Mid-Atlantic Region 2016

[Mid-Atlantic Fan]

Thoughts on rankings for today from NCAA?

I am thinking something along the lines of this...

NCAA Round 2 Ranking Predictions
1. Messiah (14-0-3) RvR 3-0-2
2. F&M (11-1-3) RvR 3-1-0
3. Fords (9-3-3) RvR 2-1-1
4. Etown (11-2-2) RvR 2-2-1
5. Scranton (11-3-1) RvR 1-2-1
6. Drew (9-4-2) RvR 1-0-1
7. LVC (13-2-0) RvR 0-1-0
8. Hopkins (10-3-2) RvR 1-2-0
9. Getty (8-3-3) RvR (0-3-1)
------------------------------------------------------
Eastern (13-3-1) RvR 0-0-0
Misericordia (10-5-1) RvR 0-2-1
Lycoming (8-6-4) RvR 2-4-1
Hood (10-5-1) RvR 0-3-0


Messiah and F&M will both be 1 and 2 that much we know. 3 through 9 will be messy and is anybody's guess but I think you will see something close to what I have. Without the current SOS it is hard to determine where some may land. Hopkins for example could easily jump Drew and Leb Val if their SOS is way higher. As for the outside looking in, Eastern having 0 games vs ranked opponents is sad. That alone will keep them completely out of the top 9 in my opinion despite their stellar record. Lycoming playing almost double the ranked opponents of any other team in the region this year with a decent showing versus ranked teams. If the record was a tad better they would be in the mix. Hood with 0 chance of cracking the top 9 with 0 results vs a ranked team and Misericordia is just a tad far behind for me to consider them.

# of Ranked Opponents Faced
Lycoming 7
Messiah 5
Etown 5
F&M 4
Fords 4
Scranton 4
Getty 4
JHU 3
Hood 3
Miseri 3
Drew 2
LVC 1
Eastern 0

[paclassic89]

MID-ATLANTIC         
1   Messiah   13-0-3   13-0-3
2   Franklin & Marshall   11-1-3   11-1-3
3   Elizabethtown   11-2-2   11-2-2
4   Haverford   9-3-3   9-3-3
5   Scranton   11-3-1   11-3-1
6   Drew   9-4-2   9-4-2
7   Johns Hopkins   10-3-2   10-3-2
8   Gettysburg   8-3-3   8-3-3
9   Misericordia   10-5-1   10-5-1

Just reposting the latest rankings from yesterday.  So, what is everybody's guess on the amount of time the committee spends putting these together?  I know the discussion regarding SOS has been beaten to death but it seems like they get the data sheet with records, SOS, and RVR and just sort of eyeball teams and slot them in.  I'd be surprised if it took them more than 30 mins.

I mean Misericordia over LVC?  LVC beat them 4-0.  The NCAA tournament manual lists the primary criteria as win %, H2H, common opponents, SOS, RVR without prescribing any weight to each factor.  They should just remove the H2H and common opponents criteria if they aren't going to be used.  Also, it seems like Drew is too high

Results of note from yesterday

F&M destroys Gettysburg
Drew ties Moravian
Haverford wins in OT over Ursinus
Misericordia ties Susquehanna
Hopkins destroys Mcdaniels

[phillyfan12]

MID-ATLANTIC         
1   Messiah   13-0-3   13-0-3
2   Franklin & Marshall   11-1-3   11-1-3
3   Elizabethtown   11-2-2   11-2-2
4   Haverford   9-3-3   9-3-3
5   Scranton   11-3-1   11-3-1
6   Drew   9-4-2   9-4-2
7   Johns Hopkins   10-3-2   10-3-2
8   Gettysburg   8-3-3   8-3-3
9   Misericordia   10-5-1   10-5-1

Just reposting the latest rankings from yesterday.  So, what is everybody's guess on the amount of time the committee spends putting these together?  I know the discussion regarding SOS has been beaten to death but it seems like they get the data sheet with records, SOS, and RVR and just sort of eyeball teams and slot them in.  I'd be surprised if it took them more than 30 mins.

I mean Misericordia over LVC?  LVC beat them 4-0.  The NCAA tournament manual lists the primary criteria as win %, H2H, common opponents, SOS, RVR without prescribing any weight to each factor.  They should just remove the H2H and common opponents criteria if they aren't going to be used.  Also, it seems like Drew is too high

Results of note from yesterday

F&M destroys Gettysburg
Drew ties Moravian
Haverford wins in OT over Ursinus
Misericordia ties Susquehanna
Hopkins destroys Mcdaniels

Agreed on the committee's time spent on the rankings. Seems like LVC is getting short changed at the moment.

