Ranking D3 BBall Conferences

[Ralph Turner]

The 8-team ASC West and the 7-team ASC East play single round robin inter-divisional games and double round-robin intra-divisional games to make a 21- and 20-game conference schedule. The top 4 teams in the division go the conference tourney which alternates between division winners, men and women, in alternating years.

[lefrakenstein]

First, the NESCAC tournament provides a chance to play a lot of the better teams twice.

...Except that every conference 'cept the UAA has a conference tournament.  So that affords teams the opportunity to play the top teams in their conference thrice, not twice.

So its actually pretty comparable to the CCIW and UAA (14 league games I believe?)

The CCIW is an 8 team league so they play 14 league games.  The UAA is also 8 (14 league games).  The WIAC is 9 (16).  Other conferences play even more league games than this if they've got two divisions and crossover.

And Amherst's choice to play non-con opponents a second time is laudible... but that doesn't expose them to a full slate of games against all the conference teams.  Having home and away series against league foes can make immense amounts of difference.  UW Whitewater and UW Platteville both lost in away games at Oshkosh and Eau Claire respectively, in the same night last season, by 1 and 5 points.  They'd won these games by 11 and 31 on their home courts in December, and it cost them a chance at a share of the conference championship and the best seeding in the conference tournament.  Platteville and Whitewater played 3 times, as did Platteville and Point.  Had these 3 teams not lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament, Whitewater and Platteville would have met up in the Sweet 16 and the winner could have met up with Stevens Point in the Elite 8 (Point would have met Puget Sound in the Elite 8 for the 3rd time in 6 years.

Secondly, I understand that the NE is still no where near an elite region, but it's been getting a lot better outside of the NESCAC. Teams like UMass-Dartmouth, RIC, Keene State, Elms, MIT, Brandeis and others have all been getting better recently. Definitely a lot more challengers than there were just a few years ago. Little East and NEWMAC both seem like they are edging towards legitimacy. Huge Nerd can probably comment on this more knowledgeably than I can.

Where's the evidence of this?  I'm not necessarily saying it isn't true... but unless these teams beat non-regional opponents, they might just be beating up on the other regional lightweights.

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. We play Williams and Wesleyan, who are in the NESCAC, twice in the regular season, but only one of the games counts towards the conference records. So we do play a home and away with at least two of the teams, including Williams, the other traditional power.

Didn't realize the WIAC plays a 16 game regular season conference schedule PLUS a conference championship, That's a whole lot of conference games.

I don't really have much evidence other than personal observation for the improvement of the rest of New England. I'm sure Huge Nerd could pull up some crazy stats.

[Ralph Turner]

First, the NESCAC tournament provides a chance to play a lot of the better teams twice.

...Except that every conference 'cept the UAA has a conference tournament.  So that affords teams the opportunity to play the top teams in their conference thrice, not twice.

So its actually pretty comparable to the CCIW and UAA (14 league games I believe?)

The CCIW is an 8 team league so they play 14 league games.  The UAA is also 8 (14 league games).  The WIAC is 9 (16).  Other conferences play even more league games than this if they've got two divisions and crossover.

And Amherst's choice to play non-con opponents a second time is laudible... but that doesn't expose them to a full slate of games against all the conference teams.  Having home and away series against league foes can make immense amounts of difference.  UW Whitewater and UW Platteville both lost in away games at Oshkosh and Eau Claire respectively, in the same night last season, by 1 and 5 points.  They'd won these games by 11 and 31 on their home courts in December, and it cost them a chance at a share of the conference championship and the best seeding in the conference tournament.  Platteville and Whitewater played 3 times, as did Platteville and Point.  Had these 3 teams not lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament, Whitewater and Platteville would have met up in the Sweet 16 and the winner could have met up with Stevens Point in the Elite 8 (Point would have met Puget Sound in the Elite 8 for the 3rd time in 6 years.

Secondly, I understand that the NE is still no where near an elite region, but it's been getting a lot better outside of the NESCAC. Teams like UMass-Dartmouth, RIC, Keene State, Elms, MIT, Brandeis and others have all been getting better recently. Definitely a lot more challengers than there were just a few years ago. Little East and NEWMAC both seem like they are edging towards legitimacy. Huge Nerd can probably comment on this more knowledgeably than I can.

