Pool C

Started by Pat Coleman, January 20, 2006, 02:35:54 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sac

11 years of Pool C data, 207 total Pool C picks

Pool C picks by region  --(by region at time of selection)
Northeast         --53
Central/MidWest  30
South                 26
Great Lakes        24
West                  22
East                   22
Mid. Atlantic       20
Atlantic               10




Pool C picks by team, min. 4
Ill. Wesleyan     7
Amherst           6
WPI                 6
Va. Wesleyan    5
Whitewater       5
Wooster           5

Emory             4
Middlebury       4
Ohio Wesleyan 4
Springfield       4
St. Thomas      4
Stevens Point   4
Wheaton         4
Williams          4




Pool C picks by Conference
NESCAC    25
CCIW       18
NEWMAC  14
UAA         14
WIAC        14
NCAC       12
ODAC       12
SUNYAC     9
LEC           8
CAC          7
MIAC         7
NEWMAC   7
OAC          7
ASC          6
CC            6
Empire 8   4
HCAC        4
Landmark   4
Liberty      4
NWC         4
MIAA        3
SCAC        3
CSAC        2
MACC       2
Skyline     2
AMCC       1
CCC         1
CUNYAC   1
IIAC         1
MASCAC   1
NACC       1
NECC       1
SCIAC      1
USAC       1








hopefan

Quote from: sac on April 11, 2018, 05:51:10 PM
11 years of Pool C data, 207 total Pool C picks

Pool C picks by region  --(by region at time of selection)
Northeast         --53
Central/MidWest  30
South                 26
Great Lakes        24
West                  22
East                   22
Mid. Atlantic       20
Atlantic               10




Pool C picks by team, min. 4
Ill. Wesleyan     7
Amherst           6
WPI                 6
Va. Wesleyan    5
Whitewater       5
Wooster           5

Emory             4
Middlebury       4
Ohio Wesleyan 4
Springfield       4
St. Thomas      4
Stevens Point   4
Wheaton         4
Williams          4




Pool C picks by Conference
NESCAC    25
CCIW       18
NEWMAC  14
UAA         14
WIAC        14
NCAC       12
ODAC       12
SUNYAC     9
LEC           8
CAC          7
MIAC         7
NEWMAC   7
OAC          7
ASC          6
CC            6
Empire 8   4
HCAC        4
Landmark   4
Liberty      4
NWC         4
MIAA        3
SCAC        3
CSAC        2
MACC       2
Skyline     2
AMCC       1
CCC         1
CUNYAC   1
IIAC         1
MASCAC   1
NACC       1
NECC       1
SCIAC      1
USAC       1

SLIAC     0     ;D
The only thing not to be liked in Florida is no D3 hoops!!!

Knightstalker

Quote from: sac on April 11, 2018, 05:51:10 PM
11 years of Pool C data, 207 total Pool C picks

Pool C picks by region  --(by region at time of selection)
Northeast         --53
Central/MidWest  30
South                 26
Great Lakes        24
West                  22
East                   22
Mid. Atlantic       20
Atlantic               10




Pool C picks by team, min. 4
Ill. Wesleyan     7
Amherst           6
WPI                 6
Va. Wesleyan    5
Whitewater       5
Wooster           5

Emory             4
Middlebury       4
Ohio Wesleyan 4
Springfield       4
St. Thomas      4
Stevens Point   4
Wheaton         4
Williams          4




Pool C picks by Conference
NESCAC    25
CCIW       18
NEWMAC  14
UAA         14
WIAC        14
NCAC       12
ODAC       12
SUNYAC     9
LEC           8
CAC          7
MIAC         7
NEWMAC   7
OAC          7
ASC          6
CC            6
Empire 8   4
HCAC        4
Landmark   4
Liberty      4
NWC         4
MIAA        3
SCAC        3
CSAC        2
MACC       2
Skyline     2
AMCC       1
CCC         1
CUNYAC   1
IIAC         1
MASCAC   1
NACC       1
NECC       1
SCIAC      1
USAC       1

In the last two seasons the NJAC has had a Pool C team in the tournament both years.

