D3Boards.Com Soccer Top 20 Fan Poll

[PaulNewman]

PN Ballot...

1)   Chicago
2)   Messiah
3)   Kenyon
4)   Stevens
5)   Bowdoin
6)   Calvin
7)   Middlebury
8)   W&L
9)   Montclair St
10)   Amherst
11)   Hopkins
12)   North Central
13)   GAC
14)   North Park
15)   Cortland St
16)   Ohio Northern
17)   Mary Hardin-Baylor
18)   Franklin & Marshall
19)   Willamette
20)   Tufts
21)   Western Connecticut
22)   Oneonta St
23)   John Carroll
24)   SLU
25)   Christopher Newport

Surprises to me compared to overall result.  I see a few others did put Hopkins at #9 but I thought they deserved to drop at least a few spots after two middling draws to Dickinson and Muhlenberg.  Also think Amherst is being more highly valued than their record and recent results warrant, although 4-0 over Hamilton was pretty impressive.  I was surprised Lynchburg didn't drop more.  I couldn't keep them in after the loss to now infamous Guilford.  Western CT seems a little high imo.  I also initially dropped CNU out but put them back in.  Was wavering with Mary Wash, Babson, and maybe Pac Luth and Catholic.  Surprised JCU and SLU not getting a little more love.

Of the teams at the top end I think many have real doubts about Kenyon and Hopkins.  Makes sense I suppose until they prove it on the field in the tournament.  I totally get Calvin holding its value.  I've had Stevens high all year but not sure why their resume engenders more confidence than some others.  A few I think most of us are probably not sure about are MHB, Willamette, W CT, and to some degree CNU.

There are some very good teams that are not ranked...JCU, SLU, Conn, NYU, OWU, Trinity (TX), CWRU, etc, etc.  This is a year when a team unranked could get hot and makes a deep run. 

The SoS talk is confusing.  Some saying Messiah higher than Chicago and the data NCAA using says Chicago higher.  By the eye test, I give the edge to Chicago.  Messiah's competitive foes imo are W&L, Lynchburg, NYU, CNU, and I'll throw in Alvernia.  Chicago has St Olaf, Luther, Calvin, North Park, UR, CMU, CWRU with NYU, Brandeis and Wash U still to go.  Wanna throw in E'twon, Carthage, and Dickinson for Messiah, then add Wheaton, Hope, and Emory for the Maroons.

[PaulNewman]

Tufts has only won 50% of their games. I just couldn't put them on my ballot.

Stepping outside of poll duties, do you think Tufts is one of the top 25 teams in the country?  Like, how would you rate their chances to get to the second weekend compared to MHB, Willamette, CNU, GAC, W CT, or even F&M and Cortland/Oneonta?  This is the FW question. 

[Coach Jeff]

Coach Jeff's week 8 Poll

1   Messiah
2   Chicago
3   Stevens
4   Kenyon
5   Amherst
6   Bowdoin
7   Johns Hopkins
8   Calvin
9   Gustavus Adolphus
10   Middlebury
11   North Park
12   Montclair State
13   Washington and Lee
14   Franklin and Marshall
15   North Central (ill.)
16   Hamilton
17   Western Connecticut
18   Christopher Newport
19   Babson
20   Lynchburg
21   Willamette
22   Ohio Northern
23   Tufts
24   St. Thomas (Texas)
25   Mary Hardin-Baylor


I am happy with my top 10 but Messiah and Chicago could be switched but I put Messiah number one over Chicago because of the current top 25 teams Messiah h2h beat W&L & CNU and had a draw with Lynchburg.  While Chicago struggle to get a win against a 10 player Calvin team for over 50 minutes.  Saturday the 29th we will have another common opponent in NYU. Their only other common opponent is Carthage. Chicago was a 2-1 winner and Messiah a 3-0.

Ohio Northern and St, Thomas TX were new for me this week. ONU big win against at John Carroll and scoring 10 goals and conceding only 2 in the last 3 games and St. Thomas big win over Trinity TX

[Coach Jeff]

Tufts has only won 50% of their games. I just couldn't put them on my ballot.

Stepping outside of poll duties, do you think Tufts is one of the top 25 teams in the country?  Like, how would you rate their chances to get to the second weekend compared to MHB, Willamette, CNU, GAC, W CT, or even F&M and Cortland/Oneonta?  This is the FW question.

