SCHEDULE | INTERACTIVE BRACKET 

Quarterfinal: Thursday, Feb. 25
 No. 5 Hamline 3, No. 4 Concordia 0 | Box Score | Recap |

Semifinals: Saturday, Feb. 27
No. 1 Augsburg 5, No. 5 Hamline 2 | Box Score | Recap | 
No. 3 Saint John's 2, No. 2 St. Thomas 1 (OT) | Box Score | Recap |

Championship: Saturday, March 5
No. 1 Augsburg 5, No. 3 Saint John's 4 (3OT) | Box Score | Recap | Photos |   

   

TEAMS AND LINKS

Seed     Team    MIAC    Points   Overall     More Info  
No. 1
   Augsburg   11-3-2   36    17-8-2   Team Page
No. 2
   St. Thomas   10-3-3   34   13-8-5
   Team Page
No. 3
   Saint John's   10-4-2   33   13-10-4
   Team Page
No. 4
   Concordia   8-7-1   26   10-14-2
   Team Page
No. 5
   Hamline
   6-8-2   22   10-12-5
   Team Page

MIAC Men's Hockey Playoffs News

3.5.16 - Augsburg wins triple-OT thriller to claim 2016 MIAC Men's Hockey Playoff title
3.4.16 - MIAC ready to crown 2016 Hockey Playoff champions Saturday
2.27.16 - Augsburg, Saint John's use thrilling semifinal wins to reach men's hockey title game
2.25.16 - Hamline rekindles MIAC Men's Hockey Playoff magic in quarterfinal road upset
2.20.16 - Champion Augsburg headlines MIAC Men's Hockey Playoff bracket

MIAC Men's Hockey Links

| Website | Standings | Schedule | Statistics | News | Athletes-of-the-Week | Season Preivew | Recordbook | Archives | 

MIAC Men's Hockey Playoff Seeding Tie Breakers

For top five teams and placing the top five. Based only on conference competition.

1. Head to head winning percentage amongst tied teams.
2. The number of wins (not including shootout wins) earned during that season’s conference play.  
3. Winning percentage amongst all tied teams, beginning in rank order.^
4. Total goal differential with those tied (not including shootout goals).
5. Goal differential for total conference season (not including shootout goals).
6. Number of overtime losses.   
7. Random Selection.  

^Rank order comparison: When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team's record against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tie-breaking procedure), rather than the performance against the individual tied teams. (Example: Team A and Team B tie for fourth place. Team C and Team D tie for second place. The Team C-D tiebreaker is settled first using tiebreaker criteria. If the Team A-B tiebreaker reaches the secohd-place team(s) in Criteria No. 3, Team A and Bs record will be compared collectively against Teams C and D, not individually against the winner of the C-D tiebreaker.

2015-16 MIAC Playoffs & Championships