Author Topic: 2010 Regional Rankings  (Read 27432 times)

Offline Hawks88

  • All-Conference
  • ****
  • Posts: 954
  • Karma: +124/-11
    • View Profile
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #30 on: April 29, 2010, 07:33:51 pm »
Yep, gotta question LaGrange being in there ahead of Huntingdon big time. Huntingdon has better region record, better strength of schedule, 2-2 record against regionally ranked opponents where LaGrange is 2-6 and the four games played between the two teams were split 2-2. Does LaGrange winning the 4 team GSAC conference tournament really count for that much more? What's up with that?
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 07:45:57 pm by Hawks88 »

OshDude

  • Guest
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #31 on: April 29, 2010, 07:41:15 pm »
If the NCAA states that the rankings are through games of 4/27, I wish the records would include all games from 4/27. Seems logical to me and not a mere matter of semantics, but many results from 4/27 in the MW and C regions were not included apparently.

It becomes imperative that records are uniformly dealt with across the regions because a fairly important primary criterion, record vs regionally ranked opponents, is now termed paraphrasing "once ranked, always ranked." For example, if the 4/27 games were included for Edgewood and St. Olaf in the Midwest, I suspect St. Olaf would be ranked No. 6 in the region, not Edgewood (although it would be close). What if St. Olaf is ranked and Edgewood is not from here on out? That may seem minor, but I don't think it is.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2010, 07:46:34 pm by OshDude »

Offline Jim Dixon

  • D3baseball.com Guru
  • Global Moderator
  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1804
  • Karma: +149/-3
  • Managing Editor, D3baseball.com
    • View Profile
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #32 on: April 29, 2010, 07:51:28 pm »
hopkins is also 34-3......not 33-3...and was never 33-3.

They went from 32-3 to 34-3 in a DH....so this is not an issue of the timing of the rankings...

I would claim that Hopkins was 33-3 until the second game of the DH was finished so for a short period of time, they were 33-3.    That withstanding, I expect the cutoff would be at the end of the day and it can be correctly said that at the end of the day Hopkins was never 33-3.

I think a few years back there was a situation where it was technically possible for Alex Rodriguez to hit his 501st homer before his 500th home run.

OshDude

  • Guest
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #33 on: April 29, 2010, 08:13:32 pm »
A positive thought. I do applaud the NCAA for releasing the regional score reporting. That is a good move IMO and potentially will help fans understand the rankings, or possibly frustrate them even more.

Where is this??? I dont see it anywhere?
It's at the bottom of the NCAA's RR page, but I have not gotten the SRF links to work in the past hour or so.

golden_dome

  • Guest
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #34 on: April 29, 2010, 08:28:38 pm »
A positive thought. I do applaud the NCAA for releasing the regional score reporting. That is a good move IMO and potentially will help fans understand the rankings, or possibly frustrate them even more.

Where is this??? I dont see it anywhere?
It's at the bottom of the NCAA's RR page, but I have not gotten the SRF links to work in the past hour or so.

Not sure why, but I was able to reopen them one at a time but had to close my browser and start again each time.

Offline Just Bill

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 3949
  • Karma: +691/-204
    • View Profile
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #35 on: April 29, 2010, 09:52:46 pm »
I had the same issue. I could open them all, but only if I closed out of my browser each time.
"That seems silly and pointless..." - Hoops Fan

The first and still most accurate description of the D3 Championship BeltTM thread.

Offline d3baseballnut

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 661
  • Karma: +35/-27
    • View Profile
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #36 on: April 29, 2010, 11:10:50 pm »
Here are the teams i think should be ranked that arent:

South:

Salisbury 21-8

New York:

Oneonta St. 21-8 39th best SOS

New England:

Bates - 18-4 (SOS is 169) that is a shame. I think it is a shame went SOS starts to factor in that much, that a team that is 18-4 in region isnt even ranked. That SOS is NOT that bad. Really. SO are you going to disqualify anyone under 150? C'mon.

Castleton St. 23-5 - SOS is low, but you really think Keene St. is more deserving at 13-11??