"In the end we will survive rather than perish not because we accumulate comfort and luxury but because we accumulate wisdom"  Colonel Jack Jacobs US Army (Ret).

magicman

Quote from: Knightstalker on April 18, 2018, 08:52:14 PM
Quote from: sac on April 11, 2018, 05:51:10 PM
11 years of Pool C data, 207 total Pool C picks

Pool C picks by region  --(by region at time of selection)
Northeast         --53
Central/MidWest  30
South                 26
Great Lakes        24
West                  22
East                   22
Mid. Atlantic       20
Atlantic               10




Pool C picks by team, min. 4
Ill. Wesleyan     7
Amherst           6
WPI                 6
Va. Wesleyan    5
Whitewater       5
Wooster           5

Emory             4
Middlebury       4
Ohio Wesleyan 4
Springfield       4
St. Thomas      4
Stevens Point   4
Wheaton         4
Williams          4




Pool C picks by Conference
NESCAC    25
CCIW       18
NEWMAC  14
UAA         14
WIAC        14
NCAC       12
ODAC       12
SUNYAC     9
LEC           8
CAC          7
MIAC         7
NEWMAC   7
OAC          7
ASC          6
CC            6
Empire 8   4
HCAC        4
Landmark   4
Liberty      4
NWC         4
MIAA        3
SCAC        3
CSAC        2
MACC       2
Skyline     2
AMCC       1
CCC         1
CUNYAC   1
IIAC         1
MASCAC   1
NACC       1
NECC       1
SCIAC      1
USAC       1

In the last two seasons the NJAC has had a Pool C team in the tournament both years.

sac is showing the NEWMAC twice...in the 3rd spot with 14 selections and tied for 10th with 7 selections. I think that 10th place spot is supposed to be the NJAC conference.

Dave 'd-mac' McHugh

Too busy right now getting ready for an AFL game (tune into CBS Sports Network at 7:30 PM ET [Albany v Baltimore] and you can hear me in the background as PA Announcer)... but wanted to share this quickly: https://www.gallaudetathletics.com/news/2017-18/atkinson-ncaambchair

Sam Atkinson has been elected as next year's men's basketball committee chair. He is headed into only his third year on the committee. Jarrod would have been a terrific pick as well, but committee went a different direction. Sam has done great for the committee in his first two years. Looking forward to working with him and Jarrod this season.
Host of Hoopsville. USBWA Executive Board member. Broadcast Director for D3sports.com. Broadcaster for NCAA.com & several colleges. PA Announcer for Gophers & Brigade. Follow me on Twitter: @davemchugh or @d3hoopsville.

fantastic50

It's admittedly very early, with Selection Monday still seven weeks away.  However, I just updated the rankings/predictions machine, and here are my mock regional rankings at the moment...

Northeast region
1) Williams (13-0, 2-0 NESCAC, 1.000 WP, 0.574 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Wesleyan (9-4, 1-1 NESCAC, 0.692 WP, 0.663 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Hamilton (13-0, 1-0 NESCAC, 1.000 WP, 0.526 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) MIT (12-1, 2-0 NEWMAC, 0.923 WP, 0.547 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Eastern_Connecticut (9-3, 3-1 LEC, 0.750 WP, 0.592 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Nichols (11-2, 3-1 CCC, 0.846 WP, 0.552 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Gordon (13-1, 5-0 CCC, 0.929 WP, 0.500 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Middlebury (9-4, 1-1 NESCAC, 0.692 WP, 0.565 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
9) Endicott (9-4, 2-2 CCC, 0.692 WP, 0.561 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Albertus_Magnus (7-3, 0-0 GNAC, 0.700 WP, 0.534 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) WPI (9-4, 0-2 NEWMAC, 0.692 WP, 0.548 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
12) Babson (9-4, 2-0 NEWMAC, 0.692 WP, 0.539 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
13) Mass-Dartmouth (9-4, 3-1 LEC, 0.692 WP, 0.514 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
14) Brandeis (8-4, 1-0 UAA, 0.667 WP, 0.549 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

