Pool C

[KnightSlappy]

2010 tournament team RPI rankings

Rankings use in-region results only (I would like to use all D3, but that will have to wait until next year.)

RNK  REG  Team               CONF    WP      OWP     OOWP    SOS     RPI   Pool
01   MW   Washington U.      UAA     0.909   0.581   0.555   0.572   0.656   A
02   WE   UW-Whitewater      WIAC    0.815   0.615   0.552   0.594   0.649   C
03   WE   UW-Stevens Point   WIAC    0.846   0.588   0.560   0.578   0.645   A
04   AT   William Paterson   NJAC    0.923   0.556   0.536   0.549   0.643   A   
05   NE   Williams           NESCAC  1.000   0.508   0.549   0.522   0.641   A   
06   NE   Middlebury         NESCAC  0.870   0.580   0.519   0.559   0.637   C   
07   MW   Carthage           CCIW    0.857   0.566   0.548   0.560   0.634   A   
08   SO   Guilford           ODAC    0.929   0.522   0.541   0.528   0.628   A   
09   MA   Albright           MACC    0.800   0.582   0.547   0.570   0.628   A   
10   WE   St. Thomas         MIAC    0.870   0.544   0.536   0.541   0.623   C   
11   WE   Whitworth          NWC     0.920   0.517   0.531   0.522   0.622   A   
12   SO   Virginia Wesleyan  ODAC    0.800   0.565   0.524   0.551   0.613   C   
13   SO   Eastern Mennonite  ODAC    0.857   0.528   0.537   0.531   0.613   C   
14   AT   Richard Stockton   NJAC    0.760   0.577   0.534   0.563   0.612   C   
15   MA   St. Marys (Md.)    CAC     0.880   0.524   0.519   0.522   0.612   A   
16   AT   Merchant Marine    LAND    0.846   0.533   0.521   0.529   0.608   A   
17   EA   St. John Fisher    E8      0.808   0.542   0.536   0.540   0.607   C   
18   GL   Hope               MIAA    0.842   0.543   0.496   0.527   0.606   A   
19   NE   Brandeis           UAA     0.760   0.548   0.561   0.552   0.604   C   
20   SO   Randolph-Macon     ODAC    0.727   0.578   0.533   0.563   0.604   C   
21   MW   Illinois Wesleyan  CCIW    0.731   0.571   0.535   0.559   0.602   C   
22   SO   Texas-Dallas       ASC     0.846   0.525   0.507   0.519   0.601   C   
23   WE   Central            IIAC    0.913   0.487   0.513   0.496   0.600   A   
24   MA   Lycoming           MACC    0.727   0.563   0.546   0.558   0.600   C   
25   AT   Rutgers-Newark     NJAC    0.739   0.554   0.529   0.546   0.594   C   
26   GL   Wooster            NCAC    0.852   0.503   0.514   0.507   0.593   A   
27   EA   Oneonta State      SUNYAC  0.778   0.536   0.515   0.529   0.591   C   
28   MA   DeSales            MACF    0.840   0.505   0.514   0.508   0.591   A   
29   NE   MIT                NEWMAC  0.875   0.478   0.531   0.496   0.591   C   
30   MA   Cabrini            CSAC    0.926   0.470   0.494   0.478   0.590   A   
31   NE   Rhode Island Coll. LEC     0.741   0.545   0.524   0.538   0.589   A   
32   SO   Maryville (Tenn.)  GSAC    0.842   0.496   0.520   0.504   0.588   B   
33   MW   St. Norbert        MWC     0.875   0.484   0.510   0.493   0.588   A   
34   GL   John Carroll       OAC     0.750   0.544   0.515   0.534   0.588   C   
35   NE   Bridgewater State  MASCAC  0.783   0.518   0.524   0.520   0.586   A   
36   GL   Wilmington         OAC     0.769   0.525   0.524   0.525   0.586   A   
37   MA   Franklin&Marshall  CC      0.852   0.487   0.516   0.496   0.585   A   
38   EA   Plattsburgh State  SUNYAC  0.769   0.525   0.516   0.522   0.584   A   
39   EA   Nazareth           E8      0.680   0.562   0.531   0.552   0.584   A   
40   MW   Wheaton (Ill.)     CCIW    0.680   0.557   0.537   0.550   0.583   C   
41   EA   Medaille           AMCC    0.846   0.488   0.502   0.493   0.581   A   
42   WE   Chapman            IND     0.944   0.425   0.522   0.458   0.579   B   
43   NE   Gordon             CCC     0.852   0.476   0.503   0.485   0.577   A   
44   MW   Defiance           HCAC    0.808   0.496   0.507   0.500   0.577   A   
45   SO   Mary Hardin-Baylor ASC     0.815   0.489   0.505   0.494   0.574   A   
46   WE   Carleton           MIAC    0.679   0.542   0.528   0.538   0.573   A   
47   NE   Albertus Magnus    GNAC    0.815   0.481   0.514   0.492   0.573   A   
48   NE   Clark              NEWMAC  0.731   0.515   0.529   0.520   0.573   A   
49   WE   Claremont-M-S      SCIAC   0.773   0.503   0.500   0.502   0.570   A   
50   SO   Centre             SCAC    0.692   0.533   0.504   0.523   0.566   A   
51   MA   Wesley             CAC     0.727   0.508   0.507   0.508   0.563   C   
52   MW   Anderson           HCAC    0.800   0.463   0.505   0.477   0.558   C   
53   AT   Brooklyn           CUNYAC  0.778   0.467   0.507   0.480   0.555   A   
54   AT   SUNY-Purchase      SKY     0.714   0.487   0.503   0.492   0.548   A   
55   MW   Westminster (Mo.)  SLIAC   0.810   0.442   0.487   0.457   0.545   A   
56   EA   SUNYIT             NEAC    0.810   0.427   0.498   0.451   0.540   A   
57   MW   Aurora             NATHC   0.630   0.485   0.515   0.495   0.529   A   
58   EA   St. Lawrence       LL      0.615   0.485   0.517   0.496   0.526   A   
59   GL   Grove City         PrAC    0.680   0.461   0.500   0.474   0.526   A   
60   NE   Maine-Farmington   NAC     0.560   0.497   0.507   0.500   0.515   A   
61   SO   Chris. Newport     USAC    0.524   0.475   0.493   0.481   0.492   A   