Offline Ralph Turner

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 28542
  • Karma: +1792/-382
  • Hall of Famer
    • View Profile
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #37 on: April 29, 2010, 11:46:42 pm »
Here are the teams i think should be ranked that arent:

South:

Salisbury 21-8

New York:

Oneonta St. 21-8 39th best SOS

New England:

Bates - 18-4 (SOS is 169) that is a shame. I think it is a shame went SOS starts to factor in that much, that a team that is 18-4 in region isn't even ranked. That SOS is NOT that bad. Really. SO are you going to disqualify anyone under 150? C'mon.

Castleton St. 23-5 - SOS is low, but you really think Keene St. is more deserving at 13-11??

We in the West Region Conferences have teams with SOS's around .500 because of the isolation.

We don't have any choice.

Bates cannot use that as an excuse.  IMHO, the NESCAC "games" they system in numerous other sports.  The most widely discussed on these boards is basketball.  There is no reason why a NESCAC team cannot have a top quartile (better than 90th) SOS with little effort at all.  The non-region Shenandoah and Mary Washington games were good, but they have not scheduled to LEC powerhouses.

Castleton St plays in a very weak conference, and they did not schedule quality in-region opponents!  The LEC is one of the strongest.  I think that the committee values  Keene State's 4-6 versus regionally ranked opponents. Castleton State is 1-2.

One other thing makes me think that the assessment is correct.  Castleton State came to east Texas in February for a series of games against 2 teams I know well.  They were blown out!  UT-Tyler is good. LeTourneau is did not make the ASC playoffs.  There is not that much early season advantage to be gained on February 22nd by warm weather schools.  We had some relatively bad weather in Texas in early February.

Oneonta can earn the AQ.  I don't think that they have distinguished themselves in their 3-3 record versus in-region ranked opponents. (They may be "7th" or "8th" in the region, but they are still only considered 3rd best in the SUNYAC.   :)   )

Thanks for your thoughts.

Offline d3baseballnut

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 661
  • Karma: +35/-27
    • View Profile
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #38 on: April 30, 2010, 12:10:38 am »
Here are the teams i think should be ranked that arent:

South:

Salisbury 21-8

New York:

Oneonta St. 21-8 39th best SOS

New England:

Bates - 18-4 (SOS is 169) that is a shame. I think it is a shame went SOS starts to factor in that much, that a team that is 18-4 in region isn't even ranked. That SOS is NOT that bad. Really. SO are you going to disqualify anyone under 150? C'mon.

Castleton St. 23-5 - SOS is low, but you really think Keene St. is more deserving at 13-11??

We in the West Region Conferences have teams with SOS's around .500 because of the isolation.

We don't have any choice.

Bates cannot use that as an excuse.  IMHO, the NESCAC "games" they system in numerous other sports.  The most widely discussed on these boards is basketball.  There is no reason why a NESCAC team cannot have a top quartile (better than 90th) SOS with little effort at all.  The non-region Shenandoah and Mary Washington games were good, but they have not scheduled to LEC powerhouses.

Castleton St plays in a very weak conference, and they did not schedule quality in-region opponents!  The LEC is one of the strongest.  I think that the committee values  Keene State's 4-6 versus regionally ranked opponents. Castleton State is 1-2.

One other thing makes me think that the assessment is correct.  Castleton State came to east Texas in February for a series of games against 2 teams I know well.  They were blown out!  UT-Tyler is good. LeTourneau is did not make the ASC playoffs.  There is not that much early season advantage to be gained on February 22nd by warm weather schools.  We had some relatively bad weather in Texas in early February.

Oneonta can earn the AQ.  I don't think that they have distinguished themselves in their 3-3 record versus in-region ranked opponents. (They may be "7th" or "8th" in the region, but they are still only considered 3rd best in the SUNYAC.   :)   )

Thanks for your thoughts.

Dr. Turner-
 ;)

I disagree regarding Bates. Their division in the NESCAC is probably the most difficult division/conference in the Region, if not the nation.

