NPI Rankings 2024

[SKUD]

Yep. If you are barely .500 you don't belong in the conversation.

Unless a team earns and AQ I agree with you.  Heck while you are at it toss out teams like F&M who only won 1/2 their games!

We can call it the SC-Williams rule.

[jknezek]

I do think they should have a win percentage rule for non-AQs. It should be 51% win percentage. Not wins plus ties, wins. That way playing for a tie is disincentived. If you play 15 games there is no reason you can't win 8 if you want to go to the dance. 16 games you have to win 9.

And yes, count conference tournament games as well. 7-6-3, 7-5-5, not good enough.

The NESCAC is still going to get 4 or 5 bids, best conference in the country deserves multiple bids, but going 6 or more deep to teams winning barely 40% of their games is ridiculous.

[SierraFD3soccer]

Yep. If you are barely .500 you don't belong in the conversation.

Unless a team earns and AQ I agree with you.  Heck while you are at it toss out teams like F&M who only won 1/2 their games!

We can call it the SC-Williams rule.

Would have no problem with F&M not making it. Did not win enough games.

Not even thinking this for F&M, but Williams did go really far despite its ties.

[SierraFD3soccer]

I do think they should have a win percentage rule for non-AQs. It should be 51% win percentage. Not wins plus ties, wins. That way playing for a tie is disincentived. If you play 15 games there is no reason you can't win 8 if you want to go to the dance. 16 games you have to win 9.

And yes, count conference tournament games as well. 7-6-3, 7-5-5, not good enough.

The NESCAC is still going to get 4 or 5 bids, best conference in the country deserves multiple bids, but going 6 or more deep to teams winning barely 40% of their games is ridiculous.

Totally agree with this, but then definitely need to bring back OT/golden goal if this case. Teams would have a chance to play for a win as opposed to ties.

[jknezek]

I do think they should have a win percentage rule for non-AQs. It should be 51% win percentage. Not wins plus ties, wins. That way playing for a tie is disincentived. If you play 15 games there is no reason you can't win 8 if you want to go to the dance. 16 games you have to win 9.

And yes, count conference tournament games as well. 7-6-3, 7-5-5, not good enough.

The NESCAC is still going to get 4 or 5 bids, best conference in the country deserves multiple bids, but going 6 or more deep to teams winning barely 40% of their games is ridiculous.

Totally agree with this, but then definitely need to bring back OT/golden goal if this case. Teams would have a chance to play for a win as opposed to ties.

Considering I'm on the record hating the current tie endings, I'm good with that. But I don't think you need to. 90 minutes is plenty to play for a win. It may not happen, but it's plenty of time.

But sure, bring back OT. D3 is about the students' playing, let them play. That's why we can sub and sub and sub, or so I've been told.

[paclassic89]

They should think about lowering the QWB multiplier a bit for next season.  That would reduce the value of draws against top teams.  Men's soccer is at .750.  Women's soccer is at .500

[ziggy]

They should think about lowering the QWB multiplier a bit for next season.  That would reduce the value of draws against top teams.  Men's soccer is at .750.  Women's soccer is at .500

Dial settings are in place a minimum of two years before there could be any changes.

[camosfan]

Can we wait and see how these NESCAC teams perform, or that does not matter?

[jknezek]

Can we wait and see how these NESCAC teams perform, or that does not matter?

Doesn't really matter because we can't see how the teams they prevented from getting in would have performed. Just because they do or don't bomb out doesn't mean they are better than the teams that could have been in.

[paclassic89]

They should think about lowering the QWB multiplier a bit for next season.  That would reduce the value of draws against top teams.  Men's soccer is at .750.  Women's soccer is at .500

Dial settings are in place a minimum of two years before there could be any changes.

Ok lol, they should think about lowering the QWB multiplier the season after next then

[Kuiper]

They should think about lowering the QWB multiplier a bit for next season.  That would reduce the value of draws against top teams.  Men's soccer is at .750.  Women's soccer is at .500

Dial settings are in place a minimum of two years before there could be any changes.

Ok lol, they should think about lowering the QWB multiplier the season after next then

One reason to wait two years that is unique to this season is that schedules were pretty much set for most teams by the time the NPI system was announced.  So, some teams may have unintentionally benefited from the NPI and others were unintentionally hurt because they couldn't adjust.  Next year, and really the year after because many non-conference games new to a team's schedule this year were signed to two year home-and-away deals, I expect teams will be trying to study and replicate the types of schedules that seemed to do better under the new system. 

I tend to think the Men's Soccer Committee was heavily lobbied by coaches of teams that had loaded up their schedules a certain way to set the dials to preference a system that preserved the status quo as much as possible within the parameters set by the NPI system.  They may have over-corrected or they may have gotten exactly what those coaches wanted.

[Saint_Dad]

Maybe they should think about borrowing something from the NHL.
Play one golden goal 10 minute period followed by 3 PKs each.
Winner gets the win and only 2 points. OT loser gets one point. If your record is 9-5-2, you have 2 overtime losses. Just a thought to spice things up and not overwork them with 20 mins. 

[Hopkins92]

I think Kuiper has it right. I don't claim to truly understand the NPI, but I would bet bottom and top dollar that the dials are set to preserve (mostly) the status quo.

And if you think about it, that's really only fair. There's no way coaches could completely overhaul schedules that have already been set for at least the next year, if not farther out.

I do think NESCAC getting 8 is going to cause some rumbling, especially if it happens again next year.

[Newenglander]

I think Kuiper has it right. I don't claim to truly understand the NPI, but I would bet bottom and top dollar that the dials are set to preserve (mostly) the status quo.

And if you think about it, that's really only fair. There's no way coaches could completely overhaul schedules that have already been set for at least the next year, if not farther out.

I do think NESCAC getting 8 is going to cause some rumbling, especially if it happens again next year.

I do agree with 8 being a lot but not much different than Division 1 and the ACC - they had 5 teams in the 32 team field last year and they have 8 teams in the top 22 RPI rankings right now.

[jsr]

Mens field in D1 is 48, not 32.