Top Conferences and NCAA Bids

[jknezek]

Thanks.  Not sure what I was after either!  I guess just that whether you are #3 or #4 or #4 or #5 can be critical and obviously there can be very thin lines between those teams.  But as you suggest, obviously the committees know this.  Do you know if they weight last 5 games heavier than a middle 5 game stretch, or like a big win early vs a big win late?

I don't have a clue. I have a feeling each Regional Ranking committee goes by its own standards. They meet several times and they come to a consensus by the end. I'm sure not all of the committee members agree with every spot, but they do the best they can. And yes, that 3/4/5 does get critical, but it has to be done to make sense of the process. The NCAA works on a winnowing process. You winnow down teams first with play on the field, meaning the best way to make the tourney is win your AQ.

After that, you are at the mercy of a committee, which is unfortunate. However, even in this process they try and find the best solution by taking the people that should know the teams best, a regionally focused group, and ordering them. After that, they try and take the best from each region and compare them one at at time. This limits the discussion in a reasonable fashion and directs the debate to only a few teams at a time. The process allows for some indepth discussion about each of the "C" picks and I can't think of a better way to do it. Sometimes it is disappointing and we don't always agree with the outcomes, but it is a very reasonable process to try and come up with the best possible tournament.

Really it's the same in all sports. If you really want to go to the playoffs, prove it on the field by winning your AQ. After that,  if you don't make it and feel like you should, it is really just a matter of splitting hairs. Take care of your business and don't leave it to others to decide your fate.

[PaulNewman]

So, in theory, 7-8 teams could be selected out of New England before a single team comes off the board from any other region.  Don't you imagine it works a little more like "your region just got one, or the last two, and so now we get one"?

[jknezek]

So, in theory, 7-8 teams could be selected out of New England before a single team comes off the board from any other region.  Don't you imagine it works a little more like "your region just got one, or the last two, and so now we get one"?

No. I don't think so. I think it would be more likely the people not from the East gather around and say, do we really think your 5 is better than all our 1s? The answer, most likely, is no. So that swings the pendulum. I don't think it's as much a smoky backroom as you want to believe. It's simply people who know their regions well and probably believe their regions have strong teams. They pick those teams and then use the reasons they picked those teams to argue for inclusion. At some point, that argument sways enough of the other regions to accept that pick. Especially since arguments are limited. For example, if the East argues their 1 pick is best because of SOS or total wins, at some point those same arguments will be used against them when a different region has the advantage.

[PaulNewman]

I don't think I suggested it's like a smoky back room.  Just stands to reason based on watching how all committees work that  when you divide up by regions that regions are going to expect a certain amount of equity, the same way conferences would fight to have their conferences as well represented as possible.  Do you think it's not noticed when the NESCAC or UAA get up to their 4th or even 5th bid?  Maybe what you are suggesting is that since each region is equally represented in terms of votes that the safeguard is built-in.

[jknezek]

I don't think I suggested it's like a smoky back room.  Just stands to reason based on watching how all committees work that  when you divide up by regions that regions are going to expect a certain amount of equity, the same way conferences would fight to have their conferences as well represented as possible.  Do you think it's not noticed when the NESCAC or UAA get up to their 4th or even 5th bid?  Maybe what you are suggesting is that since each region is equally represented in terms of votes that the safeguard is built-in.

Actually I think it's simply the argument structure. There are only so many ways to make a case and eventually that gets used against you. The power conferences are pretty well known in most sports and tend to get the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes it is deserved and sometimes it isn't. But yes, I wouldn't totally discount eventually someone looking around and thinking to themselves "how did we get to 5 in the East and still haven't pulled the 1 from Region X." This would lead to a slight bias for X in the next round, whether on purpose or not. But I don't think it would kick in at 2 or even 3, maybe even deeper.

I guess I just don't worry too much about it. I think they are doing their best to find the best teams as they see it. There isn't really an incentive not to. The prestige of having that extra team in the tourney, for DIII, isn't going to make or break a program or have one region strutting around.

[PaulNewman]

It actually sounds like a very good process.  Wasn't trying to suggest otherwise.  Just was interested in how it actually works and assumed others might have wondered as well.  For example, I had assumed that the NESCAC got a certain amount of bids because of its rating as a conference.  Glad to learn that it doesn't work by conference at all and that no region is limited up front in terms of bids awarded.

[jknezek]

It actually sounds like a very good process.  Wasn't trying to suggest otherwise.  Just was interested in how it actually works and assumed others might have wondered as well.  For example, I had assumed that the NESCAC got a certain amount of bids because of its rating as a conference.  Glad to learn that it doesn't work by conference at all and that no region is limited up front in terms of bids awarded.

Nope. You've got the right idea. I remember someone explaining it to me a few years ago. I think we all get the tutorial one way or another...

