Regional Rankings

[CatFan88]

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.

Record vs >.500.

[CatFan88]

So we are looking at Davenport ferris and GV. From gliac Truman/Indy Winner. OBU. From GAC,and Pitt from MIAA. Theses six should be in unless a random disaster 7th Then last spot is fight between Harding , ESU/NW winner, and loser from Truman/Indy all the teams will be 9-2. Any I'm missing ?

Henderson St.

[reloadmvp]

I am reminded of a fortune cookie that I got years ago, "Unfortunately common sense is not so common."

Especially in Oklahoma.

[Pistols_33]

I'll take the compliment. Thanks for listening to my TedTalk

[NW Normal]

On our show, we have talked about Criteria vs. Common Sense. All of the things you mention fall into the common sense category.

I am reminded of a fortune cookie that I got years ago, "Unfortunately common sense is not so common."

[Brandon]

I only mean "bad loss" and "league with the most teams above .500" as differentiators BECAUSE if the MIAA ends up with 7 teams above .500, does that mean that they played tougher competition than the GAC if the GAC only has 6 teams above .500? That's all i'm saying...NW would have had an extra chance to get a win against a team above .500? Or does it just mean that the bottom of the MIAA is weaker? I'm just throwing it out there to think about, i agree there's nothing great about it. But somehow you HAVE to break the tie between two teams with identical records and identical SOS.

But as i type that, performance indicator should take care of that because of home/away games and winning percentage/etc.

On our show, we have talked about Criteria vs. Common Sense. All of the things you mention fall into the common sense category.

[Pistols_33]

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

I only mean "bad loss" and "league with the most teams above .500" as differentiators BECAUSE if the MIAA ends up with 7 teams above .500, does that mean that they played tougher competition than the GAC if the GAC only has 6 teams above .500? That's all i'm saying...NW would have had an extra chance to get a win against a team above .500? Or does it just mean that the bottom of the MIAA is weaker? I'm just throwing it out there to think about, i agree there's nothing great about it. But somehow you HAVE to break the tie between two teams with identical records and identical SOS.

But as i type that, performance indicator should take care of that because of home/away games and winning percentage/etc.

[the Northeasterner]

So we are looking at Davenport ferris and GV. From gliac Truman/Indy Winner. OBU. From GAC,and Pitt from MIAA. Theses six should be in unless a random disaster 7th Then last spot is fight between Harding , ESU/NW winner, and loser from Truman/Indy all the teams will be 9-2. Any I'm missing ?

[Wallst]

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

Its ok. ESU isn't a math skool. ;) oh. and welcome to the board! :)

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.