[Greek Tragedy]

Whitewater is 22-5 overall, not sure where those records you have came from.

Skimming through, a lot seem to be wrong...John Carroll, Defiance...

[KnightSlappy]

Whitewater is 22-5 overall, not sure where those records you have came from.

Skimming through, a lot seem to be wrong...John Carroll, Defiance...

Yep, looks like the last two columns didn't take when the spreadsheet got sorted. 

Quick fix for now, took off the records. I'll try to correct tonight.

[ronk]

2010 tournament team RPI rankings

Rankings use in-region results only (I would like to use all D3, but that will have to wait until next year.)

RNK  REG  Team               CONF    WP      OWP     OOWP    SOS     RPI   Pool
01   MW   Washington U.      UAA     0.909   0.581   0.555   0.572   0.656   A
02   WE   UW-Whitewater      WIAC    0.815   0.61557   MW

   Would u be able to it for the women's tournament, also?

[KnightSlappy]

2010 tournament team RPI rankings

Rankings use in-region results only (I would like to use all D3, but that will have to wait until next year.)

RNK  REG  Team               CONF    WP      OWP     OOWP    SOS     RPI   Pool
01   MW   Washington U.      UAA     0.909   0.581   0.555   0.572   0.656   A
02   WE   UW-Whitewater      WIAC    0.815   0.61557   MW

   Would u be able to it for the women's tournament, also?

No, I don't have the data on the Women's teams. Sorry.

[Greek Tragedy]

BOLD is AQs

GREEN are Pool C winners

crossed out failed in Pool C bids

Through games of Sunday, Feb. 28, 2010.

Men's rankings

Atlantic Region
1. William Paterson 24-2 25-2
2. Merchant Marine 22-4 23-4
3. Richard Stockton 19-6 20-7
4. Rutgers-Newark 16-6 20-7
5. SUNY-Old Westbury 20-7 20-7


East Region
1. St. John Fisher 21-5 22-5
2. Plattsburgh State 20-6 21-7
3. Medaille 22-4 23-4
4. Oneonta State 21-6 22-6
5. Nazareth 17-8 18-9
6. Ithaca 15-7 18-8

Great Lakes Region
1. Wooster 23-4 23-5
2. Hope 16-3 21-7
3. Wilmington (Ohio) 20-6 21-7
4. John Carroll 18-6 20-6
5. Calvin 15-4 19-9
6. Wittenberg 17-7 21-7

Middle Atlantic Region
1. St. Mary's (Md.) 22-3 24-3
2. Albright 20-5 21-5
3. Cabrini 25-2 25-2
4. Franklin and Marshall 23-4 23-4
5. DeSales 21-4 22-5
6. Lycoming 17-6 21-6
7. Wesley 16-6 19-8
8. Messiah 15-6 16-9
9. York (Pa.) 17-7 19-7

Midwest Region
1. Washington U. 20-2 23-2
2. Carthage 18-3 22-5
3. St. Norbert 21-3 22-3
4. Illinois Wesleyan 19-7 20-7
5. Defiance 21-5 23-5
6. Wheaton (Ill.) 17-8 18-8
7. Anderson 20-5 22-5
8. Augustana 16-9 16-10

