Pool C

[CNU85]

RS,

SOS is 224. At-large Pool C bids will not go to schools that consistently schedule the easiest games they can find.  

[ADL70]

Husson OW% 0.356

[Mr. Ypsi]

My Pool B's:

1)  CWRU
2)  Wesley
3)  LaGrange

My Pool C's (in no particular order)

1) Otterbein
2) UWW
3)  HSU
4)  W&J
5)  Montclair State
6)  Cal Lutheran.

Thanks to all.

Still trying to figure Cal Lu over DePauw.   After today DPU has better OWP (20th) and OWWP than Cal Lu (39th).  Yes, Cal Lu lost to two undefeated teams, but their best win is against 8-2 Redlands while DPU knocked off formerly undefeated Wabash.  If DPU and Cal Lu are on the board for the last spot I gotta think the committee gives it to DePauw. 

But will DePauw even make it to the table?  IF I'm correct that W&J is the 4th C taken, there are only 2 slots left before they get there - and that's IF they are next in line.  They'd have to jump Catholic, Hampden Sydney, and Huntingdon (all of whom lost today, so maybe), but since the RRs only go to 10th I don't know if even then they are next up.

[Ron Boerger]

That's the key, alright, they have to get on the table, and it's a long shot.

[Ralph Turner]

That's the key, alright, they have to get on the table, and it's a long shot.

But valid points nevertheless.

My thoughts on Cal Lu are purely budget-inclined!

...
But will DePauw even make it to the table?  IF I'm correct that W&J is the 4th C taken, there are only 2 slots left before they get there - and that's IF they are next in line.  They'd have to jump Catholic, Hampden Sydney, and Huntingdon (all of whom lost today, so maybe), but since the RRs only go to 10th I don't know if even then they are next up.

I think that they "rank" beyond 10 for help in the discussions, so a DePauw may have been a "#12" or a "#13" last week.

Currently DPU is 8-2/7-2  (.778) in-region winning percentage.

OWP #20 .579
OOWP .510
In-region head-to-head (DPU lost to Trinity, if TU is on the "deep" board)
In-region common regionally ranked opponents.  Both lost to Millsaps
In-region results versus regionally ranked teams --  Results versus RRO 1-1.

[redswarm81]

RS -

You make a valid point, but even Kaiser was quoted as calling Husson a "2 loss team".

I think their very weak D3 schedule will ultimately cost them.

I have pontificated at great length (and depth, as measured by negative karma ) on Kaiser's calling Husson a "2 loss team."

In short, he can only call them a "2 loss team" if he ignores the Primary Criteria--which the rules prohibit him from doing.

[redswarm81]

RS,

SOS is 224. At-large Pool C bids will not go to schools that consistently schedule the easiest games they can find.  

(I don't know anything about Husson's "consistently schedule."  I do know that they are a team without a conference, in freaking Bangor Maine.)

If your argument were somehow reflected in the Selection Criteria, I'd agree with you wholeheartedly.  But the Primary Criteria require that you evaluate

Winning Percentage AND
OWP/OOWP AND
Head-to-Head AND
Record v. RROs AND
Record v. Common opponents.

You can't ignore winning percentage, and Husson's is HUGELY better than any other East Pool C candidate, EXCEPT Curry.

How's that for irony?

I didn't write the rules, and the rules say that you can't ignore the rules.

[redswarm81]

My Pool B's:

1)  CWRU
2)  Wesley
3)  LaGrange

My Pool C's (in no particular order)

1) Otterbein
2) UWW
3)  HSU
4)  W&J
5)  Montclair State
6)  Cal Lutheran.

Thanks to all.

Hey Ralph, can you give me any details on how undefeated Husson loses to (or ties with) 2-loss Montclair St. in the Primary Criteria?

I might be able to see how OWP/OOWP gets a team past another with one less loss, but two losses?  I don't understand how it's possible.

I get the impression that the Committee might simply be adding Won-loss percentage to OWP and OOWP to arrive at a comparison number.  I don't endorse such an analysis, since it effectively places a higher priority on SoS, and that seems illogical to me, since teams with losing records will have a higher average SoS than teams with winning records.  In any case, the Win PCT + OWP + OOWP formula gives these numbers:

Montclair:  0.800 + 0.503 + 0.518 = 1.821
Husson:    1.000 + 0.356 + 0.500 = 1.856

Dick Kaiser spoke of teams getting into the tournament on six thousandths of a point.  Here, Husson leads by over 3 hundredths!   

