Author Topic: New England Soccer Discussion  (Read 315996 times)

Offline Off Pitch

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 493
  • Karma: +23/-16
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #465 on: October 08, 2015, 05:47:11 pm »
Well, you get the extra "points" for your SOS win or lose.   By the way, Mass-Boston has 14 of their 18 games AWAY this season. 

Offline ECSUalum

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2574
  • Karma: +161/-51
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #466 on: October 08, 2015, 06:06:27 pm »
My Day, Month, and maybe year has been made today as the Boys in Green, Republic of Ireland just upset Germany 1-0 on a Shane Long break away and clinical finish at the 65' mark.  This puts them tied for second place in point in Group D of the UEFA Euro qualifiers!!!!!!!!!!!  Poland and Scotland played to a 2-2 draw  ;D  Poland on Sunday in Poland!!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2577319-shane-long-puts-ireland-in-front-against-world-champs-germany-in-euro-qualifying?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=web-des-art-top-20

Offline Mr.Right

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 4481
  • Karma: +209/-135
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #467 on: October 09, 2015, 02:14:22 pm »
Well, you get the extra "points" for your SOS win or lose.   By the way, Mass-Boston has 14 of their 18 games AWAY this season.





So since I am not a #'s guy and more of a guesser what type of impact will this have?

They are 9-1-0 on the road now against some decent teams with better records than they really are and some really bad teams with bad records. If they finish 13-1-0 on the road was is the estimated impact as far as OWP and OOWP and SOS and all that?

Offline TennesseeJed

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: +8/-0
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #468 on: October 09, 2015, 02:58:45 pm »
Just a word of caution and clarification.  Obviously it's next to impossible to do the full SOS calculation on your own.  So, yes, just considering the OWP gives you a ball park feel that's pretty useful.  But (and I'm stealing my own thunder for an article I'm preparing for the website) there's a few other wrinkles in the calculations that effect the OWP that I don't believe anyone is accounting for (and maybe not remembering or even aware of).

So, it's not even "as simple" as just SOS = 2/3 OWP + 1/3 OOWP.

(1) A team's result against each opponent is removed from each opponents W-L-T record before computing their winning percentage.  Now this is relatively minor, so again, for ease and simplicity can be neglected.  (The same thing is done for computing each opponent's opponents' winning percentage, the OOWP).

(2) There are multipliers for home and away games that factor each opponent's winning pct. up (away game) or down (home game).  (The same thing is done for computing each OOWP).  And these factors are not insignificant.

          Factored OWP = opponent's winning pct. x SOS multiplier

          Multipliers:
          0.85 for home games (or -15%)
          1.25 for away games (or +25%)

So there's a 40% value difference between home and away games.  That means that playing a team a little over .500 away is as helpful to your SOS as playing a team a little under .800 at home as can be illustrated as follows:

          Away game: .543 win pct.  x  1.25 home/away multiplier  =  .677 factored OWP

          Home game: .792 win pct.  x  0.85 home/away multiplier  =  .673 factored OWP

Interesting, isn't it?  Two teams with a difference in winning percentages of .249 contribute the same to a team's SOS if the better team is played at home and the lesser team is played on the road.  What does everyone think about that?  The multipliers are pretty drastic, aren't they?  And it can really affect a team's SOS if in a given year by happenstance they host most of the top teams in their conference versus playing them away, or vice versa.

So, I do not want to discourage the simple method of collecting the straight OWP (without removing the head-to-head result and without applying the home/away multiplier), but everyone should be aware that these components of the calculations can make the actual numbers somewhat different that the quick and dirty ones being thrown out there.  How much different will vary of course.  And there's usually going to be some balancing out within each team's calculations.  But it certainly could change who has a better SOS among a group of teams. 

So things to keep in mind.  Maybe the home/away multipliers could be accounted for in the OWP calculations to be a little more accurate without getting too burdemsome.  And I hope you'll all still read my upcoming article on D3soccer.com even though I just gave a good chuck of it away!  ;)

This is really helpful in trying to understand at least some of what the NCAA does for Pool C.  Thanks!

Well, you get the extra "points" for your SOS win or lose.   By the way, Mass-Boston has 14 of their 18 games AWAY this season.

So since I am not a #'s guy and more of a guesser what type of impact will this have?