It will all depend on tufts draw in the NCAA tourney.  I would also ask about GAC and CNU.

[Maine Soccer Fan]

I think Tufts will have the same challenge they always have, can they score?

They were shutout in 4/9 conference games. Also shutout by Babson.
They scored one goal in 2/9 conference games.

BUT they scored 3 goals against Amherst, a rare feat for anyone.

[PaulNewman]

MSF, by same challenge they alway have scoring did you mean this year or some of the four title years?  In terms of non-title years since 2014, Tufts has had two Elite 8s and one Sweet 16.  And they seem to score well at the Final Four.

I am FAR from a Tufts fan...will be happy if the Jumbos don't make the tournament or lose first round.  That said, not more than a handful of teams could pull off the Amherst-Middlebury double.

[paclassic89]

The SoS talk is confusing.  Some saying Messiah higher than Chicago and the data NCAA using says Chicago higher.  By the eye test, I give the edge to Chicago.  Messiah's competitive foes imo are W&L, Lynchburg, NYU, CNU, and I'll throw in Alvernia.  Chicago has St Olaf, Luther, Calvin, North Park, UR, CMU, CWRU with NYU, Brandeis and Wash U still to go.  Wanna throw in E'twon, Carthage, and Dickinson for Messiah, then add Wheaton, Hope, and Emory for the Maroons.

The confusion stems from people using Massey as their primary source of ratings information (nothing wrong with that since it is the most comprehensive and accurate until we start getting regional rankings).  The NCAA uses a simple proportion of OWP and OOWP to calculate a team's SOS.  This is the actual SOS number that matters for NCAA ranking purposes and Chicago has the edge here.  Massey calculates SOS based on his own power ratings rather than a simple equation of W/L records.  If anyone is interested, here is a link that explains some of the theory https://masseyratings.com/theory/sched.htm  He provides the following equation for his SOS

"Let the function EW(schedule) give the expected wins a team would get versus the specified schedule. Then I define schedule strength S to be the unique rating S such that if Team X has rating S then
n*EW(X) = EW(actual schedule played)
where n is then number of games played.

In words this means that if the team in question had played X in every game, then the expected wins would be exactly the same as for the actual schedule played.

As a consequence of this definition of schedule strength, a team's schedule is judged primarily by the "peers" that appear on its schedule. A good team has a hard schedule if it must play other good teams, while a bad team has a hard schedule if it does not play any other bad teams."

Another thing that has popped up regarding Massey is the effect of prior year's ratings on the current ratings as he seems to have fairly accurate rankings early in the season before there is enough data to really account for that accuracy.  Which also leads to questions like why is Team A ranked ahead of Team B early in the season despite maybe having a worse record and/or easier schedule thus far.  Massey uses preseason ratings. 

"Preseason ratings are typically derived as a weighted average of previous years' final ratings. As the current season progresses, their effect gets damped out completely. The only purpose preseason ratings serve is to provide a reasonable starting point for the computer. Mathematically, they guarantee a unique solution to the equations early in the season when not enough data is available yet."

[PaulNewman]

paclassic, appreciate you trying to explain this.  Simplifying for those like me who are more mathematically challenged, what is it about Messiah's schedule versus Chicago's that Massey ends up rating more favorably?  And once we see it would we immediately get it and probably agree or not?

[paclassic89]

I wouldn't put too much weight into Massey's SOS ratings tbh.  His SOS ratings are relative to the power of the team playing the schedule.  From Massey's perspective, there is a significant difference between playing a "good" team and a "great" team.  So, for example, Messiah's wins over CNU (12) and W&L (17) weigh more heavily than Chicago's wins over Calvin (18), St. Olaf (19), NPU (24) even though they seem to be close just by eyeballing them.  Also, the poorly ranked wins don't seem to have as much of a negative impact compared to wins vs highly ranked teams so a Messiah win against CNU helps their SOS more than a win against Albright (326) hurts them.

Also, try sorting the Massey SOS ratings sometime and you'll see some real head scratchers since it is relative to the strength of the team playing the schedule.  I.E. UC Santa Cruz has the 13th toughest SOS according to Massey, Whittier 16th

[stlawus]

Like most sports metric systems, Massey is useful to get a look at teams from an additional perspective but is not perfect.  I've found the predictor metric on Massey to be the most useful aspect of the site, and that goes for most sports.  Probably misses 20% of the time from a scoring aspect, but when he's right he nails it.