[Ralph Turner]

My Pool B's:

1)  CWRU
2)  Wesley
3)  LaGrange

My Pool C's (in no particular order)

1) Otterbein
2) UWW
3)  HSU
4)  W&J
5)  Montclair State  results vs regionally ranked opponents
6)  Cal Lutheran.

Thanks to all.

Hey Ralph, can you give me any details on how undefeated Husson loses to (or ties with) 2-loss Montclair St. in the Primary Criteria?

I might be able to see how OWP/OOWP gets a team past another with one less loss, but two losses?  I don't understand how it's possible.

Husson has no results versus regionally ranked opponents.

I have given thought to the Husson question, the travel question for #1 Willamette and #2 Oxy and whether DePauw leaps into the South Region Rankings by virtue of their win over Wabash.  You cannot compare scores off a rivalry game, but the Wabash outcome did not impress me relative to the SCAC!

Thanks for asking.

[redswarm81]

My Pool B's:

1)  CWRU
2)  Wesley
3)  LaGrange

My Pool C's (in no particular order)

1) Otterbein
2) UWW
3)  HSU
4)  W&J
5)  Montclair State  results vs regionally ranked opponents
6)  Cal Lutheran.

Thanks to all.

Hey Ralph, can you give me any details on how undefeated Husson loses to (or ties with) 2-loss Montclair St. in the Primary Criteria?

I might be able to see how OWP/OOWP gets a team past another with one less loss, but two losses?  I don't understand how it's possible.

Husson has no results versus regionally ranked opponents.

I have given thought to the Husson question, the travel question for #1 Willamette and #2 Oxy and whether DePauw leaps into the South Region Rankings by virtue of their win over Wabash.  You cannot compare scores off a rivalry game, but the Wabash outcome did not impress me relative to the SCAC!

Thanks for asking.

Is Rowan ranked?  If so, a 1-1 record v. RROs beats the .200 advantage in winning percentage.  If not, Montclair gets bonus points for losing (to Cortland).

[Ralph Turner]

I have always interpreted "results" to permit any game outcome.

In baseball especially, you can see that some teams may have 6-9 games versus regionally ranked teams.  Going 3-6 versus other regionally ranked teams (and 25-8 in region) may tell more about a team than a team that is 32-2 in-region, but no games versus regionally ranked opponents.

[labart96]

Rowan was ranked #8 in the East Region in the final published rankings:

East Region
1. Cortland State 9-0 9-0 lost badly to #2 IC
2. Ithaca 7-1 8-1 - beat previously #1 Cortland by 20+
3. Montclair State 8-1 8-1 - lost to Kean
4. Hobart 7-1 7-1 - beat Rochester
5. RPI 7-1 7-1 - lost to MMA
6. Hartwick 6-2 6-2 - beat Utica
7. Plymouth State 8-1 9-1 - beat MM - clinched NEFC
8. Rowan 7-2 7-2 - crushed TCNJ
9. Curry 8-1 9-1 - did not play
10. Albright 6-1 7-2 - lost badly to del val

[redswarm81]

I have always interpreted "results" to permit any game outcome.

In baseball especially, you can see that some teams may have 6-9 games versus regionally ranked teams.  Going 3-6 versus other regionally ranked teams (and 25-8 in region) may tell more about a team that is 32-2, but no games versus regionally ranked opponents.

So you're okay with a team getting bonus points for losing, if its only "results" in games v. regionally ranked opponents were losses?  Personally, I wouldn't be so sanguine.  I'll have to give some thought to the overlap of (results v. RROs) and OWP--clearly, there is some.

It is clear that Rowan was ranked, and surely remains ranked in the double secret probation rankings.

Here's a crazy thought:  If Husson were 9-0 overall, would you arrive at the same result v. Montclair St.?  I bet Dick Kaiser wouldn't    8)

UPDATE: Maybe that's my new angle/argument on appeal: Husson should have been told before the season started that even a 9-0 record would not earn it entry to the NCAA tournament.  Woe be unto the geographically inconvenient Pool Bees.

[Ralph Turner]

Actually, I think that the word "results" is deliberately used instead of "winning percentage versus regionally ranked" teams. 

We have considered winning percentage in the first of the listed primary criteria.

[ADL70]

Maybe the committees deliberation goes something like this.  Looks like team A (RR 9-0) is the best team in the region, but what about team B?  RR (6-0), but their OW% and OOW% are lower.  How about team C?  Their RR is 8-1, but they have a much higher OW% and OOW%.  The committee says "no clearly superior team." No other primary criteria apply, but team B has 2 non-region losses.  Committee ranks team C higher.

While Kaiser mentioned a numerical evaluation, it may be wrong to infer that they are doing some kind of calcuation with the various winning percentages.