They are 9-1-0 on the road now against some decent teams with better records than they really are and some really bad teams with bad records. If they finish 13-1-0 on the road was is the estimated impact as far as OWP and OOWP and SOS and all that?


So there's a 40% value difference between home and away games.  That means that playing a team a little over .500 away is as helpful to your SOS as playing a team a little under .800 at home as can be illustrated as follows:

          Away game: .543 win pct.  x  1.25 home/away multiplier  =  .677 factored OWP

          Home game: .792 win pct.  x  0.85 home/away multiplier  =  .673 factored OWP

Based on Christian's great post above, they get a big boost from the number of away games they've played vs. other teams who will play more games at home.  Impossible to say exactly what the specific/exact/actual impact is (without a pretty sophisticated computer model) because it depends on opponents and opponents' opponents schedules and records...and it'll change every time any of the teams plays a game...
« Last Edit: October 09, 2015, 03:02:58 pm by TennesseeJed »

Offline Mr.Right

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 4481
  • Karma: +209/-135
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #469 on: October 09, 2015, 03:21:53 pm »
Yes but it can be done and is very impactful in the New England region if UMASS Boston does not win the Little East. It's getting to be mid-October and I was curious to throw it out there. We have seen numerous models, tables, spread sheets, crack math and guesses..I just figured one could figure the impact this will have on the rest of New England. Seeing they will have a very limited Record v Ranked I imagine it will soften the blow for other New England schools

Offline TennesseeJed

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: +8/-0
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #470 on: October 09, 2015, 04:56:21 pm »
Yes but it can be done and is very impactful in the New England region if UMASS Boston does not win the Little East. It's getting to be mid-October and I was curious to throw it out there. We have seen numerous models, tables, spread sheets, crack math and guesses..I just figured one could figure the impact this will have on the rest of New England. Seeing they will have a very limited Record v Ranked I imagine it will soften the blow for other New England schools

Totally agree...I can definitely handle the math, but just not the time it would take to do it...and keep it current.  Love to see it if someone else does the work!

Offline Flying Weasel

  • All-Conference
  • ****
  • Posts: 924
  • Karma: +78/-12
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #471 on: October 09, 2015, 06:56:49 pm »
Yeah, it's not the level of math required that's the problem.  It's the volume of math to be done.  To do the full SOS calculation for just one team is a massive undertaking. It involves at the moment, assuming a 10-match average per team, a total of 1000* results . . . for just one team's SOS!  And that keeps growing as the season progresses.  Trying to do it for just the top 20 or so teams in a region is already getting beyond what can reasonably be done in a spreadsheet, nevermind trying to do it for the entire region or for the top 20 in all eight regions. 

* calculated as follows:

[10 matches of the team of interest] + [the 10 matches of each of the 10 opponents of the team of interest, minus the matches versus the team of interest] + [the 10 matches of the 10 opponents of the 10 opponents of the team of interest, minus the matches versus the opponents of the team of interest]
= [10] + [(10 x 10) - 10] + [(10 x 10 x 10) - (10 x 10)]  =  [10] + [100 - 10] + [1000 - 100]  =  10 + 90 + 900  =  1000

OR, more simply, . . .

103  =  1000

Offline PaulNewman

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3346
  • Karma: +199/-124
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #472 on: October 11, 2015, 07:56:09 pm »
Mr.Right, do you know the history of how the NEWMAC was formed?  Someone asked me a few days ago how and why MIT is in the NEWMAC instead of perhaps the UAA.

Offline Ommadawn

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 483
  • Karma: +30/-1
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #473 on: October 11, 2015, 08:13:53 pm »
Mr.Right, do you know the history of how the NEWMAC was formed?  Someone asked me a few days ago how and why MIT is in the NEWMAC instead of perhaps the UAA.

I don't want to step on Mr. Right's toes and I hope he'll correct any of the mistakes in my foggy recollection, but I think that the NEWMAC was formed by combining schools from the Constitution Athletic Conference (a men's conference that consisted of Babson, Clark, MIT, Springfield, Coast Guard, WPI, and Wheaton) with the NEW 8 women's conference.  I'm not sure why MIT either chose not to join the UAA or was not invited to do so.