East region
1) Rochester (11-1, 1-0 UAA, 0.917 WP, 0.552 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Plattsburgh_State (9-2, 3-1 SUNYAC, 0.818 WP, 0.565 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Skidmore (7-3, 5-0 LL, 0.700 WP, 0.547 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Nazareth (7-3, 2-0 E8, 0.700 WP, 0.514 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Brockport (7-4, 3-1 SUNYAC, 0.636 WP, 0.610 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) St._John_Fisher (7-3, 2-0 E8, 0.700 WP, 0.508 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Oswego_State (9-2, 4-0 SUNYAC, 0.818 WP, 0.487 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Stevens (10-2, 3-0 E8, 0.833 WP, 0.475 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) St._Lawrence (7-5, 4-1 LL, 0.583 WP, 0.572 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Alfred (5-2, 0-0 E8, 0.714 WP, 0.461 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Hobart (6-5, 3-1 LL, 0.545 WP, 0.592 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

Atlantic region
1) Ramapo (10-4, 4-3 NJAC, 0.714 WP, 0.595 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) New_Jersey_City (10-4, 5-2 NJAC, 0.714 WP, 0.586 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Montclair_State (10-4, 5-2 NJAC, 0.714 WP, 0.586 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Rowan (9-4, 4-3 NJAC, 0.692 WP, 0.590 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) William_Paterson (10-4, 5-2 NJAC, 0.714 WP, 0.553 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Mount_St._Mary (8-3, 5-2 SKY, 0.727 WP, 0.503 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) TCNJ (9-5, 5-2 NJAC, 0.643 WP, 0.582 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) DeSales (9-3, 2-0 MACF, 0.750 WP, 0.481 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) Farmingdale_State (8-5, 6-2 SKY, 0.615 WP, 0.543 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Yeshiva (9-5, 7-2 SKY, 0.643 WP, 0.504 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Baruch (11-3, 5-0 CUNYAC, 0.786 WP, 0.455 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

Mid-Atlantic region
1) Swarthmore (10-2, 3-2 CC, 0.833 WP, 0.603 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Salisbury (12-1, 2-0 CAC, 0.923 WP, 0.570 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Arcadia (11-2, 5-0 MACC, 0.846 WP, 0.566 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Christopher_Newport (11-2, 1-1 CAC, 0.846 WP, 0.566 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Scranton (12-1, 1-1 LAND, 0.923 WP, 0.504 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Mary_Washington (9-4, 1-1 CAC, 0.692 WP, 0.572 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Johns_Hopkins (8-4, 5-0 CC, 0.667 WP, 0.594 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Drew (10-3, 2-0 LAND, 0.769 WP, 0.515 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) Franklin_and_Marshall (9-3, 3-2 CC, 0.750 WP, 0.522 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Penn_State-Harrisburg (9-4, 1-1 CAC, 0.692 WP, 0.520 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Susquehanna (9-4, 2-0 LAND, 0.692 WP, 0.491 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

South region
1) Randolph-Macon (13-2, 5-1 ODAC, 0.867 WP, 0.542 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Centre (10-2, 3-0 SAA, 0.833 WP, 0.540 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Washington_and_Lee (10-4, 3-2 ODAC, 0.714 WP, 0.584 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Lynchburg (13-1, 4-1 ODAC, 0.929 WP, 0.507 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Emory (9-3, 0-1 UAA, 0.750 WP, 0.567 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Louisiana_College (11-2, 5-1 ASC, 0.846 WP, 0.505 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Mary_Hardin-Baylor (12-3, 3-3 ASC, 0.800 WP, 0.518 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Guilford (10-4, 4-1 ODAC, 0.714 WP, 0.534 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) North_Carolina_Wesleyan (8-2, 5-1 USAC, 0.800 WP, 0.503 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Emory_and_Henry (9-5, 2-3 ODAC, 0.643 WP, 0.571 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Sewanee (9-1, 2-1 SAA, 0.900 WP, 0.469 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

