New England Soccer Discussion

[blooter442]

OldNed, I think it has a lot to do with establishing a threshold that limits the number of teams that can be ranked within a given week. Since the top 1/6 of teams within a given region end up being ranked, there needs to be a certain cutoff that keeps everyone and their brother from being considered for ranking. (It certainly seems imperfect, as there are situations like St. Joe's and the aforementioned Luther.) Could be wrong, but that's my armchair (swivel chair, actually) punditry.

Now, how SoS and RvR comparatively stack up in terms of importance in compiling the actual rankings, I am not sure. I know they are both listed as "primary criteria," but it does not appear there's any delineation in terms of which is more (or less) important.

[OldNed]

OldNed, I think it has a lot to do with establishing a threshold that limits the number of teams that can be ranked within a given week. Since the top 1/6 of teams within a given region end up being ranked, there needs to be a certain cutoff that keeps everyone and their brother from being considered for ranking. (It certainly seems imperfect, as there are situations like St. Joe's and the aforementioned Luther.) Could be wrong, but that's my armchair (swivel chair, actually) punditry.

Now, how SoS and RvR comparatively stack up in terms of importance in compiling the actual rankings, I am not sure. I know they are both listed as "primary criteria," but it does not appear there's any delineation in terms of which is more (or less) important.

Thanks blooter- your first paragraph makes sense to me.  And I promise I'm done grumbling about this now.

[OldNed]

NEW ENGLAND REGION - NCAA REGIONAL RANKINGS - October 25, 2017

Rank	School	. Div. III . Record	. Div. III . SOS	. R-v-R .	. Non-Conf. . SOS	. Overall . Record	. Prev. . Rank
1.	Tufts	12-1-1	0.609	4-1-1	0.590	12-1-1	1
2.	Amherst	10-2-2	0.642	4-2-1	0.604	10-2-2	2
3.	Brandeis	11-3-0	0.620	3-3-0	0.600	11-3-0	4
4.	Springfield	13-0-1	0.559	3-0-0	0.565	13-0-1	6
5.	Bowdoin	10-3-1	0.580	3-1-1	0.528	10-3-1	9
6.	Connecticut College	9-1-4	0.603	1-1-4	0.544	9-1-4	3
7.	Williams	8-2-4	0.608	1-2-2	0.569	8-2-4	5
8.	Middlebury	9-5-0	0.611	1-4-0	0.601	9-5-0	7
9.	Mass-Boston	9-4-3	0.561	0-1-1	0.617	9-4-3	8
10.	Johnson and Wales	14-1-1	0.517	--	0.593	14-1-1	10
11.	Gordon	10-5-1	0.528	1-2-0	0.585	10-5-1	11
12.	WPI	11-4-1	0.521	0-1-1	0.490	11-4-1	--

Question for all you smart soccer guys out there - why is SOS more important than RvR?  Seems to me that a team like St. Joe's with a 2-0 RvR record should get a bump from that which might even out a poor SOS. No team other than the top 5 regionally ranked teams in New England have more than 2 wins RvR - except St. Joe's. Ok, enough of my grumbling...

Old Ned, IIRC a team's SOS must be above .500 to be considered in the regional rankings. A couple years ago in the North Region, Luther College found themselves in a similar position- they were regionally ranked in the first and/or second week, played a couple cupcakes, and found that they were bounced from the third rankings. Their SOS had fallen below the .500 threshold.

Someone please correct me if this information is false.

Wisco,

I don't know enough about this subject personally, but I did see in last week's regional ranking in the West that University of Dallas has a 0.492 SOS and they got the last slot.  Perhaps there just aren't that many good teams in that region so they had to slot in UDallas there. I'm not really sure, but that one stood out to me.