The NEWMAC website says:

"About the NEWMAC

The New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference (NEWMAC) is an association of 11 selective academic institutions that are committed to providing high quality competitive athletic opportunities for student-athletes within an educational and respectful environment that embodies the NCAA Division III philosophy.

The NEWMAC was established in 1998, when the former New England Women's 8 Conference (NEW 8) voted to begin sponsoring conference play and championships for men.  At this time, the conference expanded its membership to include Springfield College and the United States Coast Guard Academy. Emerson College became the 11th full-time member of the conference on July 1, 2013.

The NEW 8 began play in 1985-86 as the New England Women's 6 Conference (NEW 6).  Charter members were Babson College, Brandeis University, MIT, Smith College, Wellesley College and Wheaton College. Mount Holyoke College and WPI joined in 1988 and the name was changed to the NEW 8 Conference.  At the conclusion of the 1994-95 academic year, Brandeis University withdrew from the NEW 8 to join the University Athletic Association and Clark University accepted membership, keeping the NEW 8's membership at eight institutions."

Offline PaulNewman

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3346
  • Karma: +199/-124
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #474 on: October 11, 2015, 09:39:33 pm »
Ommadawn, much appreciated.

The Brandeis move is interesting and now in 2015 seems very savvy.  I wonder if that happened simultaneous with Johns Hopkins leaving the UAA.  I got interested a couple of weeks ago in how the UAA schools make it work and discovered that other than soccer, basketball may be the only other sport where they travel the same way.  In sports like swimming, track, tennis, etc they play an in-region schedule and then have a weekend or two for a sort of a conference jamboree with all the UAA teams.  Smart stuff.

Think about the seismic shifts in conference re-alignments in D1 over the past 5-10 years.  Now that is revenue driven as much as prestige driven, but if you think about it just under the general concept of marketing, one can come up with some interesting arrangements.  The NESCAC as an idea is pure brilliance.  Think about how much Trinity and Conn College benefit from being NESCAC members.  Think about the draw being strong enough to attract Hamilton that already was with a very attractive set of schools in the Liberty.  NESCAC isn't just brand-name, it's a brand, and a brand that plays off of the Ivy brand.

If I could be NCAA D3 commissioner for a day....

Imagine Messiah, Wheaton (Ill), Calvin, Hope, and Gordon as the foundation of a new conference, and imagine all of those schools playing each other in soccer every single year.

Imagine MIT in the UAA instead of the NEWMAC.

Imagine a midwest "NESCAC" with Carleton, Macalester, Grinnell, Oberlin, Kenyon, DePauw, Denison, St Olaf, and maybe Centre and even W&L.

Cost obviously would be a huge consideration, and I'd be curious to know how much cost-difference there is in operating the UAA vs other conferences. 

Nutmeg

  • Guest
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #475 on: October 11, 2015, 09:43:55 pm »
Ommadawn, much appreciated.

The Brandeis move is interesting and now in 2015 seems very savvy.  I wonder if that happened simultaneous with Johns Hopkins leaving the UAA.  I got interested a couple of weeks ago in how the UAA schools make it work and discovered that other than soccer, basketball may be the only other sport where they travel the same way.  In sports like swimming, track, tennis, etc they play an in-region schedule and then have a weekend or two for a sort of a conference jamboree with all the UAA teams.  Smart stuff.

Think about the seismic shifts in conference re-alignments in D1 over the past 5-10 years.  Now that is revenue driven as much as prestige driven, but if you think about it just under the general concept of marketing, one can come up with some interesting arrangements.  The NESCAC as an idea is pure brilliance.  Think about how much Trinity and Conn College benefit from being NESCAC members.  Think about the draw being strong enough to attract Hamilton that already was with a very attractive set of schools in the Liberty.  NESCAC isn't just brand-name, it's a brand, and a brand that plays off of the Ivy brand.

If I could be NCAA D3 commissioner for a day....

Imagine Messiah, Wheaton (Ill), Calvin, Hope, and Gordon as the foundation of a new conference, and imagine all of those schools playing each other in soccer every single year.

Imagine MIT in the UAA instead of the NEWMAC.

Imagine a midwest "NESCAC" with Carleton, Macalester, Grinnell, Oberlin, Kenyon, DePauw, Denison, St Olaf, and maybe Centre and even W&L.

Cost obviously would be a huge consideration, and I'd be curious to know how much cost-difference there is in operating the UAA vs other conferences.