Great Lakes region
1) Marietta (12-1, 6-0 OAC, 0.923 WP, 0.558 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Capital (11-2, 6-0 OAC, 0.846 WP, 0.563 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Wabash (10-1, 6-0 NCAC, 0.909 WP, 0.542 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) La_Roche (12-2, 7-0 AMCC, 0.857 WP, 0.528 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Wittenberg (10-2, 5-1 NCAC, 0.833 WP, 0.524 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Wooster (10-3, 5-1 NCAC, 0.769 WP, 0.539 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Baldwin_Wallace (9-4, 3-3 OAC, 0.692 WP, 0.541 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Mount_Union (11-2, 5-1 OAC, 0.846 WP, 0.496 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
9) Albion (9-3, 2-0 MIAA, 0.750 WP, 0.494 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
10) Rose-Hulman (8-4, 5-1 HCAC, 0.667 WP, 0.513 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Transylvania (8-5, 5-1 HCAC, 0.615 WP, 0.581 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
12) Penn_State-Behrend (12-1, 6-1 AMCC, 0.923 WP, 0.453 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

Central region
1) UW-Stevens_Point (10-2, 2-0 WIAC, 0.833 WP, 0.605 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Augustana (13-1, 5-0 CCIW, 0.929 WP, 0.541 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) UW-Whitewater (11-2, 0-2 WIAC, 0.846 WP, 0.571 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Wheaton_(Ill.) (10-4, 3-2 CCIW, 0.714 WP, 0.567 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) North_Central_(Ill.) (12-3, 4-2 CCIW, 0.800 WP, 0.525 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) UW-La_Crosse (9-4, 2-0 WIAC, 0.692 WP, 0.561 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Chicago (8-4, 1-0 UAA, 0.667 WP, 0.571 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) UW-Oshkosh (12-1, 2-0 WIAC, 0.923 WP, 0.482 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) Elmhurst (9-5, 4-1 CCIW, 0.643 WP, 0.585 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Illinois_Wesleyan (9-5, 2-3 CCIW, 0.643 WP, 0.569 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) UW-Eau_Claire (9-4, 2-0 WIAC, 0.692 WP, 0.480 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

West region
1) Nebraska_Wesleyan (13-0, 4-0 ARC, 1.000 WP, 0.603 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Loras (11-3, 3-2 ARC, 0.786 WP, 0.623 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Whitman (11-1, 3-0 NWC, 0.917 WP, 0.545 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) St._John's (11-1, 7-0 MIAC, 0.917 WP, 0.532 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) St._Thomas (11-1, 7-0 MIAC, 0.917 WP, 0.521 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Augsburg (8-3, 5-2 MIAC, 0.727 WP, 0.525 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Whitworth (11-1, 3-0 NWC, 0.917 WP, 0.476 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Simpson (8-4, 3-2 ARC, 0.667 WP, 0.550 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) Dubuque (9-4, 3-2 ARC, 0.692 WP, 0.514 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) George_Fox (10-2, 4-0 NWC, 0.833 WP, 0.482 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Linfield (9-2, 4-0 NWC, 0.818 WP, 0.479 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

Greek Tragedy

Surprised Stevens Point is ahead of Augustana. Augie has a win over them and a better winning percentage. I suppose when the v RRO is included, that should jump Augie over the Dawgs.
Pointers
Breed of a Champion
2004, 2005, 2010 and 2015 National Champions

Fantasy Leagues Commissioner

TGHIJGSTO!!!

