|
|
Post by jammaster on Nov 12, 2023 15:23:31 GMT -5
NEWMAC UPDATE...
Finals MIT vs Springfield
25 21 Springfield
25 15 Springfield
25 14 MIT
28 26 MIT
15 8 MIT
Amazing comeback!
|
|
|
|
Post by psuvbfan10 on Nov 12, 2023 15:52:24 GMT -5
Hopkins with the sweep
|
|
|
|
Post by d3follower on Nov 12, 2023 16:19:58 GMT -5
I think we are closer than we were Friday....and now we have flipped on St. Olaf feelings haha....I am not dinging teams for a lot of ranked losses and focusing more on the ranked win number. I am not as high on Mary Wash bc many of their ranked wins are repeats, and I don't like F&M due to all their ranked wins coming largely from Region IV which is very weak. For the same reason I don't like Stockton. And I have Millikin in front of Platteville, but they both get in I think. This is what I have: 1 OshKosh 2 Emory 3 MIT 4 Wash U 5 Transy 6 Middlebury 7 Calvin 8 CMU 9 UMW 10 Gettysburg 11 Stevens Pt 12 Babson 13 CWRU 14 St Olaf 15 Millikin 16 Tufts 17 Williams 18 La Verne 19 UW Platteville 20 Colby 21 UW Eau Claire Another person's opinion. Looks like we disagree on one team -- your 20th. Glad I will have company in our disagreements with the committee, although many cases can be made this year. I don't recall a chalkier conference tourney weekend and getting so deep into the bubble. |
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Nov 12, 2023 16:29:40 GMT -5
Looking at bracketing... Fun fact - Alfred is 498 miles from Hope per the NCAA mileage caclulator. Alfred State is 503. So despite being in the same town, one can be sent to Hope and the other (should they beat Altoona) should not be. Given the strength in the midwest I'd anticipate a few teams being shipped west if possible so that result could be important. Didn't they bump the number to 600 last year? |
|
|
|
Post by d3follower on Nov 12, 2023 16:35:05 GMT -5
It was back to 500 last year.
|
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Nov 12, 2023 16:43:59 GMT -5
Final matches are done and added in. I ran my last projections. My program weights:
D3 win %, SOS, Ranked W/L%, ranked "results", Quality Wins Index(QWI). all are values from 0-1 so they compare.
the QWI factor is minimal, for 25 scenarios, only 10% in about half.
Ranked Results, the phrase in the rules, is my numeric value for the ranked wins and losses.
The first 18 schools were picked every time or 24 times.
1 Wisconsin-Oshkosh (region 8)
2 Emory (6)
3 St. Olaf (9)
4 Gettysburg (5)
5 Mary Washington (6)
6 Springfield (2)
7 Washington University (MO) (8)
8 Mount St. Joseph (8)
9 La Verne (10)
10 Calvin (7)
11 Carnegie Mellon (7)
12 Wisconsin-Stevens Point (8)
13 Ohio Wesleyan (7)
14 Case Western Reserve (7)
15 Mount Union (7)
16 Babson (2)
17 Millikin (8)
18 Wisconsin-Platteville (8)
at this point there is a gap
19 St. Benedict (9) - 18 of 25 scenarios
20 Stockton (4) - 15 of 25
21 Ohio Northern (7) - 13 of 25
and then a second gap to the "first 4 out"
Carthage 9 of 25 scenarios
Middlebury 5 of 25
Kean 5 of 25
Wisconsin - Eau Claire 5 of 25
other schools who were picked 3 or less times:
New Paltz, Franklin & Marshall, Christopher Newport, and Coast Guard
|
|
|
|
Post by ned3vball on Nov 12, 2023 17:11:02 GMT -5
So my program did not like the NESCAC at all and did like region 7 a lot. I also have a program that builds a compare file.
This includes head to head, common opponents W/L, the primary criteria, QWI, and secondary criteria, last 25 and RPI.
I calculated the RPI and I am guessing it is pretty close. I found a few docs on line and a few people were nice enough to answer some questions.
Why is the RPI formula a secret? the NCAA being the NCAA!
I was going to post rows from the sheet but that would just give people a popsicle headache.
Short answer, the region 7 teams consistently beat the NESCAC teams in head to head.
The factor that is very likely causing me to not value the NESCAC highly is "ranked results". I value the region 7 teams ranked "results" (not records) much higher than the NESCAC.
Full disclosure, I am a NESCAC guy! I was very sorry to have to see Wesleyan OH Sophia Lindus go down in warmups on Friday! It did not look good. With her, I think Wesleyan had a chance to be the first NE school to win an Elite 8 match in a long time.
