NPI Change for Men's Soccer in 2027

[Kuiper]

The Championships Committee recently approved a decision by the Men's Soccer Committee to change its dials for the NPI calculation effective for Fall 2027

Men's soccer will make the following changes, some of which seems to pull back a little on the initial laser focus on opponent quality above everything.  Is it a sign of pushback on the advantages for NESCAC and other strong conferences getting too many tournament slots?  Maybe.

1.  Win%/SoS%

This dial controls how much emphasis goes to winning versus the strength-of-schedule.  Men's soccer initially was worried that teams would sacrifice strong opponents for easy wins by going away from the regional rankings approach and set this dial at 15%/85%.  Women's soccer, however, went with 20%/80%.  Men's soccer has now adopted the women's standard and moved to 20%/80%. It's still more emphasis on hard schedules than other sports like lacrosse, which is 25/75, but it is more in line with other team sports

2.  QWB

The Quality Win Bonus is another dial that rewards scheduling harder opponents.  It was originally set at 54 with a .750 multiplier, but it has been reduced to 51.5 with a .600 multiplier.  Not sure the exact rational for the individual numbers, but a .750 multiplier was significantly more than many other sports.

3.  Ties

It looks like they want to encourage teams to go for wins rather than to play from the start for the ties by bunkering.  It has been a .500 for ties, so each team got half a win, but now it will be .450 for a tie, which effectively means that a tie is worth a little less than half a win.  For a weaker team, that's still better than losing, but for two strong teams, this "tie discount" or "tie penalty," may have an effect on tactics.

 

[stlawus]

The Championships Committee recently approved a decision by the Men's Soccer Committee to change its dials for the NPI calculation effective for Fall 2027

Men's soccer will make the following changes, some of which seems to pull back a little on the initial laser focus on opponent quality above everything.  Is it a sign of pushback on the advantages for NESCAC and other strong conferences getting too many tournament slots?  Maybe.

1.  Win%/SoS%

This dial controls how much emphasis goes to winning versus the strength-of-schedule.  Men's soccer initially was worried that teams would sacrifice strong opponents for easy wins by going away from the regional rankings approach and set this dial at 15%/85%.  Women's soccer, however, went with 20%/80%.  Men's soccer has now adopted the women's standard and moved to 20%/80%. It's still more emphasis on hard schedules than other sports like lacrosse, which is 25/75, but it is more in line with other team sports

2.  QWB

The Quality Win Bonus is another dial that rewards scheduling harder opponents.  It was originally set at 54 with a .750 multiplier, but it has been reduced to 51.5 with a .600 multiplier.  Not sure the exact rational for the individual numbers, but a .750 multiplier was significantly more than many other sports.

3.  Ties

It looks like they want to encourage teams to go for wins rather than to play from the start for the ties by bunkering.  It has been a .500 for ties, so each team got half a win, but now it will be .450 for a tie, which effectively means that a tie is worth a little less than half a win.  For a weaker team, that's still better than losing, but for two strong teams, this "tie discount" or "tie penalty," may have an effect on tactics.

 

I was quite literally just wondering the other day about this since it's been 3 years which is the time frame you're allowed to make changes after.  I would prefer 25/75 but I'm good with any change from the current dial.  I like the changes to ties. There is no reason whatsoever a team with 10 ties should ever be in the NCAA tournament and this would likely put an end to that ever happening again.

[Ejay]

I like the changes to ties. There is no reason whatsoever a team with 10 ties should ever be in the NCAA tournament and this would likely put an end to that ever happening again.

SC and I have discussed this several times and I don't know there is a "right" answer. If I'm the coach of a team that is say 10-0-10, my argument is you need to prove you can beat me. And come tournament time, a tie is as good as a win if you have the talent to advance in PKs.

[stlawus]

I like the changes to ties. There is no reason whatsoever a team with 10 ties should ever be in the NCAA tournament and this would likely put an end to that ever happening again.

SC and I have discussed this several times and I don't know there is a "right" answer. If I'm the coach of a team that is say 10-0-10, my argument is you need to prove you can beat me. And come tournament time, a tie is as good as a win if you have the talent to advance in PKs.

I agree there's no right answer, but the tournament is just a completely different topic in my opinion.  It's about advancing, not necessarily winning.  But in order to be in that position you shouldn't be able to coast off a horde of ties. Having all those ties won't really do much for your NPI now. 

[ziggy]

You can't lose if the other team doesn't score - but you could still mostly lose!