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)


I get why you'd want to break the rankings up by region and I'm thankful that you do it and share it.  I'm not sure they should be called "mock regional rankings" though, when it's just what the computer spits out.  It's not like a Top 25, where the objective is just to pick the 25 best teams and thus a computer is on equal footing with everyone else.  The regional rankings are compiled for the purpose of selecting the field, by a specific criteria.  If you're not using that same criteria to rank the team, it doesn't make sense to call it a mock, right?

Unless you did actually go back and adjust what the computer gave you for the tendencies and requirements of the NCAA committees.  If that's the case, I just don't agree that a 4-loss Wesleyan team will be ranked ahead of an undefeated Hamilton no matter the SOS difference.  There's a lot of those where other considerations might matter - like the fact that Rowan beat two of the three teams ahead of them already this year (with very similar SOS numbers).

I want you to keep doing this, but you might want to come up with a different name for it, since it's pretty clearly not a prediction of the regional rankings, just a strength of teams divided by region.
Lead Columnist for D3hoops.com
@ryanalanscott just about anywhere

fantastic50

Quote from: Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan) on January 09, 2019, 06:52:06 AM

I get why you'd want to break the rankings up by region and I'm thankful that you do it and share it.  I'm not sure they should be called "mock regional rankings" though, when it's just what the computer spits out.  It's not like a Top 25, where the objective is just to pick the 25 best teams and thus a computer is on equal footing with everyone else.  The regional rankings are compiled for the purpose of selecting the field, by a specific criteria.  If you're not using that same criteria to rank the team, it doesn't make sense to call it a mock, right?

Unless you did actually go back and adjust what the computer gave you for the tendencies and requirements of the NCAA committees.

Thanks for the feedback, Ryan.  There are (at least) three different ways in which we could design rankings:

  • Best (most likely to win future games against a strong opponent)
  • Most deserving (best overall body of work to date)
  • Most likely to be selected (based on past selection committee behavior)

I am explicitly attempting to do the last of these.  I have a separate list of the (top 25) best teams, but this list is intended to model Pool C selection behavior, and the rankings that lead to those selections.  At season's end, it has performed well for that purpose, but there are some mid-season hiccups; for example, a regional committee may rank a team with a WP just over .500, whereas (based on Pool C selection history), my model would heavily penalize that WP.

QuoteIf that's the case, I just don't agree that a 4-loss Wesleyan team will be ranked ahead of an undefeated Hamilton no matter the SOS difference.  There's a lot of those where other considerations might matter - like the fact that Rowan beat two of the three teams ahead of them already this year (with very similar SOS numbers).

The Wesleyan/Hamilton situation is an odd one, because Wesleyan's SOS is impossibly high.  At selection time, the highest SOS we ever see is about .610, so it's tough to discern how the committee would treat a resume with an off-the-charts .663 SOS.  I think that SOS difference does supersede a difference in wins at some point (remember that an undefeated 2016 Lancaster Bible team was unranked, due to a horrible SOS).  That being said, I agree that Hamilton would likely be #2 (and MIT #3), ahead of Hamilton.  Similarly, Amherst (11-1, .434 SOS) might still get ranked by a regional committee, despite an awful SOS.  By season's end, or even by the first rankings next month, the SOS differences will decrease, and the issue should resolve itself.

Regarding Rowan, head-to-head is something that I don't include in my model, because my study of it indicates that regional committees vary widely in how much they value it.  Sometimes, it is considered heavily, and other times clearly ignored.

QuoteI want you to keep doing this, but you might want to come up with a different name for it, since it's pretty clearly not a prediction of the regional rankings, just a strength of teams divided by region.

I respectfully disagree on the last point.  If I were listing the best teams by region, I would have Amherst (11-1 against an awful schedule, but thrashing weak teams) ahead of Wesleyan (the ultra-high SOS isn't indicative, as they have only two quality wins and four lopsided defeats).