Northeast Region
1. Williams 24-0 26-1
2. Middlebury 20-3 24-3
3. Rhode Island College 20-7 20-7
4. Brandeis 19-6 19-6
5. MIT 21-3 22-4
6. Colby 17-5 19-6
7. Bridgewater State 18-5 19-7
8. Gordon 23-4 24-4
9. Western Connecticut State 18-7 19-7
10. WPI 19-7 20-7
11. Albertus Magnus 22-5 22-6

South Region
1. Guilford 26-2 26-2
2. Eastern Mennonite 18-3 22-4
3. Texas-Dallas 22-4 23-5
4. Randolph-Macon 16-6 22-6
5. Virginia Wesleyan 20-5 22-5
6. Maryville (Tenn.) 16-3 23-4
7. Austin 20-7 20-7
8. Mary Hardin-Baylor 22-5 22-6

West Region
1. Whitworth 23-2 25-2
2. UW-Stevens Point 22-4 23-4
3. UW-Whitewater 22-5 22-5
4. St. Thomas 20-4 23-3
5. Central 21-2 23-4
6. Chapman 17-1 23-2
7. Claremont-Mudd-Scripps 17-5 21-6
8. Carleton 19-9 19-9
9. UW-La Crosse 16-8 17-9

[Greek Tragedy]

This is with the last regional rankings made public with records prior to the last week's results.

POOL C CONTENDERS WITHOUT AQ'S INCLUDED.  Just to make it a little easier!

Conference Leader

Atlantic Region In-Region Record Overall Record
3.(3) Rutgers-Newark  16-5 20-6 (NJAC) LOST to Richard Stockton in NJAC semis
4.(5) Richard Stockton 19-5 19-6 (NJAC) LOST to William Paterson in NJAC Final
5.(4) Ramapo 17-7 18-8 (NJAC) LOST to William Paterson in NJAC semis;

Previously ranked:  York (N.Y.)  (CUNYAC) LOST to Brooklyn in CUNYAC Final

East Region In-Region Record Overall Record
1.(1) St. John Fisher  20-4 21-4 (Empire 8); LOST to Nazareth in Empire 8 Final
3.(3) Oneonta State  19-5 20-5 (SUNYAC) LOST to Plattsburgh State in SUNYAC Final
4.(NA) Ithaca  15-6 18-7 (Empire 8) LOST to Nazareth in Empire 8 semis  
6.(5) New York University 15-8 16-8 (UAA); LOST to Brandeis  

Dropping out:  Stevens  (Empire 8)

Previously ranked:  Rochester  (UAA) BEAT Emory

Great Lakes Region In-Region Record Overall Record
1.(2) John Carroll  17-5 19-5 (OAC) LOST to Heidelberg in OAC semis.
4.(4) Calvin 13-3 17-8 (MIAA); LOST to Hope in MIAA Final
5.(6) Thomas More  19-6 19-6 (PrAC) LOST to Grove City in PrAC Final

Dropping out:  Wittenberg (NCAC) LOST to Wooster in NCAC Final

Middle Atlantic Region In-Region Record Overall Record
5.(3) Lycoming 16-5 20-5 (MACC) LOST to Albright in MACC Final  
7.(8) Messiah 15-5 16-8 (MACC); LOST to Albright in MACC semis
8.(7) York (Pa) 18-6 19-6 (CAC); LOST to Wesley in CAC semis
9.(NA) Wesley 14-5 17-7 (CAC); LOST to St. Mary's (Md) in CAC Final

Dropping out:  Catholic (LAND) LOST to Scranton in LAND semis

Previously ranked:  Elizabethtown (MACC) LOST to Lycoming in MACC semis, Alvernia (MACC)


Midwest Region In-Region Record Overall Record
3.(4) Wheaton (Ill) 17-7 18-7 (CCIW); LOST to Illinois Wesleyan in CCIW semis
4.(5) Illinois Wesleyan  18-6 19-6 (CCIW); LOST to Carthage in CCIW Final
6.(6) Anderson 19-4 21-4 (HCAC); LOST to Defiance in HCAC Final
8.(8) Augustana 16-8 16-9 (CCIW); LOST to Carthage in CCIW semis

Northeast Region In-Region Record Overall Record
2.(3) Middlebury 19-2 23-2 (NESCAC); LOST to Williams in NESCAC Final
3.(2) MIT 21-2 22-3 (NEWMAC); LOST to Clark in NEWMAC semis
4.(5) Colby 17-4 19-5 (NESCAC); LOST to Middlebury in NESCAC semis
5.(4) Brandeis 18-6 18-6 (UAA); BEAT NYU
9.(11) Western Connecticut  17-6 18-6 (LEC); LOST to Rhode Island College in LEC Final  
10.(10) WPI 17-6 18-6 (NEWMAC);  LOST to Clark in NEWMAC Final
11.(8)Eastern Connecticut  17-8 17-8 (LEC); LOST to Western Connecticut in LEC semis

