Great Lakes Region

[Flying Dutch Fan]

Yeah, except Hope's OWP and OOWP are nearly as low as Woo's.  My guess would be that the differences among 1, 2, and 3 were razor thin.

Actually Hope's OWP is closer to Cap's than it is to Woo's, but we might as well be splitting hairs. 

[sac]

Yeah, except Hope's OWP and OOWP are nearly as low as Woo's.  My guess would be that the differences among 1, 2, and 3 were razor thin.

Regional winning %
1. Hope  .882
2. Cap .833
3. Woo .882

I don't know if its razor thin but they seem to be aplying the numbers rationally, unlike the other gender.  I'm not sure I agree with Cap being ahead of Woo however.

[ChicagoHopeNut]

Yeah, except Hope's OWP and OOWP are nearly as low as Woo's.  My guess would be that the differences among 1, 2, and 3 were razor thin.

Regional winning %
1. Hope  .882
2. Cap .833
3. Woo .882

I don't know if its razor thin but they seem to be aplying the numbers rationally, unlike the other gender.  I'm not sure I agree with Cap being ahead of Woo however.

I never thought I'd say it but after looking at the women's GL numbers this rankings seems completely reasonable. At least you can look at all the numbers and understand why things shook out they way they have even if you might have personally weighed different measures more or less strongly.

[kiltedbryan]

Yeah, except Hope's OWP and OOWP are nearly as low as Woo's.  My guess would be that the differences among 1, 2, and 3 were razor thin.

We might be splitting hairs...but at the same time, the OWP listing on this site says that Hope's .508 is good enough for 167th best among all D-III teams, while Wooster's .484 is 261st nationally. Capital's .528 OWP places them 95th best.

So it may be splitting hairs- and it may be razor-thin- but it's still wide enough for almost 100 teams to fit in-between, which feels more significant of a way to measure it than simply what I did above when I subtracted the two numbers.

[Flying Dutch Fan]

Yeah, except Hope's OWP and OOWP are nearly as low as Woo's.  My guess would be that the differences among 1, 2, and 3 were razor thin.

We might be splitting hairs...but at the same time, the OWP listing on this site says that Hope's .508 is good enough for 167th best among all D-III teams, while Wooster's .484 is 261st nationally. Capital's .528 OWP places them 95th best.

So it may be splitting hairs- and it may be razor-thin- but it's still wide enough for almost 100 teams to fit in-between, which feels more significant of a way to measure it than simply what I did above when I subtracted the two numbers.

Yes, but both Hope & Wooster would have to lose a game to be down to the same regional winning percentage as Capital.

[ChicagoHopeNut]

The good news for Hope, Capital and Wooster is that I think all are safely Pool C locks unless the craziest week of Pool A upsets in history occurs.

[Pat Coleman]

I never thought I'd say it but after looking at the women's GL numbers this rankings seems completely reasonable. At least you can look at all the numbers and understand why things shook out they way they have even if you might have personally weighed different measures more or less strongly.

This is true but remember the rankings are based on more than just those numbers. These are also criteria:

• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

[sac]

From what I'm seeing though looking around the regions, OWP is being used as a trump card.  I'm not even sure it measures anything, I see people calling it strength of schedule but its not, its just your opponents winning percentage. 


OWP is a component of RPI, but its being used as a stand alone measurement and I'm not certain thats how it should be used.

[ScotsFan]

Well, I was nervous about Wooster's opponents and their lack of winning percentage hurting Wooster in the poll last week and my nervousness proved to come to fruition...   I guess a loss is viewed better than wins over crappy teams in the eyes of the ranking committee...

At least Wabash and their .667 regional winning percentage came through with the upset over Kenyon and their .545 regional winning percentage.  That should help Wooster somewhat. 

I just have to wonder how many more Cap losses is it going to take for Wooster to jump them in the regional rankings???

[Hopester]

So a question for the expert posters out there. If Hope men were to finish number 1 in the GL poll, and the Hope women were to finish number two. Under the assumption that there are no tournament upsets. Who would host the second weekend. Men or women?

[hope1]

i think the girls would

[sac]

So a question for the expert posters out there. If Hope men were to finish number 1 in the GL poll, and the Hope women were to finish number two. Under the assumption that there are no tournament upsets. Who would host the second weekend. Men or women?

The men have priority for rounds 1 and 2 during even years. 

I don't think the women will have a chance to even be in the running, we can scratch that.

[Flying Dutch Fan]

So a question for the expert posters out there. If Hope men were to finish number 1 in the GL poll, and the Hope women were to finish number two. Under the assumption that there are no tournament upsets. Who would host the second weekend. Men or women?

The men have priority for rounds 1 and 2 during even years. 

I don't think the women will have a chance to even be in the running, we can scratch that.

Yeah, with their terrible 1.000 winning percentage and all   (no I'm not bitter about the women's ranking at all)

[NW Hope Fan]

With Woo and Cap losing I assume we may host next week. Any guesses who we might see? Sac???

[David Collinge]

With Woo and Cap losing I assume we may host next week. Any guesses who we might see? Sac???

Yeah, I think that you'll probably see sac.