6.    University of Dallas    11-2-2    0.492    1-1-1    0.340    12-2-2    5

http://www.d3soccer.com/rankings/2017/Men/regional-rankings-2

[Flying Weasel]

NEW ENGLAND REGION - NCAA REGIONAL RANKINGS - October 25, 2017

Rank	School	. Div. III . Record	. Div. III . SOS	. R-v-R .	. Non-Conf. . SOS	. Overall . Record	. Prev. . Rank
1.	Tufts	12-1-1	0.609	4-1-1	0.590	12-1-1	1
2.	Amherst	10-2-2	0.642	4-2-1	0.604	10-2-2	2
3.	Brandeis	11-3-0	0.620	3-3-0	0.600	11-3-0	4
4.	Springfield	13-0-1	0.559	3-0-0	0.565	13-0-1	6
5.	Bowdoin	10-3-1	0.580	3-1-1	0.528	10-3-1	9
6.	Connecticut College	9-1-4	0.603	1-1-4	0.544	9-1-4	3
7.	Williams	8-2-4	0.608	1-2-2	0.569	8-2-4	5
8.	Middlebury	9-5-0	0.611	1-4-0	0.601	9-5-0	7
9.	Mass-Boston	9-4-3	0.561	0-1-1	0.617	9-4-3	8
10.	Johnson and Wales	14-1-1	0.517	--	0.593	14-1-1	10
11.	Gordon	10-5-1	0.528	1-2-0	0.585	10-5-1	11
12.	WPI	11-4-1	0.521	0-1-1	0.490	11-4-1	--

Question for all you smart soccer guys out there - why is SOS more important than RvR?  Seems to me that a team like St. Joe's with a 2-0 RvR record should get a bump from that which might even out a poor SOS. No team other than the top 5 regionally ranked teams in New England have more than 2 wins RvR - except St. Joe's. Ok, enough of my grumbling...

Old Ned, IIRC a team's SOS must be above .500 to be considered in the regional rankings. A couple years ago in the North Region, Luther College found themselves in a similar position- they were regionally ranked in the first and/or second week, played a couple cupcakes, and found that they were bounced from the third rankings. Their SOS had fallen below the .500 threshold.

Someone please correct me if this information is false.

Wisco,

I don't know enough about this subject personally, but I did see in last week's regional ranking in the West that University of Dallas has a 0.492 SOS and they got the last slot.  Perhaps there just aren't that many good teams in that region so they had to slot in UDallas there. I'm not really sure, but that one stood out to me.

6.    University of Dallas    11-2-2    0.492    1-1-1    0.340    12-2-2    5

http://www.d3soccer.com/rankings/2017/Men/regional-rankings-2

In both the first and second regional rankings this year there has been one team with a sub-.500 overall SOS.  So that indicates that there is no hard-and-fast .500 SOS threshold to be ranked.

It was in 2014 that Luther went from #2 in the North region in the first rankings to unranked the next week with their SOS going from a little above to a little below .500.  When asked by D3soccer.com, the NCAA committee denied there was any .500 SOS threshold to be ranked, but that was hard to accept because there was no other reasonable explanation for why Luther had dropped out from #2 when they had won both their games by shutout that week while several of the teams that moved ahead of them had lost.

The only time the committee seemed to acknowledge the use of a .500 SOS threshold to be ranked was in 2010.  The basis for doing so was never clear, because it most certainly was not stipulated in the Championship Manual.  The implementation of the threshold that season created quite the negative reaction when an undefeated Dominican and undefeated Swarthmore were left out of the first weekly rankings.  A week later they had already abandoned the threshold and Dominican and Swarthmore, despite ironically both picking up their first losses that week, were ranked #3 in the Mid-Atlantic and #2 in the Central regions.

The committee has no basis for a hard-and-fast threshold, and have been called out when it has seemed they were using one. So I doubt they are openly using any threshold at the present, but there may still be an unspoken understanding to try to avoid ranking teams with a sub-.500 SOS. There's no doubt a sub-.500 SOS is a huge strike against a team.

[OldNed]

In both the first and second regional rankings this year there has been one team with a sub-.500 overall SOS.  So that indicates that there is no hard-and-fast .500 SOS threshold to be ranked.