In it you have

Tufts 22-5
Trinity (Conn) 22-8
Bowdoin 21-11

THat is quite a 9 game stint there. Granted, they lost 2 of 3 to Trinity and Tufts, but all that means is that they are 16-0 in region besides those games. THe other teams you mentioned arent getting props because they beat top rated teams...they just played them. I dont see how keene's 4-6 against regionaly rankedl opponents is any better than Bates' 2-4. To me, Bate's 18-4 is strong enough for a ranking......

....same with Webster. I would take their 21-1 record over Buena vista's 18-10  any day of the week.....i hope they meet in regionals to prove this point..... (and i hope they dont prove me wrong :P)


golden_dome

  • Guest
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #39 on: April 30, 2010, 12:19:10 am »
Bates - 18-4 (SOS is 169) that is a shame. I think it is a shame went SOS starts to factor in that much, that a team that is 18-4 in region isnt even ranked. That SOS is NOT that bad. Really. SO are you going to disqualify anyone under 150? C'mon.

Castleton St. 23-5 - SOS is low, but you really think Keene St. is more deserving at 13-11??


I do think the balance of actual wins/losses and the SOS needs common sense at some point, and the implementation could use some consistency. Those cases you mentioned do have huge SOS differences. I'd be more concerned when SOS differences aren't really substantial, but I see your point.

Then you have the issue of what the SOS means anyway. Linfield's .502 SOS is enough to overcome three more losses than MS College who has a SOS of .476. But you can't tell me there is any real difference in the two schedules. Linfield played 5 teams with winning records for a total of 10 games (7-3), and had a streak of 19 straight games vs losing opponents at one point. MC played 6 teams with winning records over 12 games ( 9-3).

MC lost one game all year to a regional losing opponent, losing at Ozarks (12-21). Linfield lost at Puget Sound (14-15), lost at Pacific (12-16), and lost twice to Whitworth (10-18) at home.

Sorry, I just don't see it. Even if you do RPI #'s with winning percentage at 25% and SOS at 75%, MC is still higher along with the better record. Tyler has a bigger argument for how Pacific Lutheran is somehow ahead of them if SOS is that important. I'll put together the RPI #'s for the West just for argument sake.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2010, 11:06:15 am by Chris Brooks »

OshDude

  • Guest
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #40 on: April 30, 2010, 12:23:40 am »
Here are the teams i think should be ranked that arent:

South:

Salisbury 21-8

New York:

Oneonta St. 21-8 39th best SOS

New England:

Bates - 18-4 (SOS is 169) that is a shame. I think it is a shame went SOS starts to factor in that much, that a team that is 18-4 in region isn't even ranked. That SOS is NOT that bad. Really. SO are you going to disqualify anyone under 150? C'mon.

Castleton St. 23-5 - SOS is low, but you really think Keene St. is more deserving at 13-11??

We in the West Region Conferences have teams with SOS's around .500 because of the isolation.

We don't have any choice.

Bates cannot use that as an excuse.  IMHO, the NESCAC "games" they system in numerous other sports.  The most widely discussed on these boards is basketball.  There is no reason why a NESCAC team cannot have a top quartile (better than 90th) SOS with little effort at all.  The non-region Shenandoah and Mary Washington games were good, but they have not scheduled to LEC powerhouses.

Castleton St plays in a very weak conference, and they did not schedule quality in-region opponents!  The LEC is one of the strongest.  I think that the committee values  Keene State's 4-6 versus regionally ranked opponents. Castleton State is 1-2.

One other thing makes me think that the assessment is correct.  Castleton State came to east Texas in February for a series of games against 2 teams I know well.  They were blown out!  UT-Tyler is good. LeTourneau is did not make the ASC playoffs.  There is not that much early season advantage to be gained on February 22nd by warm weather schools.  We had some relatively bad weather in Texas in early February.

Oneonta can earn the AQ.  I don't think that they have distinguished themselves in their 3-3 record versus in-region ranked opponents. (They may be "7th" or "8th" in the region, but they are still only considered 3rd best in the SUNYAC.   :)   )

Thanks for your thoughts.

Dr. Turner-
 ;)

I disagree regarding Bates. Their division in the NESCAC is probably the most difficult division/conference in the Region, if not the nation.

