2015 Great Lakes Region

[TennesseeJed]

Interesting stats but maybe a little misleading.  Certainly acceptance rate is a huge factor to consider and one of the more compelling, but I don't think it's the sole or even overriding factor, as Williams has been ranked #1 for as long as I can remember and you wouldn't conclude that just from these stats, nor, for example, would almost anyone conclude that Colorado College is academically "higher" than a Carleton.  Also would need to get admit rates for like 5 and 10 year periods.  You're highlighting Kenyon's lowest rate in the school's history.  Many years Oberlin's has been lower, and I can't think of a year where Kenyon was ahead of Oberlin in US News (although they are almost tied this year I think).  For me, they are very much in the same tier of schools academically and saying much beyond that is probably pretty meaningless.

All perfectly legit, good points NCACNE.  I was editing my original post to address your first point regarding acceptance rates being the sole factor in academic rank when you replied.  I agree with you that it's certainly not.  At the end of the day, the academic rankings (whether from USNWR or other sources) are all subjective (though their subjective conclusions may be in part based on some quantitative measures, including the one reflected here), just as our DIII soccer rankings are.  This was just one recent objective set of criteria that's a highly correlated proxy for academic strength (and the most recent one I could find--I did not select it to prove a particular point).  I agree w/ your suggestion too that a time series describing the trends for each school would be more informative, but I don't have the data (nor the time or inclination) to put it all together...  But, I agree entirely that it would be more interesting and more informative than this single data point.  I'm not sure I agree entirely that they're misleading, as we haven't necessarily agreed on a conclusion or mutually accepted an objectively determined set of criteria with which to decide superiority.  It would also depend on whether we're looking at the data for a current assessment only, or for a historical perspective.

The parallel with soccer rankings and academic rankings in this context is nearly perfect and entirely pertinent to this forum.  The data presented above are no more misleading in one sense than any single Massey Ratings set, or NSCAA or D3 Soccer Polls are, if taken in isolation, (though I acknowledge they each do incorporate more than 1 criteria in assessing rank) in assessing who the de facto top 25 soccer teams are.  There's no objective standard or criteria, nor universal agreement amongst all participants, that a given team is, de facto, better than another.  The existence of this forum illustrates that there is no shortage of strong (subjective) opinions and interested parties and no general agreement on the "right" rankings for individual teams, nor agreement on who will win any given match.  (Note the abundance of "pick 'em" contests, in which we both participate, as evidence.)

Tufts winning the NCAA tournament in 2014 illustrates the ranking dilemna perfectly.  The Jumbos were not the number one ranked or seeded team, yet they won.  One camp would say that they were the best team, ipso facto and/or post hoc, because they won.  Another would say that they were, de facto, always the best team, yet the rankings were incorrect and "mislead" observers.  Yet another would argue that Tufts was never the best team, irrespective of the fact that they won, and irrespective of the fact that they were ranked #1 following their NCAA victory in post-season rankings, but that they just got lucky for a variety of reasons and didn't deserve to win, etc...  This is further complicated by assertions that Tufts needed to be ranked number 1 in postseason and early season polls/rankings, simply because they won last year's tournament, when the actual reality is/was that all teams changed (graduations, injuries, departures, transfers, etc.) from year to year, so it doesn't follow logically that last year's champ is automatically the best team going into the next season.  (This does not mean that we can't all accept this as a modus operandi, but there is ample debate on this subject here too, and elsewhere.)  If this were, in fact, true, then there would be no reason to have a tournament at all...the same team would continue to win.  Messiah and OWU have made careers attempting to prove this point... ) ((Note:  I'm not taking a position here w/ respect to Tufts.  I am arguing both sides for the point of illustration.  I like Tufts as a team personally...I have no idea whether they were the "best" team last year, or this year--though they were certainly the best, using final scores as an objective measure, in each of the games that they played during the 2014 NCAA tournament...)  The point is that just because one or more rankings (NSCAA, USN&WR and others) assert something to be so, doesn't necessarily make it so, without advance agreement on what's being measured.  Flying Weasel provides ample reasons why the NSCAA rankings are problematic.

The intent here was not to draw conclusions or prove anything with a scholarly degree of rigor, I just found it interesting and pertinent to your earlier point, and following your reply, to soccer and sports rankings in general.  Glad you found it interesting too.   

[Mid-Atlantic Fan]

My guess is that this region will be the toughest to predict for NCAA Regional Rankings as there are so many teams in close proximity and there will be tons of flux over the next few weeks.

[TennesseeJed]

My guess is that this region will be the toughest to predict for NCAA Regional Rankings as there are so many teams in close proximity and there will be tons of flux over the next few weeks.

I think UAA, NJAC and SUNYAC will be interesting too but agree that NCAC's going to be interesting to say the least!

[Mid-Atlantic Fan]

My guess would be something along these lines:

1. Thomas More          12-1-1
2. Kenyon                   11-1-0 
3. Ohio Northern         13-3-0
4. Ohio Wesleyan        11-2-2
5. Case Western          11-2-1
6. DePauw                   9-1-3
7. PSU-Behrend          13-1-1
8. CMU                        8-2-3
9. Dension                   9-2-2
10. Rose-Hulman        9-2-3
RV: John Carroll 9-3-1, Geneva 8-3-3, Wabash 9-3-2         

[Mr.Right]

Besides Ohio Wesleyan WHAT are Ohio Northern's big wins?         I do not see many...

[Mid-Atlantic Fan]

Besides Ohio Wesleyan WHAT are Ohio Northern's big wins?         I do not see many...