Let's see how these look in a couple of weeks.  Maybe we need "predict the regional rankings" to be a new fantasy contest! ;)

nescac1

Based on a combo of results, talent level, and the eye test, I'd put the northeast rankings at something like this:

Williams, Hamilton, MIT (although if Jurko and Forsythe are both done for the year, which seems possible, and if Korb continues to be out as well, they will very likely drop) are a clear top three, and after that it's a total morass of teams with gaudy records vs. weak schedules and so-so records vs. strong schedules.  I'll go with Eastern Conn, Amherst, Wesleyan, Gordon, Nichols, Middlebury, Babson, but it's defensible to group those teams in just about any order.  I may be a little low on Nichols after the very strong start to the season and big wins over Wesleyan and Eastern Conn, but the last four games they have been underwhelming. 

Amherst really is the hardest to evaluate in light of all the blowouts against bad teams.  But Amherst's upcoming four-game stretch at Williams, Eastern Conn and Hamilton, and home vs. Wesleyan, will determine if Amherst is too low (if they go 3-1 or better), about right (2-2) or too high (1-3 or worse).  It will certainly bring Amherst's abysmal SOS rating up to a more respectable level. 

Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)


The other thing to consider - and Dave only hinted at it in his interview with Men's Committee chair, Sam Atkinson, earlier this year, is that they've been directed not to make such a definitive use of the 2 wins to .03 SOS comparison.  It should be a guide, but not a determinant factor.  The last few years it's been used to rank teams, but there will be more nuance this year.  Obviously, it's early and a 25 game schedule will look a lot different than what we have now - the four losses vs zero thing will probably resolve itself.

That being said, things like head-to-head and common opponent may be a little more influential this year - at least from what we're hearing.  Maybe you've got the data to prove me wrong, but I do think head to head is a pretty common factor when the other numbers are so close (like the NJAC right now) - I agree it's often ignored, but not usually in deciding between two very similar (or identical) resumes.

Also, I think 3/8ths of the committee is new this year, so that'll make things even less predictable.  Fun times.  I'm glad you're doing this.  It'll be good to have multiple models to look at.
Lead Columnist for D3hoops.com
@ryanalanscott just about anywhere

fantastic50

Good to hear the update, Ryan.  I don't catch the podcast too often, so it's interesting to know what might be evolving.

Dave 'd-mac' McHugh

3/8s of the committee is technically new, but I believe (if memory serves) that one of them is a repeat committee member.

Also ... SOS numbers this time of year are so out of wack they are hard to gauge against anything. It is the biggest reason the rankings don't start getting spit out until late January or early February.
Host of Hoopsville. USBWA Executive Board member. Broadcast Director for D3sports.com. Broadcaster for NCAA.com & several colleges. PA Announcer for Gophers & Brigade. Follow me on Twitter: @davemchugh or @d3hoopsville.

KnightSlappy

When it comes to head-to-head results, I think the committee might look at it like this:

3-0 extremely meaningful, will almost certainly jump (or drop) a team even if they're otherwise separated
2-0 very meaningful, will almost certainly jump a team if they're otherwise close
1-0 somewhat meaningful, will break ties but might not jump a team even if they're otherwise close.
2-1 only slightly meaningful, will only break the narrowest of ties.
1-1 obviously not meaningful, will not break a tie

Ralph Turner

Quote from: fantastic50 on January 08, 2019, 02:22:45 PM
Fantastic 50's Fabulous Mock Regional Rankings


Northeast region
1) Williams (13-0, 2-0 NESCAC, 1.000 WP, 0.574 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Wesleyan (9-4, 1-1 NESCAC, 0.692 WP, 0.663 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Hamilton (13-0, 1-0 NESCAC, 1.000 WP, 0.526 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) MIT (12-1, 2-0 NEWMAC, 0.923 WP, 0.547 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Eastern_Connecticut (9-3, 3-1 LEC, 0.750 WP, 0.592 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Nichols (11-2, 3-1 CCC, 0.846 WP, 0.552 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Gordon (13-1, 5-0 CCC, 0.929 WP, 0.500 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Middlebury (9-4, 1-1 NESCAC, 0.692 WP, 0.565 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
9) Endicott (9-4, 2-2 CCC, 0.692 WP, 0.561 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Albertus_Magnus (7-3, 0-0 GNAC, 0.700 WP, 0.534 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) WPI (9-4, 0-2 NEWMAC, 0.692 WP, 0.548 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
12) Babson (9-4, 2-0 NEWMAC, 0.692 WP, 0.539 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
13) Mass-Dartmouth (9-4, 3-1 LEC, 0.692 WP, 0.514 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
14) Brandeis (8-4, 1-0 UAA, 0.667 WP, 0.549 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