It was in 2014 that Luther went from #2 in the North region in the first rankings to unranked the next week with their SOS going from a little above to a little below .500.  When asked by D3soccer.com, the NCAA committee denied there was any .500 SOS threshold to be ranked, but that was hard to accept because there was no other reasonable explanation for why Luther had dropped out from #2 when they had won both their games by shutout that week while several of the teams that moved ahead of them had lost.

The only time the committee seemed to acknowledge the use of a .500 SOS threshold to be ranked was in 2010.  The basis for doing so was never clear, because it most certainly was not stipulated in the Championship Manual.  The implementation of the threshold that season created quite the negative reaction when an undefeated Dominican and undefeated Swarthmore were left out of the first weekly rankings.  A week later they had already abandoned the threshold and Dominican and Swarthmore, despite ironically both picking up their first losses that week, were ranked #3 in the Mid-Atlantic and #2 in the Central regions.

The committee has no basis for a hard-and-fast threshold, and have been called out when it has seemed they were using one. So I doubt they are openly using any threshold at the present, but there may still be an unspoken understanding to try to avoid ranking teams with a sub-.500 SOS. There's no doubt a sub-.500 SOS is a huge strike against a team.

Agreed - it's pretty clear this is the case.

[Mr.Right]

I actually kind of see your point that a 2-0-0 RvR is legitimate. I mean you can only play the teams on your schedule BUT their SOS in Conference is a horrific .482 and SOS out of conference not much better at .492. That is why when they did not play the Keene St or Colby matches it hurt their SOS a bit. I mean even Norwich has an Out of Conference schedule of .516 and while not great it is still way higher than St.Joe's. Johnson and Wales has no ranked wins but a .593 out of conference SOS which is legit. Now either way St.Joe's and Johnson and Wales both need the AQ so in the end it is just the plain weakness of the league that is dragging the top teams #'s way down. I suppose coaches could put pressure on the bottom feeders to pump their schedules up but coaches of those schools are not going to play a match where the final score could be 8-0 just so the top teams SOS rise. Makes no sense. Basically, your stuck until St.Joe's and frankly Johnson and Wales find a stronger conference that will take them.

[OldNed]

I actually kind of see your point that a 2-0-0 RvR is legitimate. I mean you can only play the teams on your schedule BUT their SOS in Conference is a horrific .482 and SOS out of conference not much better at .492. That is why when they did not play the Keene St or Colby matches it hurt their SOS a bit. I mean even Norwich has an Out of Conference schedule of .516 and while not great it is still way higher than St.Joe's. Johnson and Wales has no ranked wins but a .593 out of conference SOS which is legit. Now either way St.Joe's and Johnson and Wales both need the AQ so in the end it is just the plain weakness of the league that is dragging the top teams #'s way down. I suppose coaches could put pressure on the bottom feeders to pump their schedules up but coaches of those schools are not going to play a match where the final score could be 8-0 just so the top teams SOS rise. Makes no sense. Basically, your stuck until St.Joe's and frankly Johnson and Wales find a stronger conference that will take them.

I'm not able to give karma yet (when does one pass that threshold?), but if I were I would give you some here, Mr. Right. Interesting idea about getting to a better conference, but it may be easier in the short term to just schedule better out-of-conference opponents.

[1970s NESCAC Player]

I actually kind of see your point that a 2-0-0 RvR is legitimate. I mean you can only play the teams on your schedule BUT their SOS in Conference is a horrific .482 and SOS out of conference not much better at .492. That is why when they did not play the Keene St or Colby matches it hurt their SOS a bit. I mean even Norwich has an Out of Conference schedule of .516 and while not great it is still way higher than St.Joe's. Johnson and Wales has no ranked wins but a .593 out of conference SOS which is legit. Now either way St.Joe's and Johnson and Wales both need the AQ so in the end it is just the plain weakness of the league that is dragging the top teams #'s way down. I suppose coaches could put pressure on the bottom feeders to pump their schedules up but coaches of those schools are not going to play a match where the final score could be 8-0 just so the top teams SOS rise. Makes no sense. Basically, your stuck until St.Joe's and frankly Johnson and Wales find a stronger conference that will take them.

