Great Lakes Region

[ziggy]

Per Hope... I know the message was relayed... and I was told it would be adjusted... I am not sure why it wasn't.

Two key things Calvin has going against them: an SOS of .431 which is roughly in the bottom 1/4 of the country... and no results versus regionally ranked opponents. We have seen over the last two years that these two keys will hurt a team if they have a low SOS and if they didn't play a lot of teams that ended up being regionally ranked. Franciscan and Pitt-Greensburg are the only other two teams in the Great Lakes region with no opponents that have been ranked regionally.

From the looks of it Calvin could get on equal standing with St. Vincent if they were able to magically add in a road in-region loss to a regionally ranked opponent. Yay!

[bojack]

Per Hope... I know the message was relayed... and I was told it would be adjusted... I am not sure why it wasn't.

Two key things Calvin has going against them: an SOS of .431 which is roughly in the bottom 1/4 of the country... and no results versus regionally ranked opponents. We have seen over the last two years that these two keys will hurt a team if they have a low SOS and if they didn't play a lot of teams that ended up being regionally ranked. Franciscan and Pitt-Greensburg are the only other two teams in the Great Lakes region with no opponents that have been ranked regionally.

Who's fault is it that Calvin has not played regionally ranked opponents? This process is an abomination. No worries NCAA, only 4 years of extremely hard work and dedication by your student/athletes at stake...thanks for punching the numbers into a spreadsheet.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

The criteria isn't new and Vande Streek said on Hoopsville that this year they had some opponents who didn't live up to expectations. Even he realizes sometimes it is out of your hands. Win the AQ and you won't have to worry about it. We also have two regional rankings to come (one public, one private - the final one) where Calvin can improve - their SOS has already come up .02 thanks to teams like Hope improving their WPs.

[sac]

Yeah: in-region results versus regionally ranked opponents is primary.

Your point was they had not played a regionally ranked opponent, I was pointing out they had.

Primary or secondary was not part of the equation.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

sac - I was talking about criteria and I am sorry I didn't say "in-region" which I thought would be assumed. That data is also in the SOS sheets provided by the NCAA: http://web1.ncaa.org/champsel_new/exec/pdf/staticpdfrank?doWhat=publicrankings&sportCode=MBB&region=30&division=3

[KnightSlappy]

Also a good one: Capital is ranked above St. Vincent because Marietta used to be ranked. Once ranked always ranked is a huge joke.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Well they put that in because teams were getting punished in the final regional rankings when a team that was ranked the whole time dropped out... which then hurt other teams in the region. It was really bad the first year when the rankings went through a gut check after conference tournaments.

[KnightSlappy]

Well they put that in because teams were getting punished in the final regional rankings when a team that was ranked the whole time dropped out... which then hurt other teams in the region. It was really bad the first year when the rankings went through a gut check after conference tournaments.

Getting "punished" for not scheduling games versus teams that would end up regionally ranked? Isn't how the results versus regionally ranked criterion works?

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

No... it was teams like in the East and Atlantic that only have six spots and a team that was regionally ranked the whole time took a bad loss and slipped out in the very last rankings. I am not talking about any regional ranking prior to that... just the very last one. That is what happened a few years ago. And usually it was the conference opponent that ended up being hurt by it... not one they had or had not scheduled.

[bojack]

Well they put that in because teams were getting punished in the final regional rankings when a team that was ranked the whole time dropped out... which then hurt other teams in the region. It was really bad the first year when the rankings went through a gut check after conference tournaments.

Which makes sense. I know you are just reporting the process and thank you for that. It just seems like a lot of bandaids on a pretty brutal process. If they did regional ranking throughout the year Calvin would have benefitted quite highly for wins vs Adrian who may be have been pretty high in early january when they boasted an undefeated record and a win vs #1 wooster...at wooster.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Trust me - I wish there were more regional rankings - there used to be I think up to six... but they have cut back and one of the biggest reasons is because even in mid-January there isn't a lot of data to base on and with the fact there is "once ranked, always ranked" they don't want to be ranking opponents who really probably don't deserve to be ranked on so little data but they have to because the criteria says that team should be ranked.

As for the criteria and rules... these are not mutually exclusive to basketball... they are across the board for all sports. So, it is the overall Championships Committee at the NCAA who ultimately decides if these protocols will be put in place. If they didn't make sense for all of most sports, they don't do it.

[KnightSlappy]

Interesting to me: only 5 regionally ranked teams (that would count as an in-region game) exist within 385 miles for Calvin. 10 exist period.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Too bad Hope wasn't having a better season as many, including myself, expected... you could add at least one more to that list. Very interesting indeed, KnightSlappy.

[neilrocks]

Too bad Hope wasn't having a better season as many, including myself, expected... you could add at least one more to that list. Very interesting indeed, KnightSlappy.

Yes, Dave, I agree it would be nice if Hope had a better record.

However, 4 of their losses are to regionally ranked teams, 3 of which were on the road and one was a neurtal site. (IWU #1, NCC #4, Wheaton #3 and Calvin #6).

[AO]

No... it was teams like in the East and Atlantic that only have six spots and a team that was regionally ranked the whole time took a bad loss and slipped out in the very last rankings. I am not talking about any regional ranking prior to that... just the very last one. That is what happened a few years ago. And usually it was the conference opponent that ended up being hurt by it... not one they had or had not scheduled.

Why is a win against a team with a bad loss in November, worse than a team with a bad loss in February?  The only regional ranking that should matter is the last one.