Also, looks like F&M has firmly stamped its authority on the Centennial with a convincing win while the Fords escape again but remain entirely unconvincing. Hopkins may be trending upward which bodes well for them if they see the Fords in the Centennial playoffs, although WAC may be the #3 seed in which case Hopkins would have to deal with F&M if they win the #4/#5 game

[Flying Weasel]

I agree that I think a good case could be made for LVC over the bottom two (Misericordia and Gettysburg) and maybe even Hopkins.  LVC's SOS is just soo low that I think it's extremely hard for the committee to get past that and give much weight to their winning percentage.  However, Gettysburg and Misericordia haven't managed any wins over ranked teams and their SOS's aren't just that great.  Misericordia does have a tie (Messiah) from three matches against ranked teams, so that might have been what gave them the edge when combined with LVC's SOS dropping closer to .500 from week 1 to week 2 while Misericordia's SOS changed minimally. LVC has a loss in their lone game versus a ranked team (Messiah) so that adds to the strikes against them instead of helping to compensate for the low SOS.  LVC played well and made Messiah work for that win, but that can't be captured and factored in the same way a tie (instead of a loss) can be. 

Hopkins' SOS is pretty low too (.522) so they don't have as much of an advantage over LVC in that department like Gettysburg and Misericordia do.  They did play three ranked teams and have a win vs. ranked to their name, so apparently that slightly better SOS and win vs. ranked more than compensated for having 3 more blemishes (1 more loss, 2 more ties) than LVC. 

Now oddly enough, by Misericordia getting ranked, LVC's 4-0 win over Meisericordia will count for their RvR next week.  Unfortunately, if Misericordia drops form the rankings next week (maybe with LVC taking their place due to having that win vs. ranked), LVC would then again lose that win vs. ranked for the fourth and final rankings that are used for at-large selections.

Bottom line, no matter if LVC is or is not in the rankings, they have no shot of being high enough to be in the at-large berth discussion, so it's all or nothing for them in the Commonwealth tournament.

[paclassic89]

Very nice analysis FW.  I've been around D3 soccer for awhile but i'm pretty new to the whole ranking process so thanks for clarifying things.  I guess at some point it would be nice if the committee quantified the extent to which SOS is weighted because it obviously is weighted very heavily (contrary to the description of primary criteria in the pre-championship manual).  I'm going to use a Drew/LVC comparison as an example.  In the latest Rankings, Drew is 6 and LVC is UR.  Drew has a SOS of .545 and LVC has a SOS of .508 (a big difference in SOS of .037).  Drew has 6 blemishes (now 7) and LVC has 2.  So all things being equal,  according to the committee, .01 of SOS makes up for approx one blemish.  Then there is the factor of who they lost to and who they beat.  One of the primary criteria listed is common opponents.  LVC and Drew have 3 common opponents: Hood, Muhlenberg, Susquehanna.  Drew's results: Hood L 2-1, Muhlenberg L 2-1, Susquehanna L 2-1.  LVC's results: Hood W 1-0, Muhlenberg W 2-1, Susquehanna W 3-1.

I suspect that the committee doesn't bother with this sort of analysis.  But why have H2H and common opponents listed as a primary criteria then?  That's just disingenuous

Curious to hear opinions on this

[2xfaux]

It is my understanding that, at this stage, the "Committee" defers to Watson and Al Goreithm.  Neither of whom ever played the game.

[Shooter McGavin]

Based off of LVC 4-0 win over Misericordia and high winning % I would slot them ahead of Misericordia despite the limited RvR. Misericordia doesn't have a win vs ranked either and got smoked by LVC. Hard to see the justification in that 9th slot as well as having Drew so high despite a poor record and subpar SOS.

[Mr.Right]

Based off of LVC 4-0 win over Misericordia and high winning % I would slot them ahead of Misericordia despite the limited RvR. Misericordia doesn't have a win vs ranked either and got smoked by LVC. Hard to see the justification in that 9th slot as well as having Drew so high despite a poor record and subpar SOS.

I totally agree...however the whole region seems to be a bit down especially the Centennial Conference. I do not remember when teams like Haverford, Hopkins, Swat, etc had SUCH LOW SOS...To me Scranton is to high as well but if you really look at it there is no one more deserving to move up. If Messiah, F&M and ETOWn win their respective AQ's, you are looking at possibly only 1 Pool C in Haverford.

