Top 25 talk

[Pat Coleman]

Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

[Pat Coleman]

Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

One of them to 2-23 Macalester.

[AO]

Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

Playing in the national championship game isn't enough to inspire you?  In any given year how many teams ranked much above #30 could beat a D2 power like St. Cloud State, and play the D3 champs to the bitter end on their home floor?

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Glad you are focusing on just two games versus the 23 others that resulted in a poor record... and thus the complaint about Massey.

[ziggy]

Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

Nor can they account for teams playing uninspired against crappy teams.

[AO]

Glad you are focusing on just two games versus the 23 others that resulted in a poor record... and thus the complaint about Massey.

The other 12 wins were nothing to sneeze at.  The only cupcake on the MIAC schedule was Macalester.  Subjectively they looked like they could beat a top 25 team.

[Pat Coleman]

Computers can't account for teams playing inspired against their archrivals. Yes, they lost to UWSP (by 27, mind you), but they also lost 10 other games.

Nor can they account for teams playing uninspired against crappy teams.

No doubt. But regardless, No. 30 for the sixth-best team in the MIAC is excessive. (And they weren't even sixth-best in the MIAC standings.)

[Greek Tragedy]

Can we even consider the MIAC a top 10 conference?

[Pat Coleman]

Can we even consider the MIAC a top 10 conference?

Oh, I would probably say so but I have fastidiously avoided thinking about how we would rank conferences subjectively because it's such a massive undertaking to rank 80-some leagues.

[KnightSlappy]

Massey currently has Pacific Lutheran as playing the 12th toughest schedule in D3.  Filtering out Pacific Lutheran' exhibition game with Seattle Pacific takes that schedule down to #30.  Calvin is at #95 filter out their exhibition game with Ferris State takes it down to #118.  I guess its up to the reader to decide if that's enough of an error.

The other big problem with massey is the number of missing scores, particularly involving NAIA and lower divisions.  Its frustrating that it can't be 100% accurate but in general massey is usually 'in the ballpark' and its the best we have.  I just wish it could be better and more accurate.

Massey does not count the games that are marked as exhibitions on his site, I do not believe. He DOES count the games when they're an exhibition for one team but not another (and doesn't mark these as exhibitions).

[AO]

Can we even consider the MIAC a top 10 conference?

Oh, I would probably say so but I have fastidiously avoided thinking about how we would rank conferences subjectively because it's such a massive undertaking to rank 80-some leagues.

Maybe try ranking the men's basketball conferences first, then see if you have the energy to rank the volleyball and field hockey conferences?  (obviously the 40 or so men's conferences is still a large number) The UMAC can't be last in both football and basketball, right?

[Pat Coleman]

I mean that if I go through the process to rank MBB conferences I have to do the same for WBB, and that's where I get 80-plus.

[AO]

I mean that if I go through the process to rank MBB conferences I have to do the same for WBB, and that's where I get 80-plus.

Yes, I know, just poking fun at your self-imposed title IX regulations.  You ought to feel ashamed that you haven't created the women's sport equivalent of d3football.com's Kickoff. 

I suppose the women might also get a little upset that their best conference is #41 on your list...

[Gregory Sager]

I'm kind of confused why some people seem to think the CCIW is "down" or "not up to past standards".  This years .648 win % puts it #7 on that 21 year list, making it in the top 1/3 and frankly above avg.

Are we simply comparing the CCIW to its very best seasons, and isn't that always going to be futile?

I think only Greg is in that camp.  I don't recall seeing anyone else suggest that.  I think the CCIW "is who we thought it was" (shout out to Dennis Green).  Typical year really.

I didn't realize that we had established "camps" here, Bob. If there's any camps involved here, they consist of these two: Your opinion and mine.

There is selection bias here at work, which I freely admit. In terms of the post-Carroll CCIW, the '90s were markedly down by comparison, the '00s were markedly up, and this decade seems to be in the middle, more or less. So the selection bias really comes down to how many previous seasons you want to lump in with the current one (or the past two or three) in order to make an evaluation.

The CCIW's current problem - in terms of overall strength - is what's happening at North Park and Elmhurst.  The programs at NPU and EC are not in great shape right now...althouth NPU has a new coach with a strong track record at Anderson, and Elmhurst's Mark Scherer has had a lot of good CCIW seasons in the past.

I painfully agree about NPU and Elmhurst. Can't deny it, as the 'jays have gone 4-7, 6-5, 5-6, and 5-6 in non-con play over the past four years, while NPU's gone 4-7, 5-6, 7-4, and 6-5 over that span.

In North Central, Illinois Wesleyan, Wheaton, and Augustana, the CCIW really has four extremely strong "anchor" programs at the present time - each of these programs is poised to be good year after year.  Carthage is a good, solid 5th program.  Millikin plays 10 freshman this year and seems to have brighter days ahead under Matt Nadelhoffer, who is working his tail off to build the Big Blue.

Carthage has had its struggles over the past couple of years, going 11-11 in non-con play over that time. Since the Red Men will return zero bigs next season, the jury's out as to whether they will be "good, solid" next season, too. And let's not overplay Millikin's success just yet. It's true that the Big Blue are markedly better than they've been (which isn't saying much), and they definitely have a talented freshman class. But it's still a long ways away from being a healthy program, recordwise, and the jury has to remain out until we see just how many of those frosh return to campus in Decatur next fall.

[Mr. Ypsi]

I realize this is the basketball board, but a question I hope someone can answer.  Annually, Massey has NESCAC football teams ranked very high.  Since Massey is a purely data-driven computer ranking (or so I understand it), how can they rank NESCAC football (whether high, low, or in between) since they NEVER play ANYONE outside of other NESCAC teams?  There is NO data to compute for comparisons!