Pool C

[Wydown Blvd.]

I think they are making changes to it now, because the site is disabled...

[Ralph Turner]

The site asks for help from fans if you see there is an error. Ill email them your comment Ralph.

Thanks, I emailed him the info as well.

We see UT-Dallas busing to Trinity, and the winner going to WUSTL.  Oh, fun!

[Ralph Turner]

The first bracket of the year that I have seen.  Pool C'ers may find this interesting.

http://www.d3bracketology.bravehost.com/

They have FIVE CCIW teams making the tournament............so zero cred.

I agree.  At least four of those CCIW teams garner losses from here on out.

In his last four, Brandeis is not even listed on pabegg's chart.

Augie is currently #50, Bowdoin is #57!

Carthage is #71!

That is skipping over St Joe's L.I. NY #40, and William Paterson #44 from the NJAC.

[Hugenerd]

That bracket is pretty disconnected from reality.  It has 12-8 Brandeis making the tourney. Brandeis is currently 4 games back of WashUin the UAA with 5 games to go, but WashU holds the tiebreak so they are effectively 5 back with 5 to go (UAA has no tourney).  That means Brandeis would some how get a Pool C with 8 in region losses (no Pool C team made it in the tourney with 8 region losses last year).

After seing Brandeis in the bracket, I stopped looking through it, but I am sure some people who follow d3 closely set it up.

[Mr. Ypsi]

The first bracket of the year that I have seen.  Pool C'ers may find this interesting.

http://www.d3bracketology.bravehost.com/

They have FIVE CCIW teams making the tournament............so zero cred.

I agree.  At least four of those CCIW teams garner losses from here on out.

In his last four, Brandeis is not even listed on pabegg's chart.

Augie is currently #50, Bowdoin is #57!

Carthage is #71!

That is skipping over St Joe's L.I. NY #40, and William Paterson #44 from the NJAC.

Before you scoff TOO hard, notice who is #1 in SOS this week.

But, yeah, they are AQ or go home.  (Of course, that is what Wheaton assumed last year.)

[Wydown Blvd.]

yeah its a little weird that someone willing to put the effort into making the webpage and bracket wouldnt check and take into consideration the great info that pabegg posts... well, it sure quickly triggered some discussion

[Ralph Turner]

The first bracket of the year that I have seen.  Pool C'ers may find this interesting.

http://www.d3bracketology.bravehost.com/

They have FIVE CCIW teams making the tournament............so zero cred.

I agree.  At least four of those CCIW teams garner losses from here on out.

In his last four, Brandeis is not even listed on pabegg's chart.

Augie is currently #50, Bowdoin is #57!

Carthage is #71!

That is skipping over St Joe's L.I. NY #40, and William Paterson #44 from the NJAC.

Before you scoff TOO hard, notice who is #1 in SOS this week.

But, yeah, they are AQ or go home.  (Of course, that is what Wheaton assumed last year.)

I believe that Carthage's OWP/OOWP has been considered in the pabegg's ranking!

• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).

I need a valued opinion...

Mr Ypsi and/or others, do you read Strength of Schedule to be the OWP/OOWP or does Strength of Schedule include the numerical rank as well as the raw data from OWP and OOWP?

Thanks.

[Ralph Turner]

yeah its a little weird that someone willing to put the effort into making the webpage and bracket wouldnt check and take into consideration the great info that pabegg posts... well, it sure quickly triggered some discussion

Pabegg's data is becoming very critical in our analyses.  We may be able to surmise the last 8 teams on the table come Selection Sunday.

[sac]

yeah its a little weird that someone willing to put the effort into making the webpage and bracket wouldnt check and take into consideration the great info that pabegg posts... well, it sure quickly triggered some discussion

Pabegg's data is becoming very critical in our analyses.  We may be able to surmise the last 8 teams on the table come Selection Sunday.

I think pabegg's data is awesome.  I look forward to it every week.

[Ralph Turner]

The  old PnAc is the new CSAC.

It is 397 miles from Guilford to Capital.  That is good.

Bowdoin to Ithaca is 489 miles.

[Ralph Turner]

yeah its a little weird that someone willing to put the effort into making the webpage and bracket wouldnt check and take into consideration the great info that pabegg posts... well, it sure quickly triggered some discussion

Pabegg's data is becoming very critical in our analyses.  We may be able to surmise the last 8 teams on the table come Selection Sunday.

I think pabegg's data is awesome.  I look forward to it every week.

Same here.

I think that we are one more selection cycle away from canonizing it!   

[sac]

I need a valued opinion...

Mr Ypsi and/or others, do you read Strength of Schedule to be the OWP/OOWP or does Strength of Schedule include the numerical rank as well as the raw data from OWP and OOWP?

I don't really consider either a strength of schedule.  But it gets tossed around that way.


Example from last year Wash U's inregion record 16-5, Ursinas' inregion record 22-1.........if you played both you get more 'credit' for playing Ursinas but clearly WashU was the much better team.

OWP and OOWP just tell you how many games your opponents won, nothing more.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Well sac... the OWP tells you how many games your opponents won, while the OOWP balances out if a team that is 20-1 is beating nothing but sub-.500 teams while a 16-5 team is battling a tough schedule with maybe half of its opponents at better than .500. So... there is some math that keeps a team with a great record (Chapman) from getting too much credit for beating up an easy schedule.

[sac]

Well sac... the OWP tells you how many games your opponents won, while the OOWP balances out if a team that is 20-1 is beating nothing but sub-.500 teams while a 16-5 team is battling a tough schedule with maybe half of its opponents at better than .500. So... there is some math that keeps a team with a great record (Chapman) from getting too much credit for beating up an easy schedule.

Team A plays Haverford (10-1) ..................Haverford played Ursinas(20-1)

Team B plays Augustana.(10-1).................Augustana played Washington(16-5)

Guess which one is going to have a higher OOWP Dave?  It really doesn't balance anything out, it just perpetuates the notion that wins is the way to rate a teams strength.

[KnightSlappy]

Well sac... the OWP tells you how many games your opponents won, while the OOWP balances out if a team that is 20-1 is beating nothing but sub-.500 teams while a 16-5 team is battling a tough schedule with maybe half of its opponents at better than .500. So... there is some math that keeps a team with a great record (Chapman) from getting too much credit for beating up an easy schedule.

Team A plays Haverford (10-1) ..................Haverford played Ursinas(20-1)

Team B plays Augustana.(10-1).................Augustana played Washington(16-5)

Guess which one is going to have a higher OOWP Dave?  It really doesn't balance anything out, it just perpetuates the notion that wins is the way to rate a teams strength.

I guess Teams A and B should have played more than just one game!