Where's the evidence of this?  I'm not necessarily saying it isn't true... but unless these teams beat non-regional opponents, they might just be beating up on the other regional lightweights.

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. We play Williams and Wesleyan, who are in the NESCAC, twice in the regular season, but only one of the games counts towards the conference records. So we do play a home and away with at least two of the teams, including Williams, the other traditional power.

Didn't realize the WIAC plays a 16 game regular season conference schedule PLUS a conference championship, That's a whole lot of conference games.

I don't really have much evidence other than personal observation for the improvement of the rest of New England. I'm sure Huge Nerd could pull up some crazy stats.

I think that the old message board (pre-2005) had a statistical analysis of the NESCAC and their SOS numbers.

If I were a conference commissioner designing a schedule to optimize the SOS of my conference, I would choose either the NESCAC or the UAA.

1)  Fewer conference games (NESCAC, no more than 9-12 regular season games versus conference opponents.  UAA only has 14.)

2)  Very little duplication in non-conference, in-region opponents.  NESCAC has 70+ likely teams that are in-region with good geographic proximity and good records to boost the numbers.  The UAA is spread over five regions, but has very close proximity to two more (Atlantic and Mid-Atlantic Regions).  They can cherry-pick beatable teams that will have good numbers for SOS/OWP/OOWP.

3)  The UAA is spread over five regions when being considered for in-region rankings.  Several teams may be at the table when bids are being deliberated.

4)  If you want to see how not to do it, consider the ASC which basically has little choice in non-conference opponents.  It is just easier on class time and schedule making to go with the 20-21 game conference slate.

[Hugenerd]

Unfortunately,  when it comes to Midwest/West vs. Northeast, there is not many games for comparison (you could always look at the Massey ratings, which are not out yet for this year).  You might have some oddball tourney that a team goes to, but usually all you have is the final four of the NCAA tourney.  The one constant is to see how Brandeis does in the UAA and then see how they do in NE to see the relative strength, but again, that is just one team so who knows how matchups, etc., would go if you had a larger population of inter-region games.  Last year, for example, Brandeis only had 4 losses in the UAA (2 to WashU), finishing 2nd to WashU, and played WashU really tight at home, while having 4 non-conference losses in region to Lasell, WPI, UMD, and Framingham State.  With that performance, Brandeis was ranked 8th in the final released NE rankings at the end of last year.  So make what you will with those numbers, but if the 2nd best team in the UAA is the 8th best team in NE, I would say NE is pretty deep (in my opinion).  Also, the NESCAC was really down last year and, in my opinion, the conference appears to be very strong this year, so I think the NE is stronger this year than last in terms of the top teams.  There are some teams that were very strong last year that appear to have fallen off a bit (RIC, Salem State, Bridgewater), but, in general, I think it is too early to tell even the hierarchy in-region, let alone to know with any sense of certainty across the whole nation.  I really don't see any reason to try to bash the Northeast, there are very strong teams up here just like there are in the Midwest/West.  It just so happens that, unfortunately for the CCIW and their fans, the top team in the CCIW has not been as good as either the top team in the UAA (WashU) or the top team in the WIAC in recent years, and due to their geographic proximity those teams meet before the final four.  Therefore, although the CCIW is a strong conference and a deep conference, they dont have the hardware they feel they deserve.  We just have to accept this as a geographic fact because I doubt one of the following two things will happen: a) someone comes up with a business plan that makes flying d3 teams all across the country to play games profitable, or b) WashU decides St. Louis isnt for them and relocates to Maine.

[Hugenerd]

First, the NESCAC tournament provides a chance to play a lot of the better teams twice.

...Except that every conference 'cept the UAA has a conference tournament.  So that affords teams the opportunity to play the top teams in their conference thrice, not twice.

So its actually pretty comparable to the CCIW and UAA (14 league games I believe?)

The CCIW is an 8 team league so they play 14 league games.  The UAA is also 8 (14 league games).  The WIAC is 9 (16).  Other conferences play even more league games than this if they've got two divisions and crossover.