Previously ranked:  Mass-Dartmouth (LEC);

South Region In-Region Record Overall Record
1.(1) Eastern Mennonite  17-2 21-3 (ODAC) LOST to Randolph-Macon in ODAC semis 
3.(3) Texas-Dallas 20-3 21-4 (ASC-East); LOST to Mary Hardin-Baylor in ASC Final
4.(4) Virginia Wesleyan  19-4 21-4 (ODAC); LOST to Guilford in ODAC semis  
5.(6) Randolph-Macon 14-5 20-5 (ODAC); LOST to Guilford in ODAC Final
7.(5) Austin 19-6 19-6 (SCAC); LOST to DePauw in SCAC semis

Previously ranked:  Mississippi College  (ASC-East) LOST to Mary Hardin-Baylor in ASC semis

West Region In-Region Record Overall Record
1.(1) Whitewater 21-4 21-4 (WIAC); LOST to Stevens Point in WIAC Final
2.(3) St. Thomas 20-2 23-2 (MIAC); LOST to Carleton in MIAC semis
7.(9) La Crosse 16-7 17-8 (WIAC); LOST to Superior in WIAC quarterfinals
9.(8) Augsburg  17-7 18-7 (MIAC); LOST to Gustavus Adolphus in MIAC semis

[Titan Q]

New for 2010-11...


Effective with the 2011 championship, the calculation of the strength of schedule (SOS) for men's basketball will include a statistical component that gives significance to games played on the road.  The basketball committee proposed that a multiplier of 1.4 be added to OWP for those games played away from home.  In addition, the same multiplier (1.4) should be included for those games played on the road for the OOWP.  A multiplier of 1.0 (no positive or negative effect) should be included in the OWP and OOWP for all neutral games.  A multiplier of 0.6 should be included in the OWP and OOWP for all home games. 

[Just Bill]

New for 2010-11...


Effective with the 2011 championship, the calculation of the strength of schedule (SOS) for men's basketball will include a statistical component that gives significance to games played on the road.  The basketball committee proposed that a multiplier of 1.4 be added to OWP for those games played away from home.  In addition, the same multiplier (1.4) should be included for those games played on the road for the OOWP.  A multiplier of 1.0 (no positive or negative effect) should be included in the OWP and OOWP for all neutral games.  A multiplier of 0.6 should be included in the OWP and OOWP for all home games. 

Source? Women's too or just men's?  It would seem odd if this was a men's only rule.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

New for 2010-11...


Effective with the 2011 championship, the calculation of the strength of schedule (SOS) for men's basketball will include a statistical component that gives significance to games played on the road.  The basketball committee proposed that a multiplier of 1.4 be added to OWP for those games played away from home.  In addition, the same multiplier (1.4) should be included for those games played on the road for the OOWP.  A multiplier of 1.0 (no positive or negative effect) should be included in the OWP and OOWP for all neutral games.  A multiplier of 0.6 should be included in the OWP and OOWP for all home games. 

Seriously?  Road games are going to count more than double what home games count?  That seems a little steep.  1.0, 1.2, and 1.4 seems a little more in line, to me.

[Titan Q]

Source?

Per an e-mail from one of the Regional Advisory Committee members.

That's all I know about it.

[KnightSlappy]

This is not good. I thought I was nearly done with my regional ranking spreadsheet. Tack several more hours of work on.

They can do this, but they can't do a blinkin' RPI calculation?

I think they use a similar multiplyer in DI, but they use it for the winning percentage portion, I believe the OWP and OOWP's are left alone. Curious.

[Hugenerd]

Did they pick these constants out of a hat?  I would like to know who proposed this and the rationale they used to justify it.  Why dont we just go back to the 1-15 scale.    I hope this is some sort of early (or late) April Fools joke.

[Ralph Turner]

Did they pick these constants out of a hat?  I would like to know who proposed this and the rationale they used to justify it.  Why dont we just go back to the 1-15 scale.    I hope this is some sort of early (or late) April Fools joke.

The 0-15 scale was easy to use and probably approximates the new system, after a 25 game season.

Good teams will win and almost good teams will have lost 1 game that they should not have lost and will stay.

[Titan Q]

This seems like a simple OWP question I should know the answer to, but I don't...

Does your result vs a given in-region opponent count in the calculation of your own OWP?  For example, IWU beat Benedictine...then Benedictine beat Cornell (both games in-region for BU).  As far as IWU's OWP, is Benedictine 1-1 or 1-0 right now?

Thanks for your help.