[Flying Weasel]

That comparison of common opponents for LVC and Drew (something I hadn't looked at until you brought it up) bolsters LVC's case even more and it does raise the question about how much the committee looks into that particular criterion.  So let's return to LVC vs. Misericordia and look at their common opponents prior to the Week 2 rankings:
   Wilkes: LVC 2-0 win away, Misericordia 1-0 win away
   Arcadia: LVC 4-0 win away, Misericordia 1-2 loss at home
   Lycoming: LVC 2-1 win away, Misericordia 2-1 win at home
   Messiah: LVC 0-1 loss at home, Misericordia 1-1 tie at home
LVC has a slight or large edge in the first three and then Misericordia the edge against Messiah.  But combining that ledger with LVC's 4-0 head-to-head win, and it really feels like LVC was deserving of being ranked. 

So, results versus common opponents is a primary criteria, but is it being given much weight? It's certainly the most difficult criterion to consider as it doesn't neatly fit in a table or lend itself to sorting.  Head-to-head, which also doesn't fit in the data sheet, is still much easier and quicker to consider and factor in as it's one game (maybe two).  Those of us following the rankings for years are fully convinced that SOS and RvR (specifically wins vs. ranked) are weighted most heavily, but you'd like to think that the other primary criteria is given full attention as well.  Now the one thing Drew had was that they played two teams ahead of them in the rankings and collected a win and a tie.  If LVC had been ranked and Drew not (or down at 8 or 9), maybe their fans question how their results versus ranked teams (and not ones at the bottom end of the rankings) did get weighted more heavily.  It's not easy.  My guess is that not much separated Drew, Hopkins, Gettysburg, Misericordia, and LVC (Eastern's SOS is only .489, so forget about them) and that it wouldn't take much for any one of them to leap to the top or fall to the bottom of this sub-group. 

Looking ahead, Drew's not going to lose their 1-0-1 RvR as their opponents aren't in danger of falling out of the rankings.  Hopkins will like lose their win vs. ranked for the final rankings if Gettysburg misses the Week 3 rankings.  As I already said, LVC gains a win vs. ranked for the Week 3 rankings, but could very well lose it for the final rankings.  And it's all probably a mute point, as none of these teams will probably be in the running for an at-large anyways.  If LVC won through to the Commonwealth final and lost to Messiah, it would mean they'd have a 15-3-0 record, SOS probably would go up a little but not much as they play 5-10-1 Alvernia Saturday off-setting the bump from playing Messiah in the final, their RvR would be 0-2-0 or 1-2-0 (depending if Misericordia stays ranked), and their results vs. common opponents would be favorable against teams like Drew and Misericordia at least.  That's well short of what E-town (who was ranked #4 in Weeks 2 and 3) was sporting last year and they didn't have their name called.

[rudy]

That comparison of common opponents for LVC and Drew (something I hadn't looked at until you brought it up) bolsters LVC's case even more and it does raise the question about how much the committee looks into that particular criterion.  So let's return to LVC vs. Misericordia and look at their common opponents prior to the Week 2 rankings:
   Wilkes: LVC 2-0 win away, Misericordia 1-0 win away
   Arcadia: LVC 4-0 win away, Misericordia 1-2 loss at home
   Lycoming: LVC 2-1 win away, Misericordia 2-1 win at home
   Messiah: LVC 0-1 loss at home, Misericordia 1-1 tie at home
LVC has a slight or large edge in the first three and then Misericordia the edge against Messiah.  But combining that ledger with LVC's 4-0 head-to-head win, and it really feels like LVC was deserving of being ranked. 

So, results versus common opponents is a primary criteria, but is it being given much weight? It's certainly the most difficult criterion to consider as it doesn't neatly fit in a table or lend itself to sorting.  Head-to-head, which also doesn't fit in the data sheet, is still much easier and quicker to consider and factor in as it's one game (maybe two).  Those of us following the rankings for years are fully convinced that SOS and RvR (specifically wins vs. ranked) are weighted most heavily, but you'd like to think that the other primary criteria is given full attention as well.  Now the one thing Drew had was that they played two teams ahead of them in the rankings and collected a win and a tie.  If LVC had been ranked and Drew not (or down at 8 or 9), maybe their fans question how their results versus ranked teams (and not ones at the bottom end of the rankings) did get weighted more heavily.  It's not easy.  My guess is that not much separated Drew, Hopkins, Gettysburg, Misericordia, and LVC (Eastern's SOS is only .489, so forget about them) and that it wouldn't take much for any one of them to leap to the top or fall to the bottom of this sub-group. 