And Amherst's choice to play non-con opponents a second time is laudible... but that doesn't expose them to a full slate of games against all the conference teams.  Having home and away series against league foes can make immense amounts of difference.  UW Whitewater and UW Platteville both lost in away games at Oshkosh and Eau Claire respectively, in the same night last season, by 1 and 5 points.  They'd won these games by 11 and 31 on their home courts in December, and it cost them a chance at a share of the conference championship and the best seeding in the conference tournament.  Platteville and Whitewater played 3 times, as did Platteville and Point.  Had these 3 teams not lost in the second round of the NCAA tournament, Whitewater and Platteville would have met up in the Sweet 16 and the winner could have met up with Stevens Point in the Elite 8 (Point would have met Puget Sound in the Elite 8 for the 3rd time in 6 years.

Secondly, I understand that the NE is still no where near an elite region, but it's been getting a lot better outside of the NESCAC. Teams like UMass-Dartmouth, RIC, Keene State, Elms, MIT, Brandeis and others have all been getting better recently. Definitely a lot more challengers than there were just a few years ago. Little East and NEWMAC both seem like they are edging towards legitimacy. Huge Nerd can probably comment on this more knowledgeably than I can.

Where's the evidence of this?  I'm not necessarily saying it isn't true... but unless these teams beat non-regional opponents, they might just be beating up on the other regional lightweights.

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. We play Williams and Wesleyan, who are in the NESCAC, twice in the regular season, but only one of the games counts towards the conference records. So we do play a home and away with at least two of the teams, including Williams, the other traditional power.

Didn't realize the WIAC plays a 16 game regular season conference schedule PLUS a conference championship, That's a whole lot of conference games.

I don't really have much evidence other than personal observation for the improvement of the rest of New England. I'm sure Huge Nerd could pull up some crazy stats.

I think that the old message board (pre-2005) had a statistical analysis of the NESCAC and their SOS numbers.

If I were a conference commissioner designing a schedule to optimize the SOS of my conference, I would choose either the NESCAC or the UAA.

1)  Fewer conference games (NESCAC, no more than 9-12 regular season games versus conference opponents.  UAA only has 14.)

2)  Very little duplication in non-conference, in-region opponents.  NESCAC has 70+ likely teams that are in-region with good geographic proximity and good records to boost the numbers.  The UAA is spread over five regions, but has very close proximity to two more (Atlantic and Mid-Atlantic Regions).  They can cherry-pick beatable teams that will have good numbers for SOS/OWP/OOWP.

3)  The UAA is spread over five regions when being considered for in-region rankings.  Several teams may be at the table when bids are being deliberated.

4)  If you want to see how not to do it, consider the ASC which basically has little choice in non-conference opponents.  It is just easier on class time and schedule making to go with the 20-21 game conference slate.

Yeah, you may as well not even waste your time calculating OWP and OOWP numbers for the ASC, just plug in 0.5 for every team and move on to some other criteria.

[John Gleich]

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. We play Williams and Wesleyan, who are in the NESCAC, twice in the regular season, but only one of the games counts towards the conference records. So we do play a home and away with at least two of the teams, including Williams, the other traditional power.

Didn't realize the WIAC plays a 16 game regular season conference schedule PLUS a conference championship, That's a whole lot of conference games.

I don't really have much evidence other than personal observation for the improvement of the rest of New England. I'm sure Huge Nerd could pull up some crazy stats.

I knew what you meant, it was me who was not clear.  I know that Williams and Amherst play once as a conference game and once as a non-conference game.  That's what I said is laudable to a point... but it still isn't a double round robin.  As I said, it takes a lot to play a team twice, home and away.  Those late-season road trips can be brutal and they can often be games that a good team loses.  And I'm not even talking about rivalry games like Williams and Amherst.  Those games are always going to be tough and records won't matter.  It's the games against teams that have been up and down that have some talented players that can get hot.

[Titan Q]

If I were a conference commissioner designing a schedule to optimize the SOS of my conference, I would choose either the NESCAC or the UAA.

1)  Fewer conference games (NESCAC, no more than 9-12 regular season games versus conference opponents.  UAA only has 14.)

You are absolutely right, Ralph...but in my opinion, optimizing conference SOS is not really what's in the best interest of a conference.  If I'm a conference commissioner, I'd rather know that my league has fair system for determining a conference champion, and that every school (and student-athlete) plays on a level field each season.  The best way to do that is via a double round robin.  This year Middlebury plays @ Amherst, but does not get a chance to host the Lord Jeffs.  In terms of determining a true conference champion, that just does not sit well with me.