|
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Nov 12, 2023 20:04:51 GMT -5
Looking at bracketing... Fun fact - Alfred is 498 miles from Hope per the NCAA mileage caclulator. Alfred State is 503. So despite being in the same town, one can be sent to Hope and the other (should they beat Altoona) should not be. Given the strength in the midwest I'd anticipate a few teams being shipped west if possible so that result could be important. Didn't they bump the number to 600 last year? I was unsure so I checked the prechampionship manual... "Teams should be paired and eligible sites should be selected according to geographic proximity (within 500 miles)." page 16 But in my head I was thinking Behrend... Altoona is 532 miles from Hope so still not getting shipped west. |
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Nov 12, 2023 20:19:18 GMT -5
So my program did not like the NESCAC at all and did like region 7 a lot. I also have a program that builds a compare file. This includes head to head, common opponents W/L, the primary criteria, QWI, and secondary criteria, last 25 and RPI. I calculated the RPI and I am guessing it is pretty close. I found a few docs on line and a few people were nice enough to answer some questions. Why is the RPI formula a secret? the NCAA being the NCAA! I was going to post rows from the sheet but that would just give people a popsicle headache. Short answer, the region 7 teams consistently beat the NESCAC teams in head to head. The factor that is very likely causing me to not value the NESCAC highly is "ranked results". I value the region 7 teams ranked "results" (not records) much higher than the NESCAC. Full disclosure, I am a NESCAC guy! I was very sorry to have to see Wesleyan OH Sophia Lindus go down in warmups on Friday! It did not look good. With her, I think Wesleyan had a chance to be the first NE school to win an Elite 8 match in a long time. I agree on the NCAA data - not sure why so much is kept secret. I disagree on not valuing the ranked results. I am persuaded by the argument that was made to me that the NCAA D3 is about access to championships and and it is against the letter and spirit and everything in D3 to require teams to fly around the country to build a resume. A resume built entirely in one region is equal to one built across several regions. Is it in reality? No, but there are more schools that cannot fly around and hunt ranked teams than there are schools that can so if the NCAA went too far it would be forced to change. To me, this means a team with 6-7 ranked wins on the east coast is going to get in over a 3 win team in a better region but we shall see. |
|
|
|
Post by d3follower on Nov 12, 2023 21:19:41 GMT -5
Access is great. Everyone has two bites at the apple, either Pool A/C or Pool B/C. Committees have repeatedly signaled what is necessary to get a Pool C. That subsection of programs actively attempting to secure Pool C bids is a rather small percentage of the division.
Being rewarded yearly for gaining up to 6-7 regional wins against conference rivals must be awesome. We won't realign the division again for a long time, so it's just this thing that I don't think we've been able to crack in a way that can be codified.
A similar issue is how to view SOS in Region X and its relation to the rest of the country. I tend to regard SOS and results versus ranked opponents in terms of relativity to regional peers instead of applying a blanket view across the country.
There's a mathematical/geographical reason why two Region X teams had an SOS above .564. I think the same can be said for regionally ranked results in different areas of the division.
In my mind the criteria should all be relative to peers first with disqualifying numbers (below .500 win% or SOS, 0-1 ranked wins, etc.) and rewards for positive outliers (7+ ranked wins, beating multiple regional #1-2s, etc.).
Pretty soon we'll have PairWise to argue about. Speaking of, if anyone has insight into the algorithm guts of PairWise for volleyball, please message me. I would like to see the specific components for the sake of transparency but also to satisfy my inner nerd who likes to know how/why things work.
|
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Nov 12, 2023 22:43:56 GMT -5
The mathematical reason is they have to play double round robin. The more conference matches you play, the stronger you are anchored to .500.
This is to the detriment of the SOS numbers in the SCIAC, SAA, MIAA and SCAC and to the benefit of the C2C which can hunt ranked teams. However in my experience most people on the committee and the RACs in other sports as well as volleyball look at it at face value, and either never think about the math or can’t understand it if they did. I’ve never heard of a selection committee accommodating for this bias.
|
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Nov 12, 2023 22:48:52 GMT -5
Last post for the night.
Teams that can drive to Emory
Emory - 0
Barry - 77
Covenant - 127
Transylvania - 386
Meredith - 399
Mt. St. Joseph - 472
Washington and Lee - 472
Unless I'm overlooking someone, Emory will need a flight to get to 8, which I would assume is East Texas Baptist because it's already a pretty strong pool on top, and maybe that leaves Trinity to go to the Northeast again, Wesleyan or MIT.
|
|
|
|
Post by tmb on Nov 13, 2023 7:59:04 GMT -5
Congrats and Erica is a great leader and advocate for D3 women’s volleyball
NCAA DIII…
Oberlin: Head Coach Erica Rau was elected to serve for the second time as the NCAA DIII Women’s Representative to the AVCA Board of Directors
|
|
|
|
Post by coahc21 on Nov 13, 2023 11:28:55 GMT -5
I think we are closer than we were Friday....and now we have flipped on St. Olaf feelings haha....I am not dinging teams for a lot of ranked losses and focusing more on the ranked win number. I am not as high on Mary Wash bc many of their ranked wins are repeats, and I don't like F&M due to all their ranked wins coming largely from Region IV which is very weak. For the same reason I don't like Stockton. And I have Millikin in front of Platteville, but they both get in I think. This is what I have: 1 OshKosh 2 Emory 3 MIT 4 Wash U 5 Transy 6 Middlebury 7 Calvin 8 CMU 9 UMW 10 Gettysburg 11 Stevens Pt 12 Babson 13 CWRU 14 St Olaf 15 Millikin 16 Tufts 17 Williams 18 La Verne 19 UW Platteville 20 Colby 21 UW Eau Claire Another person's opinion. Looks like we disagree on one team -- your 20th. Glad I will have company in our disagreements with the committee, although many cases can be made this year. I don't recall a chalkier conference tourney weekend and getting so deep into the bubble. I think Christopher Newport could replace them there, Ohio Wesleyan was also on the bubble for me. Wouldn't be shocked if either of those two snuck in. Obviously, on my list, swap out Transy for Mt. St. Joe and Springfield for MIT...both should get in easily right around, if not higher than those teams they replace. |
|
|
|
Post by jammaster on Nov 13, 2023 13:21:46 GMT -5
Another person's opinion. Looks like we disagree on one team -- your 20th. Glad I will have company in our disagreements with the committee, although many cases can be made this year. I don't recall a chalkier conference tourney weekend and getting so deep into the bubble. I think Christopher Newport could replace them there, Ohio Wesleyan was also on the bubble for me. Wouldn't be shocked if either of those two snuck in. Obviously, on my list, swap out Transy for Mt. St. Joe and Springfield for MIT...both should get in easily right around, if not higher than those teams they replace. Why swap out Springfield for MIT? MIT beat Springfield in the finals. They are in. |
|