Looking ahead, Drew's not going to lose their 1-0-1 RvR as their opponents aren't in danger of falling out of the rankings.  Hopkins will like lose their win vs. ranked for the final rankings if Gettysburg misses the Week 3 rankings.  As I already said, LVC gains a win vs. ranked for the Week 3 rankings, but could very well lose it for the final rankings.  And it's all probably a mute point, as none of these teams will probably be in the running for an at-large anyways.  If LVC won through to the Commonwealth final and lost to Messiah, it would mean they'd have a 15-3-0 record, SOS probably would go up a little but not much as they play 5-10-1 Alvernia Saturday off-setting the bump from playing Messiah in the final, their RvR would be 0-2-0 or 1-2-0 (depending if Misericordia stays ranked), and their results vs. common opponents would be favorable against teams like Drew and Misericordia at least.  That's well short of what E-town (who was ranked #4 in Weeks 2 and 3) was sporting last year and they didn't have their name called.

It seems to me that the regional rankings are based purely on a mathematical formula that places too much weight on things like RvR.  Lvc should definitely be in top 10. As someone else mentioned..if the formula considered head to head and common opponents it sure does not look like much weight is given. I would think that the whole point if ranking regionally is so you can consider more head to head and common opponents. After all there are not a lot of games between nescac and mid Atlantic or south Atlantic teams.  I guess lvc needs to try to schedule some games with f&m, haverford, maybe a couple Jersey teams. I don't know why Messiah does not play these teams either? Seems playing the best local teams you can schedule would make sense to avoid having a 15-2 record and not being regionally ranked. Seems like etown last year was a victim.

[rudy]

Dickinson hands F&M 2nd loss. Dickinson seems to have F&m number.  The head to head over last few years favors Dickinson by a lot.  So with Messiah 3-0 win I'd guess that they overtake f&m in the NSCAA regional poll. They already were ahead in NCAA regional ranking. With Chicago losing and f&m at #2 nationally last week I wonder if Messiah will move to #1. 

In other news Hood wins so Lycoming is officially out of the playoffs. What a shocking season for them.

[Falconer]

Dickinson hands F&M 2nd loss. Dickinson seems to have F&m number.  The head to head over last few years favors Dickinson by a lot.  So with Messiah 3-0 win I'd guess that they overtake f&m in the NSCAA regional poll. They already were ahead in NCAA regional ranking. With Chicago losing and f&m at #2 nationally last week I wonder if Messiah will move to #1. 

In other news Hood wins so Lycoming is officially out of the playoffs. What a shocking season for them.

Rudy, Chicago tied, not lost, yesterday to CWRU.  I expect they will retain their top ranking with the Falcons solidly number two and obviously number one in the Mid-Atlantic since F&M lost.

[Falconer]

The Falcons finished their conference 8-0-0 while allowing just one goal--a PK vs Alvernia, which meant they had to win in OT.  Alvernia is very tough so I'm glad to see them make the playoffs after that brutal schedule they took on. The puzzling game on their docket is the 3-1 loss at Arcadia, after they had started playing very well.

[Mr.Right]

I have comoplaind ofr years about Messiah's "soft" out of conference scheduling by Brandt but was told back in the day he did not want to play on turf which supposedly these Centennial teams have. McCarty really upped the scheduling when he took over except for this season he had a fairly good schedule. I have said before there is no reason for Messiah not to play at least HALF the Centennial teams and a good opening weekend tournament(which they did 1 year when they went to Jersey). I commend Lycoming and Haverford coaches for having nutsack and taking chances and tryin to play the best teams possible. This year it did not work out for Lycoming but it seems they killed themselves by losing to bad teams. You cannot do that. I mean you just beat Oneonta St and now you cannot even get the low seed in a weak league...Not good

[rudy]

I have comoplaind ofr years about Messiah's "soft" out of conference scheduling by Brandt but was told back in the day he did not want to play on turf which supposedly these Centennial teams have. McCarty really upped the scheduling when he took over except for this season he had a fairly good schedule. I have said before there is no reason for Messiah not to play at least HALF the Centennial teams and a good opening weekend tournament(which they did 1 year when they went to Jersey). I commend Lycoming and Haverford coaches for having nutsack and taking chances and tryin to play the best teams possible. This year it did not work out for Lycoming but it seems they killed themselves by losing to bad teams. You cannot do that. I mean you just beat Oneonta St and now you cannot even get the low seed in a weak league...
Not good

Hard to criticize coaching decisions on scheduling when they won 10 national championships between 2000-2013. But I do agree they could add 1 or 2 more local teams that are typically better teams. The Virginia tournament this year was not a bad choice.. Lynchburg is regionally ranked.  Some nescac teams have powder puff teams on their schedules ..pine manor ?