[Ron Boerger]

NCAC, if you've got the time, Christian Shirk did a great writeup on Regional Rankings and the whole selection process just a week or so ago here on the site.  Have a look at

http://d3soccer.com/columns/around-the-nation/2013/ncaa-regional-rankings-with-new-criteria

It covers some of the points you and jknezek have been discussing and some others, too.     Some of the criteria were modified a bit this season, most significantly that the NCAA has gotten rid of the ridiculous and arbitrary "in-region" distinction as a primary selection criterion.   Now ALL games against D3 competition count as primary, as opposed to a side being penalized for playing another halfway across the country. 

[All NESCAC]

Just read the posts today/yesterday regarding regional rankings and how they are the forerunner basically for the NCAA berths specifically for the "at large" selections.  Noticed in the New England Regional rankings that there are 4 teams in the 11 ranked out of the CCC conference, 4 from NESCAC and 2 from NEWMAC and Brandeis of the UAA.  Does the NESCAC do itself a disservice in how these rankings are calculated by only playing 14 regular season games?  Seems there would be more NESCAC teams possibly ranked if they played 4 more games and fattened up there winning % (assuming 4 more wins)with more non-conference games?  The NESCAC #'s #2 through #8 are splitting hairs and all beating up on each other this year in conference.  I can't imagine the NESCAC not getting at least 3 bids, and deserving a 4th.  Trouble could be not all of the NESCAC contenders other than Amherst did well with their out of conference games....most still dominated, but there were some unusual losses in some non-conference games.   

[PaulNewman]

Maybe, but historically the NESCAC has gotten more bids than any other conference in the country, right?  The CCC having 4 at the moment seems like an aberration and may well change significantly over the next 2 weeks.  That said, while the presumption is that NESCAC is the top conference, do we really know how the top 4-5 NESCACs would do head-to-head with the top 4-5 in the UAA, NJAC, Centennial, NCAC?  Would really like to see the NESCACs have one weekend where they play 4-5 teams from like the Centennial or another similar conference.  As it stands, we get the occasional NESCAC game with a Brandeis or Babson or RPI or Wheaton or MIT, but there is a fair amount of beating up the Maine-Farmingtons out there.

[Christan Shirk]

In addition to the current article that Ron Boerger already suggested for NCAC to read to get a better understanding of the whole at-large process, I can also suggest the following two articles from last season that deal with the at-large process (these articles will be updated for 2013 and posted again shortly):

AQ's, Pool B and Pool C? What does it all mean?
http://www.d3soccer.com/columns/around-the-nation/2012/AQs-PoolB-PoolC-explained

At-large berth analysis and predictions
http://www.d3soccer.com/columns/around-the-nation/2012/at-large-analysis-and-predictions


As to the conferences that get the most berths, the UAA has averaged the most berths with the NESCAC getting the second most on average.  The Centennial has years when they get three teams.  Off the top of my head there are no other conferences that regularly get or have a realistic shot of getting three teams in, unless I am completely forgetting someone.  You have to go back a little for the NJAC to regularly have three tournament-worthy teams.  The SUNYAC also had a period when they would usually have at least three teams in the mix.  Beyond that, most conferences only have one team beyond their conference champion (AQ) who is realistically in the running for an at-large berth in a given year.  An unexpected conference champion can sometimes push that to two which is often the reason for a conference to surprisingly get three teams in despite not being the strongest/deepest conference.


I get the feeling that the committee does reach a point in which they will try to avoid going too deep in any given conference.  I think if it's a close call between two (or more schools), a team from a conference that has already received two at-large selections has less chance than a team from a conference that has not yet received an at-large berth. 

[PaulNewman]

Great stuff.

[PaulNewman]

Just looked at latest regional rankings.  Unbelievable that Dickinson is STILL so high.  Why???  And Brandeis as well.  And F&M jumps up 6-7 spots just because they blew out the aforementioned Dickinson squad?  F&M is only 4-3-1 in their conference with losses to Ursinus and Muhlenberg and now they are the #2 team in the Mid-Atlantic?  And meanwhile Haverford and Swat aren't ranked at all?  Elsewhere Ohio Northern goes from not ranked at all (which clearly was a mistake) all the way to 4th in Great Lakes.  Carnegie Mellon and DePauw both seem overrated as well.

NESCAC is a mess.  Trinity goes from being nationally ranked just a couple of weeks ago (or so it seems) to not even making NESCAC playoffs (an 8 team playoff).  Williams loses at home to Hamilton in a shocker.  Amherst rolls.  Wesleyan continues to be confusing as their season seems pretty mediocre and yet they keep getting results in-conference getting by Conn College in OT today.

[Ambush004]

Is it too early to predict a Final Four? 

Loras
OWU
Amherst
DePauw

[Ron Boerger]

Naw on DePauw.    Fourth in the NCAC??