In it you have

Tufts 22-5
Trinity (Conn) 22-8
Bowdoin 21-11

THat is quite a 9 game stint there. Granted, they lost 2 of 3 to Trinity and Tufts, but all that means is that they are 16-0 in region besides those games. THe other teams you mentioned arent getting props because they beat top rated teams...they just played them. I dont see how keene's 4-6 against regionaly rankedl opponents is any better than Bates' 2-4. To me, Bate's 18-4 is strong enough for a ranking......

....same with Webster. I would take their 21-1 record over Buena vista's 18-10  any day of the week.....i hope they meet in regionals to prove this point..... (and i hope they dont prove me wrong :P)
Webster has 17 in-region wins (they're 23-1 now) against teams that are a combined 64-122 on the year.

Offline Ralph Turner

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 28542
  • Karma: +1792/-382
  • Hall of Famer
    • View Profile
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #41 on: April 30, 2010, 12:36:36 am »
Here are the teams i think should be ranked that arent:

South:

Salisbury 21-8

New York:

Oneonta St. 21-8 39th best SOS

New England:

Bates - 18-4 (SOS is 169) that is a shame. I think it is a shame went SOS starts to factor in that much, that a team that is 18-4 in region isn't even ranked. That SOS is NOT that bad. Really. SO are you going to disqualify anyone under 150? C'mon.

Castleton St. 23-5 - SOS is low, but you really think Keene St. is more deserving at 13-11??

We in the West Region Conferences have teams with SOS's around .500 because of the isolation.

We don't have any choice.

Bates cannot use that as an excuse.  IMHO, the NESCAC "games" they system in numerous other sports.  The most widely discussed on these boards is basketball.  There is no reason why a NESCAC team cannot have a top quartile (better than 90th) SOS with little effort at all.  The non-region Shenandoah and Mary Washington games were good, but they have not scheduled to LEC powerhouses.

Castleton St plays in a very weak conference, and they did not schedule quality in-region opponents!  The LEC is one of the strongest.  I think that the committee values  Keene State's 4-6 versus regionally ranked opponents. Castleton State is 1-2.

One other thing makes me think that the assessment is correct.  Castleton State came to east Texas in February for a series of games against 2 teams I know well.  They were blown out!  UT-Tyler is good. LeTourneau is did not make the ASC playoffs.  There is not that much early season advantage to be gained on February 22nd by warm weather schools.  We had some relatively bad weather in Texas in early February.

Oneonta can earn the AQ.  I don't think that they have distinguished themselves in their 3-3 record versus in-region ranked opponents. (They may be "7th" or "8th" in the region, but they are still only considered 3rd best in the SUNYAC.   :)   )

Thanks for your thoughts.

Dr. Turner-
 ;)

I disagree regarding Bates. Their division in the NESCAC is probably the most difficult division/conference in the Region, if not the nation.

In it you have

Tufts 22-5
Trinity (Conn) 22-8
Bowdoin 21-11

THat is quite a 9 game stint there. Granted, they lost 2 of 3 to Trinity and Tufts, but all that means is that they are 16-0 in region besides those games. THe other teams you mentioned arent getting props because they beat top rated teams...they just played them. I dont see how keene's 4-6 against regionaly rankedl opponents is any better than Bates' 2-4. To me, Bate's 18-4 is strong enough for a ranking......

....same with Webster. I would take their 21-1 record over Buena vista's 18-10  any day of the week.....i hope they meet in regionals to prove this point..... (and i hope they dont prove me wrong :P

It is not that NESCAC schedule to which I am disagreeing.  It is the non-conference in-region schedule where I think that Bates has ignored the published criteria.

I think that the New England Region committee is considering that, too.

To wit,  Maine Farmiington, Husson, Emerson, Lasell, Maine-Presque Isle.  I would have hoped for a Keene State, or Wheaton MA to compensate for the weak teams that are nearby in Maine.  :)

Offline d3baseballnut

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 661
  • Karma: +35/-27
    • View Profile
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #42 on: April 30, 2010, 09:51:38 am »
i think the SOS criteria is arbitrary. In certain cases it should come into play, but it shouldnt be a main portion of the ranking.