That Messiah, Wheaton, Hope, etc. conference would be most excellent!

Offline Mr.Right

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 4481
  • Karma: +209/-135
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #476 on: October 12, 2015, 01:08:12 pm »
Ommadawn, much appreciated.

The Brandeis move is interesting and now in 2015 seems very savvy.  I wonder if that happened simultaneous with Johns Hopkins leaving the UAA.  I got interested a couple of weeks ago in how the UAA schools make it work and discovered that other than soccer, basketball may be the only other sport where they travel the same way.  In sports like swimming, track, tennis, etc they play an in-region schedule and then have a weekend or two for a sort of a conference jamboree with all the UAA teams.  Smart stuff.

Think about the seismic shifts in conference re-alignments in D1 over the past 5-10 years.  Now that is revenue driven as much as prestige driven, but if you think about it just under the general concept of marketing, one can come up with some interesting arrangements.  The NESCAC as an idea is pure brilliance.  Think about how much Trinity and Conn College benefit from being NESCAC members.  Think about the draw being strong enough to attract Hamilton that already was with a very attractive set of schools in the Liberty.  NESCAC isn't just brand-name, it's a brand, and a brand that plays off of the Ivy brand.

If I could be NCAA D3 commissioner for a day....

Imagine Messiah, Wheaton (Ill), Calvin, Hope, and Gordon as the foundation of a new conference, and imagine all of those schools playing each other in soccer every single year.

Imagine MIT in the UAA instead of the NEWMAC.

Imagine a midwest "NESCAC" with Carleton, Macalester, Grinnell, Oberlin, Kenyon, DePauw, Denison, St Olaf, and maybe Centre and even W&L.

Cost obviously would be a huge consideration, and I'd be curious to know how much cost-difference there is in operating the UAA vs other conferences.







So there are a ton of variables that play into this answer, all of which I either remember correctly or might miss a detail or 2.

I will be blunt, so if I offend oh well....Some of this is opinion not fact but opinion and good opinion. Also, I tend to get off topic on these long answers because I lose concentration so I have that going for me.



1. MIT does not need the UAA because well MIT is MIT. You yourself praised the UAA schools for joining together in the mid-80's to give deserved recognition to their schools to a more national and international audience rather than a regional one. That was done for the usual reasons $$$$$ and prestige, better students make for better alums that make for more endowment, etc...

2. I have no idea why Johns Hopkins backed out but I would guess it is because well Johns Hopkins is Johns Hopkins and also did not need the UAA. Hopkins and MIT already had national and international recognition.

3. My guess is Brandeis NEEDED the UAA more than the UAA needed Brandeis. By the mid-80's Brandeis' endowment was not good and they were in need of like most of these schools more recognition. The great thing about the UAA is that all these schools need each other and like most leagues there are some that need them more than others. My guess is Brandeis is one that needed the UAA more than most.

Some schools make decisions for one reason or another that I have no answer for. In 1982 when the Nescac schools told Union to either drop D1 Hockey or leave Nescac, Union chose D1 Hockey.

In the mid to late 80's when Williams and Amherst alums were pressuring their respective presidents to consider to allow their student athletes to participate in the highest level of their respective sports, FACULTY balked and so did 2 Maine Presidents at Bates and especially Colby. Eventually, Alums and their $$$ won and to temper faculty's concerns they said the biggest sport Football would remain an 8 game schedule and No NCAA's. Colby's President in the late 80's and early 90's for whatever reason was 100% against this move and he fought it valiantly for about 3 years but he knew he was fighting a losing battle. WHY? Because Amherst and Williams do not need Nescac, they MAKE Nescac. Nescac does not need Colby but most certainly Colby needs Nescac.

Is it elitist? YES Is it true? YES....

Also, in 2009-2010 after the financial crisis hit when Hamilton's president for whatever reason(most likely $$$$) wanted to be more associated with that Nescac prestige instead of quite frankly Liberty League schools that besides RPI and Union had very lax admissions standards and decent but weak endowments. Because Hamilton was a previous member and still a member in Football they were allowed back into the league. She wanted that prestige even if it meant for all athletic teams to travel 8-9 hours to Maine for athletic events. $$$ talks..

