Regional Rankings

[GorillaTeacher]

I doubt it.

[Predatory Primates]

You said it yourself in another thread, for every game, there are two data generated, a win and a loss. An odd number times two is an even number.

They must throw out all the wins for your team, and just figure it based on opponent's record vs. each other.

Otherwise, it would be less than 500.

[GorillaTeacher]

Oh, yes, they exclude the specimen's results against the teams to calculate SOS.

[Divisiontwo]

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/footba...ional-rankings

Well it looks like they have ESU at #9 and NWMSU at #10. Harding is the #8.

I just don’t see the winner of the ESU/NWMSU not getting the #7 spot if Ouachita wins out. SOS has to be over Harding. Truman/Indy are #6/#7 but one has to lose still.

I have no clue what will happen. Nobody does. But you seem to be struggling with the idea that all 3 of those teams will have the exact same SOS when it's all over. Your bias seems to be showing.

[CatFan88]

I wonder how they come up at .500 since you can't play yourself, leaving an odd number of teams?

Add up the total wins of your opponents. Add up the total losses of your opponents. Now subtract your win total from the opponents total losses. Subtract your loss total from the opponents total wins. The wins and losses after the math will equal .500.

[Taxman]

The teams are either seeded 1,2,3, or 4 or considered unseeded.

Only the NCAA can lack the intelligence to place a 2 seed v. a 5 and a 4 seed v. a 7 in the name of immaterial travel expenses over competitive integrity.

[GoCatsGo5]

Everything outside of D1 FBS and D1 MBB March Madness is just static to the NCAA.

[Predatory Primates]

Everything outside of D1 FBS and D1 MBB March Madness is just static to the NCAA.

I would argue that they probably pay closer attention to money losers than money makers.

[Try II]

Everything outside of D1 FBS and D1 MBB March Madness is just static to the NCAA.

NCAA doesn't make anything from FBS so it's all about protecting the men's tourney and the other money makers (CWS)

[GorillaTeacher]

Add up the total wins of your opponents. Add up the total losses of your opponents. Now subtract your win total from the opponents total losses. Add your loss total to the opponents total wins. The wins and losses after the math will equal .500.

only after everyone has played everyone, which is why our SOS is.511 right now.

[BartonHornet]

I have no clue what will happen. Nobody does. But you seem to be struggling with the idea that all 3 of those teams will have the exact same SOS when it's all over. Your bias seems to be showing.

When I posted that I had no clue that Harding would actually have the same SOS of .500 as ESU and NWMSU.

[Pistols_33]

I think to break those ties wouldn't you have to look at quality wins or bad losses? If OBU beats HSU, Harding and NW would both have losses to the top team in their league (undefeateds) but Hardings second loss would be to a 3-loss team whereas NW's second loss would be to a 4-loss team (obviously all of this can change with 2 weeks to go). So Harding wouldn't have as bad of a loss, but opposite of that, NW would have better wins over all three 3-loss teams, whereas Harding would only have 2 (i think?) wins over 3-loss teams?

Or do you look at which league ends up with more teams above .500? Does that mean that one league is stronger than the other, or just that their bottom teams are worse? Or is one league more balanced?

Obviously if Henderson knocks off OBU, they have the best win and they're in right? or does their "bad losses" trump that anyway?

The answer is: whatever the committee decides, as stated previously.

[Brandon]

I think to break those ties wouldn't you have to look at quality wins or bad losses? If OBU beats HSU, Harding and NW would both have losses to the top team in their league (undefeateds) but Hardings second loss would be to a 3-loss team whereas NW's second loss would be to a 4-loss team (obviously all of this can change with 2 weeks to go). So Harding wouldn't have as bad of a loss, but opposite of that, NW would have better wins over all three 3-loss teams, whereas Harding would only have 2 (i think?) wins over 3-loss teams?

Or do you look atwhich league ends up with more teams above .500? Does that mean that one league is stronger than the other, or just that their bottom teams are worse? Or is one league more balanced?

Obviously if Henderson knocks off OBU, they have the best win and they're in right? or does their "bad losses" trump that anyway?

The answer is: whatever the committee decides, as stated previously.

Where is the "bad loss" in the criteria? Where is "league with most teams over .500" in the criteria, which is meaningless in silo scheduling anyway?

I say that sarcastically because I think the criteria is **** in general.

These should be the only three criteria: Winning % | SOS | Performance Index

[NWHoops]

If Harding wins out they will be in before NW or ESU. Those two teams better hope they lose a game.

Don’t see a 2 loss team jumping another one with the same SOS. Plus the committee having them where they are and the other 2 where they are let’s you know what they are thinking.

The committee having them where they are could be based on the data available (SOS, etc.) today, but from the sound of it there will be no difference in NW/ESU winner and Harding (if they win out) once the full schedule is complete.

[GorillaTeacher]

The committee having them where they are could be based on the data available (SOS, etc.) today, but from the sound of it there will be no difference in NW/ESU winner and Harding (if they win out) once the full schedule is complete.

there may be a difference in record against teams >.500 which I believe Inkblot noted is a supposed area of emphasis.