I'm not able to give karma yet (when does one pass that threshold?), but if I were I would give you some here, Mr. Right. Interesting idea about getting to a better conference, but it may be easier in the short term to just schedule better out-of-conference opponents.

Need to get to 200 posts.

[Mr.Right]

Gordon up on WNEC early 2nd Half 1-0...That loss WNEC had to Gordon earlier has really hurt them as they would of rather hosted this game. Gordon's field just plain sucks because it is so narrow

[blooter442]

Well well well...two years later and we again have Gordon at Endicott in the CCC final. The last time this happened, Endicott won the regular season meeting (at home) but then visiting Gordon came out and hit EC for two quick first half goals in the championship game and the Gulls never recovered. This year the regular season game was a 0-0 draw in which Endicott probably shaded general play. Let's see if Endicott can put the demons to rest and win its first CCC title.

[4231CenterBack]

I thought we went over this    Gordon's field is completely standard width for a turf soccer field.  Its slightly wider than Endicott's field and much wider than the comical Wentworth field.  Its almost indentical to the turf at Tufts.  There is a 4 yard spread between the 10 yard mark for corners and the 18 yrd box. 

Gordon up on WNEC early 2nd Half 1-0...That loss WNEC had to Gordon earlier has really hurt them as they would of rather hosted this game. Gordon's field just plain sucks because it is so narrow

[blooter442]

I thought we went over this    Gordon's field is completely standard width for a turf soccer field.  Its slightly wider than Endicott's field and much wider than the comical Wentworth field.  Its almost indentical to the turf at Tufts.  There is a 4 yard spread between the 10 yard mark for corners and the 18 yrd box.

Is it possible he is referencing the grass field? FWIW, I thought the grass field was somewhat narrow, and I assumed that was where most games were played, although clearly not the case if it was a 7:00 night game. I've run around the Gordon track before (assuming we're talking about that turf field), and the field seemed pretty standard, although there was no soccer game going on. Agree that Wentworth's field is hilarious in terms of width.

[4231CenterBack]

No he's talking about the turf.  Must look small on camera.  The grass field is even bigger. 

[Bobcat1]

Updated Regional Rankings:
NEW ENGLAND               
1.   Tufts     13-1-2   13-1-2      
2.   Amherst   11-3-2   11-3-2      
3.   Brandeis   12-4-0   12-4-0      
4.   Springfield   13-1-1   13-1-1      
5.   Bowdoin   10-3-3   10-3-3      
6.   Middlebury   11-5-0   11-5-0      
7.   Connecticut College   9-3-4   9-3-4      
8.   Williams   8-3-5   8-3-5      
9.   Clark (MA)   9-4-3   9-5-3      
10.   Endicott   11-4-3   11-4-3      
11.   UMass Boston   9-5-3   9-5-3      
12.   Gordon   12-5-1   12-5-1

[Flying Weasel]

NEW ENGLAND REGION - NCAA REGIONAL RANKINGS - November 01, 2017

Rank	School	. Div. III . Record	. Div. III . SOS	. R-v-R .	. Overall . Record	. Prev. . Rank
1.	Tufts	13-1-2	0.607	3-1-2	13-1-2	1
2.	Amherst	11-3-2	0.619	4-1-1	11-3-2	2
3.	Brandeis	12-4-0	0.630	5-4-0	12-4-0	3
4.	Springfield	13-1-1	0.554	3-0-1	13-1-1	4
5.	Bowdoin	10-3-3	0.585	2-1-3	10-3-3	5
6.	Middlebury	11-5-0	0.613	3-3-0	11-5-0	8
7.	Connecticut College	9-3-4	0.602	1-2-3	9-3-4	6
8.	Williams	8-3-5	0.605	0-3-3	8-3-5	7
9.	Clark	9-4-3	0.531	1-2-0	9-5-3	--
10.	Endicott	11-4-3	0.521	1-2-1	11-4-3	--
11.	Mass-Boston	9-5-3	0.556	0-1-1	9-5-3	9
12.	Gordon	12-5-1	0.531	0-2-0	12-5-1	11