I am no expert on this region but I do follow it/try to follow it. OWU and John Carroll are their 2 big wins. Wheaton(Mass.) at the time was big since they ended up winning 7 straight after losing to ONU, but have struggled as of late losing 5 of their last 7 to be 9-7. That's all I have for you on their good wins.

[TennesseeJed]

My guess would be something along these lines:

1. Thomas More          12-1-1
2. Kenyon                   11-1-0 
3. Ohio Northern         13-3-0
4. Ohio Wesleyan        11-2-2
5. Case Western          11-2-1
6. DePauw                   9-1-3
7. PSU-Behrend          13-1-1
8. CMU                        8-2-3
9. Dension                   9-2-2
10. Rose-Hulman        9-2-3
RV: John Carroll 9-3-1, Geneva 8-3-3, Wabash 9-3-2       

Largely agree with your assessment in general but I'd probably swap ONU and OWU.  I might also swap CMU and PSU-B, given what I see as a relatively weak schedule for PSU-B.  Wouldn't have thought to include PSU-B as they haven't been on my radar and surprised to see that they're (somewhat quietly) 13-1-1!   Would love to see relative SOS's for each team as well if anyone has run the #'s.

[Mr.Right]

Wheaton MA will be no where near ranked...OWU will be and John Carroll is a bubble rank....Ohio Northern might have to win their respective league....I am jacked for Wednesday Oct 21st to see the rankings and I will be more jacked for Wed Oct 28th to see the "better" rankings

[TennesseeJed]

I'm guessing that normally it's almost impossible to have OWU and Kenyon (or most Ohio schools) in different sectionals and even the other side of the sectional as the other side last year played at Emory (where Whitworth prevailed).  Last year I think they could have because Wheaton got placed out West and hosted and OWU could have been sent to Wheaton, just as Kenyon was sent to Wheaton the prior year.  Don't know exactly but might have been even closer for OWU than going to Calvin last year.

Speaking of sectionals and sites and such, I wonder if TMC has a shot at hosting if they win out (which is more than likely).

In 2013, I noted in the NCAA brackets (http://www.ncaa.com/interactive-bracket/soccer-men/d3/2013) that Oberlin was in a completely different quadrant than OWU and Kenyon.  Oberlin was paired w/ Oneonta, Rochester, CMU, and other Great Lakes and East region schools.  Kenyon and OWU couldn't have seen Oberlin until a final match--not even in a semi-final.  OWU and Kenyon, on the other hand, would have met for the first time in the Elite 8, if either team had made it that far.  OWU had a bye and lost to RH in round 2.  Kenyon lost to Messiah (2-1), who went on to win the crown that year, in the Sweet 16 round. Kenyon was paired w/ TMC and ONU.  OWU was paired with RH and PSU-Behrend.

I haven't looked back further in time and I'm sure that there are many others here who know this far better than me, but if Oberlin can be put in an entirely separate bracket, there's no reason why the NCAA couldn't split OWU and Kenyon, it seems to me.  I guess the NCAA could perhaps argue that Oberlin is closer to CMU, CW and others than Kenyon, TMC, RH and OWU, but Oberlin is also much closer to PSU-Behrend than OWU. 

[Mid-Atlantic Fan]

NSCAA Regional Rankings

Rank   School   Prev.   W-L-T
1   Thomas More College
2   Kenyon College
3   Ohio Northern University
4   Ohio Wesleyan University
5   Penn State-Behrend
6   Case Western Reserve University
7   DePauw University
8   John Carroll University
9   Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
10   Carnegie Mellon University

Also receiving votes: Geneva College (3), Denison University (2), Oberlin College (1), Hanover College (1)

[Domino1195]

Besides Ohio Wesleyan WHAT are Ohio Northern's big wins?         I do not see many...

. . . and based on what happened to John Carroll last year there will be only one OAC representative (as it should be as the OAC is down quite a bit this year) - that being the conference tournament champ.

[PaulNewman]

And there goes Ohio Northern.  AQ or bust.  Lost to Heidelberg 2-0.

[Ryan Harmanis]

Midway through 1H in OWU-DePauw, very little going on.  OWU has probably just edged play, each team has had one good opportunity, OWU with a header and DePauw off a cutback.  OWU's advantage is that DePauw is letting them get the ball deep into the forwards, even inside the box.  Too many chances for those guys and they're going to score.  DePauw's advantage is speed on the outside, which is how they created their first shot by getting in behind the outside back.

[Ryan Harmanis]

And just like that 1-0 DePauw.  OWU had them pinned in, centerback slips on a backpass and DePauw is on a breakaway which was finished nicely.  Think Steven Gerrard against Chelsea two seasons ago.  Bad mistake but guy still had to run 60 yards and finished well.

[Ryan Harmanis]

Game settling into a familiar pattern.  OWU with stretches of possession, DePauw probably looking more dangerous on the break.

1-1 at half.  Wow, if ever there was a time to teach a familiar lesson in soccer.  DePauw with a quick counter, smashes one off the post.  OWU goes straight down the other end and buries a chance off an almost identical play, but with a more controlled finish. 

Following the goal, OWU took more control.  But if I'm DePauw I'd prefer it that way.  I probably don't want a shootout if I'm them, I'd rather keep it compact and keep counterattacking effectively.  Once they start committing too many men forward...well, that's how they gave up the equalizing goal.  OWU went from nearly 2-0 down (off the post) into the DePauw net in probably 10-15 seconds.

Also, ref doing a very nice job of handling the game.  Calling it probably tighter than necessary, but (if the parents are any indication) emotions are high and he's keeping it level.