I like the UAA's model - double round robin, but no conference tournament.  Why should a strong league beat itself up even more by playing a conference tourny?  The CCIW held out a long time before going to one and I wish the league would scrap it.  The teams that go 0-1 and 1-1 in the 4-team tournament always end up in worse position come Selection Sunday (and most years, one or both of those teams are strong Pool C candidates).

[Gregory Sager]

If I were a conference commissioner designing a schedule to optimize the SOS of my conference, I would choose either the NESCAC or the UAA.

1)  Fewer conference games (NESCAC, no more than 9-12 regular season games versus conference opponents.  UAA only has 14.)

You are absolutely right, Ralph...but in my opinion, optimizing conference SOS is not really what's in the best interest of a conference.

From the standpoints of fairness, fan interest, and basketball purism, you're right, of course. But from the standpoint of, "Let's get as many teams into the D3 tourney as we can so that we can ramp up our accomplishments as a league in March," it's hard to argue with the NESCAC model.

Just imagine what would happen if the CCIW abandoned the double round-robin and moved to a single round-robin, and replaced those seven CCIW games with games against the top tier of the surrounding leagues -- teams such as Benedictine, Aurora, Wartburg, Hope, Webster, Fontbonne, DePauw, Carroll, St. Norbert, Lawrence, Franklin, Defiance, etc. Sure, the CCIW would lose some of those games, especially the second-division CCIW teams. But the upper four or five CCIW teams, if not more of them, would in all likelihood enhance their credentials over what they would be if the league was still in a double round-robin schedule format, via strength of schedule if not in-region winning percentage as well.

I'd hate to see that happen, of course. But it would certainly augment the league's chances for additional Pool C berths every season.

[hopefan]

Updated D3 vs D3 non conference standings

1   ODAC   34   9   0.791 2   UAA   40   12   0.769 3   WIAC   29   9   0.763 4   MACC   34   12   0.739 5   NJAC   38   15   0.717 6   NESCAC   44   20   0.688 7   MIAC   22   11   0.667 8   CCIW   31   16   0.660 9   SCAC   27   15   0.643 10   LEC   35   22   0.614 11   SUNYAC   23   15   0.605 12   E8   25   18   0.581 13   Newmac   33   25   0.569 14   OAC   22   17   0.564 15   IIAC   20   16   0.556 16   GNAC   27   22   0.551 17   HCAC   22   18   0.550 18   LL   25   23   0.521 19   AMCC   16   15   0.516 20   CAC   20   19   0.513 21   Landmark   19   22   0.463 22   ASC   9   11   0.450 23   SCIAC   13   16   0.448 24   MWC   17   22   0.436 25   NCAC   22   29   0.431 26   CC   16   22   0.421 27   Mascac   21   29   0.420 28   Sky   12   17   0.414 29   NWC   7   10   0.412 30   NECC   22   32   0.407 31   CCC   39   58   0.402 32   MIAA   11   17   0.393 33   MACF   13   21   0.382 34   CUNY   21   36   0.368 35   Independent   22   38   0.367 36   NATCH   16   28   0.364 37   CSAC   9   16   0.360 38   PrAC   11   21   0.344 39   NAC   13   28   0.317 40   USAC   12   30   0.286 41   SLIAC   8   22   0.267 42   NEAC   12   38   0.240 43   UMAC   6   25   0.194

[smedindy]

This is a fascinating argument because it has echoes of back when the NCAA D-1 tourney regionals were actually regionals, and the argument was that UCLA usually had an easy route to the final 4 because the West wasn't so strong. Of course, they had to win the Pac-10 and then had to win IN the Final 4, but still.

Unless a sugar daddy allows D-3 to break away from its regionality, you're going to have issues like all of the above, where the NESCAC can cherry pick, the CCIW is stuck in a tough area and the ASC plays with itself for the most part.

Maybe an ASC / SCAC / GSAC challenge?

[hickory_cornhusker]

This is a fascinating argument because it has echoes of back when the NCAA D-1 tourney regionals were actually regionals, and the argument was that UCLA usually had an easy route to the final 4 because the West wasn't so strong. Of course, they had to win the Pac-10 and then had to win IN the Final 4, but still.

Unless a sugar daddy allows D-3 to break away from its regionality, you're going to have issues like all of the above, where the NESCAC can cherry pick, the CCIW is stuck in a tough area and the ASC plays with itself for the most part.