Back to the question..in the 90's D2 schools began fizzling out for whatever reason. Springfield, Coast Guard and Clark were all D2 schools. I imagine they all merged because it made sense. I forgot what I was answering but anyway the real interesting thing was when the financial crisis hit in 2008-09 ALL colleges and Universities FELT it including Williams, Amherst, MIT, Harvard, etc..
but Brandeis FELT IT the MOST. They were HIT hard for whatever reason. So they needed to make cuts and slash budgets and all that good stuff. Now you would think the 1st thing they would look into was why were they spending hundreds of thousands of dollars flying sub-standard athletic teams across the East and Midwest to get lit up in most sports. BUT NO....They needed the UAA more than anything else and even if I remember correctly they were considering selling off $40 Million in Art or whatever and letting great faculty and staff go because they were high earners. Never once did I read about Brandeis ever thinking about leaving the prestigious UAA.

Back to the answer...MIT is MIT and I do not know if they were asked to join the UAA but my guess is that even if they were they didn't need to.

Offline PaulNewman

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3346
  • Karma: +199/-124
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #477 on: October 12, 2015, 01:28:18 pm »
Mr.Right.....with all due respect....that is GREAT STUFF!

Agree with your points about Brandeis and even Colby needing the UAA and NESCAC, and Williams, Amherst, MIT, Hopkins not needing anything.  And in that vein, the move to go UAA looks brilliant for Brandeis, a really good school but without a real sistership in New England that needed a place to "fit in."  I sometimes think of Holy Cross the same way, as an always highly ranked school that never really gets discussed in the same breath as the NESCACs (and I don't think it's just because HC is D1).

The point about Union is VERY interesting.  I've always thought of Union as a close cousin to Trinity and Conn.  The D1 hockey makes sense, especially since they recently have been going to Frozen Fours and won a national title.  Union also is so close to RPI and Skidmore that the 3 of those together make sense.

In your other Hamilton analysis and best schools in Liberty, you forgot about Vassar, but hey, loved the post.

Offline blooter442

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 2508
  • Karma: +102/-14
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #478 on: October 12, 2015, 02:03:38 pm »
Well done Mr.Right.

I just think it's interesting that, with all due respect to the rest of the conference which does boast some great schools, MIT is above all other NEWMAC schools in terms of prestige and academics, so I myself would think that they might look elsewhere. But you're right, they really don't "need" to be part of any particular conference because they have their tradition and prestige. I don't want to start a big discussion about it, but I think that Bates could be added to the list of schools that "need" the NESCAC - it's very similar to Colby in terms of selectivity, academics, prestige, endowment, etc...and geography.

I didn't start at Brandeis until after the financial crisis, but I think you're absolutely right that it has a strong interest in maintaining its UAA membership. The UAA is a prestigious group, and sharing a conference with UChicago, WashU, etc. certainly is good for its reputation. What's interesting, though, is that while Brandeis is well-known nationally and is academically on the same level as some of the NESCACs - I picked Brandeis over two NESCACs - it's not as well known as some of the NESCACs by casual NE college searchers, particularly outside MA. That said, many top employers and grad schools are well aware of Brandeis, so while in casual NE college conversation it's not as oft-mentioned, in more academically-inclined circles Brandeis is well-known. Enough about my alma mater, but I just wanted to draw a parallel to what my thoughts have been.

What is pretty interesting, though, is that a lot of NE folks rate UAA schools highly without knowing what conference they belong to. For example, New Englanders would go "Oh, Chicago, WashU, Carnegie, those are fantastic schools," yet have not the slightest idea which athletic conference they belong to. I've been guilty of this as well - before I researched Hopkins leaving the UAA, I had no idea they were in the Centennial. Same thing with top west coast schools like Pomona and Pizter, which are far more selective than the majority of NESCACs (12-13% acceptance rates), but couldn't begin to tell you what "conference" they were in. Meanwhile, everyone knows that Williams and Amherst are NESCACs - that speaks to the point you made before about Williams and Amherst "making" the NESCAC.

Either way, you've provided some great points and interesting stuff.

Offline PaulNewman

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3346
  • Karma: +199/-124
    • View Profile
Re: New England Soccer Discussion
« Reply #479 on: October 13, 2015, 03:09:39 pm »
So far this looks like a controlled scrimmage for Tufts.