East region
1) Rochester (11-1, 1-0 UAA, 0.917 WP, 0.552 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Plattsburgh_State (9-2, 3-1 SUNYAC, 0.818 WP, 0.565 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Skidmore (7-3, 5-0 LL, 0.700 WP, 0.547 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Nazareth (7-3, 2-0 E8, 0.700 WP, 0.514 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Brockport (7-4, 3-1 SUNYAC, 0.636 WP, 0.610 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) St._John_Fisher (7-3, 2-0 E8, 0.700 WP, 0.508 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Oswego_State (9-2, 4-0 SUNYAC, 0.818 WP, 0.487 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Stevens (10-2, 3-0 E8, 0.833 WP, 0.475 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) St._Lawrence (7-5, 4-1 LL, 0.583 WP, 0.572 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Alfred (5-2, 0-0 E8, 0.714 WP, 0.461 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Hobart (6-5, 3-1 LL, 0.545 WP, 0.592 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

Atlantic region
1) Ramapo (10-4, 4-3 NJAC, 0.714 WP, 0.595 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) New_Jersey_City (10-4, 5-2 NJAC, 0.714 WP, 0.586 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Montclair_State (10-4, 5-2 NJAC, 0.714 WP, 0.586 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Rowan (9-4, 4-3 NJAC, 0.692 WP, 0.590 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) William_Paterson (10-4, 5-2 NJAC, 0.714 WP, 0.553 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Mount_St._Mary (8-3, 5-2 SKY, 0.727 WP, 0.503 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) TCNJ (9-5, 5-2 NJAC, 0.643 WP, 0.582 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) DeSales (9-3, 2-0 MACF, 0.750 WP, 0.481 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) Farmingdale_State (8-5, 6-2 SKY, 0.615 WP, 0.543 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Yeshiva (9-5, 7-2 SKY, 0.643 WP, 0.504 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Baruch (11-3, 5-0 CUNYAC, 0.786 WP, 0.455 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

Mid-Atlantic region
1) Swarthmore (10-2, 3-2 CC, 0.833 WP, 0.603 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Salisbury (12-1, 2-0 CAC, 0.923 WP, 0.570 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Arcadia (11-2, 5-0 MACC, 0.846 WP, 0.566 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Christopher_Newport (11-2, 1-1 CAC, 0.846 WP, 0.566 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Scranton (12-1, 1-1 LAND, 0.923 WP, 0.504 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Mary_Washington (9-4, 1-1 CAC, 0.692 WP, 0.572 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Johns_Hopkins (8-4, 5-0 CC, 0.667 WP, 0.594 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Drew (10-3, 2-0 LAND, 0.769 WP, 0.515 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) Franklin_and_Marshall (9-3, 3-2 CC, 0.750 WP, 0.522 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Penn_State-Harrisburg (9-4, 1-1 CAC, 0.692 WP, 0.520 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Susquehanna (9-4, 2-0 LAND, 0.692 WP, 0.491 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