The fact is, Webster has taken care of their business. Their in reigon record is stellar. I just dont know what else you want from them.

I think the SOS can put some teams, at what appears like, an insurmountable disadvantage/.

Offline BigPoppa

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 4587
  • Karma: +283/-82
    • View Profile
    • Carthage Baseball
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #43 on: April 30, 2010, 10:11:01 am »
I think that by the end of the process it all works itself out. Teams that should be in are in (usually) and teams that should be out are out.

The bigger point is that teams that rely on their regional ranking to get a bid only have themselves to blame (except Pool B) as they all had a chance to win a bid on the field. Pool C is just a back-up for those who blew it the first time. If they want to blame anyone, blame the secopnd baseman for dropping a double play ball in a game that you should have won or something along those lines.

The ranking to really watch is the one that comes out just before the bids. There are still three weekends of baseball to play which will move many, many teams on or off the bubble.
Baseball is not a game that builds character, it is a game that reveals it.

Offline BigToughGuy

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 85
  • Karma: +0/-56
    • View Profile
Re: 2010 Regional Rankings
« Reply #44 on: April 30, 2010, 10:35:23 am »
Here are the teams i think should be ranked that arent:

South:

Salisbury 21-8

New York:

Oneonta St. 21-8 39th best SOS

New England:

Bates - 18-4 (SOS is 169) that is a shame. I think it is a shame went SOS starts to factor in that much, that a team that is 18-4 in region isn't even ranked. That SOS is NOT that bad. Really. SO are you going to disqualify anyone under 150? C'mon.

Castleton St. 23-5 - SOS is low, but you really think Keene St. is more deserving at 13-11??

We in the West Region Conferences have teams with SOS's around .500 because of the isolation.

We don't have any choice.

Bates cannot use that as an excuse.  IMHO, the NESCAC "games" they system in numerous other sports.  The most widely discussed on these boards is basketball.  There is no reason why a NESCAC team cannot have a top quartile (better than 90th) SOS with little effort at all.  The non-region Shenandoah and Mary Washington games were good, but they have not scheduled to LEC powerhouses.

Castleton St plays in a very weak conference, and they did not schedule quality in-region opponents!  The LEC is one of the strongest.  I think that the committee values  Keene State's 4-6 versus regionally ranked opponents. Castleton State is 1-2.

One other thing makes me think that the assessment is correct.  Castleton State came to east Texas in February for a series of games against 2 teams I know well.  They were blown out!  UT-Tyler is good. LeTourneau is did not make the ASC playoffs.  There is not that much early season advantage to be gained on February 22nd by warm weather schools.  We had some relatively bad weather in Texas in early February.

Oneonta can earn the AQ.  I don't think that they have distinguished themselves in their 3-3 record versus in-region ranked opponents. (They may be "7th" or "8th" in the region, but they are still only considered 3rd best in the SUNYAC.   :)   )

Thanks for your thoughts.

Dr. Turner-
 ;)

I disagree regarding Bates. Their division in the NESCAC is probably the most difficult division/conference in the Region, if not the nation.

In it you have

Tufts 22-5
Trinity (Conn) 22-8
Bowdoin 21-11

THat is quite a 9 game stint there. Granted, they lost 2 of 3 to Trinity and Tufts, but all that means is that they are 16-0 in region besides those games. THe other teams you mentioned arent getting props because they beat top rated teams...they just played them. I dont see how keene's 4-6 against regionaly rankedl opponents is any better than Bates' 2-4. To me, Bate's 18-4 is strong enough for a ranking......

....same with Webster. I would take their 21-1 record over Buena vista's 18-10  any day of the week.....i hope they meet in regionals to prove this point..... (and i hope they dont prove me wrong :P)
Webster has 17 in-region wins (they're 23-1 now) against teams that are a combined 64-122 on the year.

The SLIAC kills Webster's SOS within the region.  Outside of the SLIAC they are 6-1 in the Central Region and those opponents are 81-51 combined (.610).  What is the solution here?  The rest of Webster's athletic programs along with geography prevent them from exploring a change of conference.  Should Webster start recruiting for other teams in the SLIAC so that they aren't so pathetic year-in and year-out?