[PaulNewman]

I wouldn't put too much weight into Massey's SOS ratings tbh.  His SOS ratings are relative to the power of the team playing the schedule.  From Massey's perspective, there is a significant difference between playing a "good" team and a "great" team.  So, for example, Messiah's wins over CNU (12) and W&L (17) weigh more heavily than Chicago's wins over Calvin (18), St. Olaf (19), NPU (24) even though they seem to be close just by eyeballing them.  Also, the poorly ranked wins don't seem to have as much of a negative impact compared to wins vs highly ranked teams so a Messiah win against CNU helps their SOS more than a win against Albright (326) hurts them.

Also, try sorting the Massey SOS ratings sometime and you'll see some real head scratchers since it is relative to the strength of the team playing the schedule.  I.E. UC Santa Cruz has the 13th toughest SOS according to Massey, Whittier 16th

So some of the variance comes from Massey ending up with CNU over the others when imo and based on at least some real data CNU is the weakest of that entire group you listed.

It's like saying you rate Messiah higher because they beat two teams currently ranked.  Well, when Chicago played North Park the latter was #3 in the country (rankings-wise) and Calvin has been top 10 all year.  CMU at one point I think was as high as #8.  Luther and Rochester also were ranked pretty high when Chicago played them...and CWRU has been RV past few weeks.

[paclassic89]

Yeah, more or less.  I think Massey ends up with a really accurate power rating so it's useful in that respect, but things like SOS will deviate from what we expect to see based on the NCAA criteria.  There are also home/away and margin of victory elements to his ranking system. 

For all SOS discussions I prefer the NCAA number, which is all that really matters at the end of the day anyway

[Hopkins92]

paclassic - just want to say, really appreciate your insight.

[Coach Jeff]

I wouldn't put too much weight into Massey's SOS ratings tbh.  His SOS ratings are relative to the power of the team playing the schedule.  From Massey's perspective, there is a significant difference between playing a "good" team and a "great" team.  So, for example, Messiah's wins over CNU (12) and W&L (17) weigh more heavily than Chicago's wins over Calvin (18), St. Olaf (19), NPU (24) even though they seem to be close just by eyeballing them.  Also, the poorly ranked wins don't seem to have as much of a negative impact compared to wins vs highly ranked teams so a Messiah win against CNU helps their SOS more than a win against Albright (326) hurts them.

Also, try sorting the Massey SOS ratings sometime and you'll see some real head scratchers since it is relative to the strength of the team playing the schedule.  I.E. UC Santa Cruz has the 13th toughest SOS according to Massey, Whittier 16th

So some of the variance comes from Massey ending up with CNU over the others when imo and based on at least some real data CNU is the weakest of that entire group you listed.

It's like saying you rate Messiah higher because they beat two teams currently ranked.  Well, when Chicago played North Park the latter was #3 in the country (rankings-wise) and Calvin has been top 10 all year.  CMU at one point I think was as high as #8.  Luther and Rochester also were ranked pretty high when Chicago played them...and CWRU has been RV past few weeks.

That is true about the past rankings.  IMO if a team beats the preseason number one team let's say CONN College, should we consider that win the same if a team beats Chicago this week?  If you look at other sports they don't even start ranking until weeks into the season.  Because the preseason number one could get beat in every game due to transfers, injuries, new coach, bad playing condition or anything that causes teams to underachieve. That is why i stated that Messiah has wins over current ranked teams compared to Chicago.  What do you think about comparing these wins are they same quality of victories?  Is it also true that the NCAA committee looks at the last weeks rankings?

[paclassic89]

paclassic - just want to say, really appreciate your insight.

Thanks.  I tend to fixate a lot on the rankings/statistical aspect so i'm glad some people find it useful haha

That is true about the past rankings.  IMO if a team beats the preseason number one team let's say CONN College, should we consider that win the same if a team beats Chicago this week?  If you look at other sports they don't even start ranking until weeks into the season.  Because the preseason number one could get beat in every game due to transfers, injuries, new coach, bad playing condition or anything that causes teams to underachieve. That is why i stated that Messiah has wins over current ranked teams compared to Chicago.  What do you think about comparing these wins are they same quality of victories?  Is it also true that the NCAA committee looks at the last weeks rankings?

Yes, they use the prior weeks rankings for the record vs. ranked component of the regional rankings