Maybe an ASC / SCAC / GSAC challenge?

This is a good idea in theory but with the OOWP factored in the SOS would still gravitate around .500 with all of the teams playing each other but no one else. You almost would have to do a ASC-CCIW/WIAC challenge to get it to work. (There are a alot of teams in the ASC so I put two conferences on the other side of the challenge.) You have to get fresh blood for your opponents and fresh blood for your opponents' opponents.

[Gregory Sager]

This is a fascinating argument because it has echoes of back when the NCAA D-1 tourney regionals were actually regionals, and the argument was that UCLA usually had an easy route to the final 4 because the West wasn't so strong. Of course, they had to win the Pac-10 and then had to win IN the Final 4, but still.

Unless a sugar daddy allows D-3 to break away from its regionality, you're going to have issues like all of the above, where the NESCAC can cherry pick, the CCIW is stuck in a tough area and the ASC plays with itself for the most part.

Maybe an ASC / SCAC / GSAC challenge?

This is a good idea in theory but with the OOWP factored in the SOS would still gravitate around .500 with all of the teams playing each other but no one else. You almost would have to do a ASC-CCIW/WIAC challenge to get it to work. (There are a alot of teams in the ASC so I put two conferences on the other side of the challenge.) You have to get fresh blood for your opponents and fresh blood for your opponents' opponents.

Perhaps they could hold the ASC/CCIW-WIAC Challenge in Branson, MO. Tony Orlando could do the pregame renditions of the national anthem.

[smedindy]

This is a fascinating argument because it has echoes of back when the NCAA D-1 tourney regionals were actually regionals, and the argument was that UCLA usually had an easy route to the final 4 because the West wasn't so strong. Of course, they had to win the Pac-10 and then had to win IN the Final 4, but still.

Unless a sugar daddy allows D-3 to break away from its regionality, you're going to have issues like all of the above, where the NESCAC can cherry pick, the CCIW is stuck in a tough area and the ASC plays with itself for the most part.

Maybe an ASC / SCAC / GSAC challenge?

This is a good idea in theory but with the OOWP factored in the SOS would still gravitate around .500 with all of the teams playing each other but no one else. You almost would have to do a ASC-CCIW/WIAC challenge to get it to work. (There are a alot of teams in the ASC so I put two conferences on the other side of the challenge.) You have to get fresh blood for your opponents and fresh blood for your opponents' opponents.

Perhaps they could hold the ASC/CCIW-WIAC Challenge in Branson, MO. Tony Orlando could do the pregame renditions of the national anthem.

And Yakov Smirnov could be the PA announcer! "What a country! What a layup! In Soviet Russia, shot blocks you!"

[hickory_cornhusker]

This is a fascinating argument because it has echoes of back when the NCAA D-1 tourney regionals were actually regionals, and the argument was that UCLA usually had an easy route to the final 4 because the West wasn't so strong. Of course, they had to win the Pac-10 and then had to win IN the Final 4, but still.

Unless a sugar daddy allows D-3 to break away from its regionality, you're going to have issues like all of the above, where the NESCAC can cherry pick, the CCIW is stuck in a tough area and the ASC plays with itself for the most part.

Maybe an ASC / SCAC / GSAC challenge?

This is a good idea in theory but with the OOWP factored in the SOS would still gravitate around .500 with all of the teams playing each other but no one else. You almost would have to do a ASC-CCIW/WIAC challenge to get it to work. (There are a alot of teams in the ASC so I put two conferences on the other side of the challenge.) You have to get fresh blood for your opponents and fresh blood for your opponents' opponents.

Perhaps they could hold the ASC/CCIW-WIAC Challenge in Branson, MO. Tony Orlando could do the pregame renditions of the national anthem.

And Yakov Smirnov could be the PA announcer! "What a country! What a layup! In Soviet Russia, shot blocks you!"

I'm sure there are a lot of older alumni from the WIAC who would love another reason to visit Branson. It seems like every senior center around eastern Wisconsin plans at least one trip a year there, usually another one near Christmas.

[Hugenerd]

Didnt know what the best forum for this was, but here is the complete list for the NCSA Collegiate Power Rankings (takes into account athletics, academics, and graduation rate):

http://www.ncsasports.org/about-ncsa/power-rankings