down the stretch. So I think they'll be in the mix. I think SCSU could be good. I really wonder what we're going to see from Nebraska-Omaha and Bemidji State. I get the feeling Dean Blais is going to have UNO up there somewhere - maybe not the top, but a good chance at top half. I don't think you can rule out Denver, either, even with the losses they took.

WaP: Speaking of Dean Blais... given what he accomplished at North Dakota and what he's done for USA Hockey, especially the unexpected gold medal at the World Juniors last year, is it fair to call him the Herb Brooks of our time? Is that a fair comparison?

TM: I read someone making that comparison once, and my first reaction was to dismiss it. Then you think about it a little more, and it's not too far off. I'd like to give him another year or two at UNO to see if he has magic there, but in terms of a presence among college hockey coaches, he's in that class with Brooks.

WaP: Now that the dust seems almost ready to settle - although, who knows, there could be some more sudden and unexpected defections - who are your early pre-season choices to meet in St. Paul in April?

TM: That's a good one. Way too early to pick this, but I'll take Boston College for sure. They're not on that early departures list yet, which should be big for them. Then maybe North Dakota, Miami and how about Denver. I'm not enthused about picking DU there, but I can see it happening.

WaP: Could Yale have a legit shot at making it that far, or is the ECAC just doomed to mediocrity in late March?

TM: When I was looking through teams trying to come up with a Frozen Four, they were one of those in the list. Are they going to try to play every goaltender on campus again this season? I wasn't a big fan of that, and I wonder if it held them back last year. It seems like they have enough talent up front.

WaP: Their attitude seems to be that if you can score enough goals, you usually don't have to worry about defense all that much. BC spiked that idea last year. They've got a heck of a forecheck, though.

TM: I saw them play a couple games last year at the Wisconsin tournament, and they seemed like one of those teams that could break out and be a real force, but I wonder if that's a short-term deal.

WaP: How about the NCAA's proposal to change the regional system into a home series for the top seeds? What's your take on that?

TM: I think you have to do it one way or another. If you're going to have it on campus in the first round, it has to be on campus in the second round. Otherwise, aren't you just pushing those same attendance issues onto the second round? I think the NCAA needs to figure out what its priority is - attendance or a fair bracket - and go with whatever works best. But going to campus sites seems like a step back to me.

WaP: One thought we had about it is that, if nothing else, it might build some interesting out-of-conference rivalries if a couple of teams play a particularly intense series. We try to find the good in everything... unfortunately, we were unable to find anything good about the concept of icing on the penalty kill.

TM: Yeah, that was kind of out of left field, wasn't it?

WaP: It was shocking to find that Forrest Karr actually had a background in hockey and he was still pushing it as a good idea.

TM: Forrest definitely has a strong hockey background, and I think there's one thing in the idea that has at least some merit, and it's that players should be taught how to work the puck out of trouble instead of flinging it down the ice. I think that's a valid concern, but it didn't have enough weight to change that rule so radically.

WaP: Our overriding concern was really that Paul Kelly's job is hard enough without suddenly trying to convince potentially reticent recruits to come spend a few years playing with a power play and penalty kill strategy that no one else uses anywhere.

TM: Yeah, that's the overriding concern that I think finally brought it down. I feel bad for Forrest because that was his last set of rule changes as part of the committee, and that's what he'll be remembered for.

WaP: Yeah, that's definitely true. Sticks out like a sore thumb. Are half-shields in the NCAA's future? If so, what kind of effect will it have on the game?

TM: It's not hard to find people who think it is. I'm not sure it's going to be very easy to get that through the NCAA. It opens up a pretty big liability if you go from full shields to half shields. But if those who are in favor of the change can effectively explain how it can make the game safer, it has a chance. As for the effect it would have, let's hope it would keep some of those sticks down. Seriously, it's scary out there sometimes, and that's just from watching from the press box. Imagine it down on the ice.

WaP: Last question - what is there that could possibly be done to create some semblance of peace between the CHL and the NCAA?

TM: I honestly think if there's peace to be made, it's going to have to come from the NHL. And with the way things look right now, I don't like the chances of that happening. The CHL isn't going to give up things easily, and college hockey doesn't have anything to give away, really. I just have trouble picturing what harmony between the NHL, CHL and college would look like. I'd love to see it, but it's going to be tough.