South region
1) Randolph-Macon (13-2, 5-1 ODAC, 0.867 WP, 0.542 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Centre (10-2, 3-0 SAA, 0.833 WP, 0.540 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Washington_and_Lee (10-4, 3-2 ODAC, 0.714 WP, 0.584 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Lynchburg (13-1, 4-1 ODAC, 0.929 WP, 0.507 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Emory (9-3, 0-1 UAA, 0.750 WP, 0.567 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Louisiana_College (11-2, 5-1 ASC, 0.846 WP, 0.505 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Mary_Hardin-Baylor (12-3, 3-3 ASC, 0.800 WP, 0.518 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Guilford (10-4, 4-1 ODAC, 0.714 WP, 0.534 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) North_Carolina_Wesleyan (8-2, 5-1 USAC, 0.800 WP, 0.503 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Emory_and_Henry (9-5, 2-3 ODAC, 0.643 WP, 0.571 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Sewanee (9-1, 2-1 SAA, 0.900 WP, 0.469 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

Great Lakes region
1) Marietta (12-1, 6-0 OAC, 0.923 WP, 0.558 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Capital (11-2, 6-0 OAC, 0.846 WP, 0.563 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Wabash (10-1, 6-0 NCAC, 0.909 WP, 0.542 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) La_Roche (12-2, 7-0 AMCC, 0.857 WP, 0.528 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) Wittenberg (10-2, 5-1 NCAC, 0.833 WP, 0.524 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Wooster (10-3, 5-1 NCAC, 0.769 WP, 0.539 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Baldwin_Wallace (9-4, 3-3 OAC, 0.692 WP, 0.541 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Mount_Union (11-2, 5-1 OAC, 0.846 WP, 0.496 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
9) Albion (9-3, 2-0 MIAA, 0.750 WP, 0.494 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
10) Rose-Hulman (8-4, 5-1 HCAC, 0.667 WP, 0.513 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Transylvania (8-5, 5-1 HCAC, 0.615 WP, 0.581 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
12) Penn_State-Behrend (12-1, 6-1 AMCC, 0.923 WP, 0.453 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

Central region
1) UW-Stevens_Point (10-2, 2-0 WIAC, 0.833 WP, 0.605 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Augustana (13-1, 5-0 CCIW, 0.929 WP, 0.541 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) UW-Whitewater (11-2, 0-2 WIAC, 0.846 WP, 0.571 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) Wheaton_(Ill.) (10-4, 3-2 CCIW, 0.714 WP, 0.567 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) North_Central_(Ill.) (12-3, 4-2 CCIW, 0.800 WP, 0.525 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) UW-La_Crosse (9-4, 2-0 WIAC, 0.692 WP, 0.561 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Chicago (8-4, 1-0 UAA, 0.667 WP, 0.571 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) UW-Oshkosh (12-1, 2-0 WIAC, 0.923 WP, 0.482 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) Elmhurst (9-5, 4-1 CCIW, 0.643 WP, 0.585 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) Illinois_Wesleyan (9-5, 2-3 CCIW, 0.643 WP, 0.569 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) UW-Eau_Claire (9-4, 2-0 WIAC, 0.692 WP, 0.480 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)

West region
1) Nebraska_Wesleyan (13-0, 4-0 ARC, 1.000 WP, 0.603 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
2) Loras (11-3, 3-2 ARC, 0.786 WP, 0.623 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
3) Whitman (11-1, 3-0 NWC, 0.917 WP, 0.545 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
4) St._John's (11-1, 7-0 MIAC, 0.917 WP, 0.532 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
5) St._Thomas (11-1, 7-0 MIAC, 0.917 WP, 0.521 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
6) Augsburg (8-3, 5-2 MIAC, 0.727 WP, 0.525 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
7) Whitworth (11-1, 3-0 NWC, 0.917 WP, 0.476 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
8) Simpson (8-4, 3-2 ARC, 0.667 WP, 0.550 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
----------
9) Dubuque (9-4, 3-2 ARC, 0.692 WP, 0.514 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
10) George_Fox (10-2, 4-0 NWC, 0.833 WP, 0.482 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)
11) Linfield (9-2, 4-0 NWC, 0.818 WP, 0.479 SOS, 0-0 vRRO)


Appropriate disclaimer... to be added with each publication...

...evaluation and comparisons...

I like it.