I see plenty of angst around the message boards and in my e-mail about the regional rankings the NCAA published today (a day late, by the way — if the NCAA is going to fine schools for reporting scores late then perhaps the NCAA should pay $50 to every ranked school to which it reported a day late).
Remember one thing — regional rankings are not like the national rankings. They do not consider all games. Any win is better than any loss.
We have a lot of info about the playoffs and how teams are ranked by the NCAA in our FAQ. But let’s run through them quickly and take a look at what the salient numbers are.
Almost always these run heavily on regional winning percentage and QOW, the Quality of Wins index. We calculate this for you each week. You can find a link to it on the menu rail of any news page.
I’ve listed regional record, regional winning percentage, and QOW.
East Region
1. Rowan 4-0, 1.000, 12.000
2. Hobart 5-0, 1.000, 11.600
3. Delaware Valley 7-0, 1.000, 10.857
4. Union 5-0, 1.000, 10.800
5. Alfred 5-0, 1.000, 10.600
6. Ithaca 6-1, .857, 10.286
7. RPI 5-1, .833, 10.000
8. St. John Fisher 7-1, .875, 9.875
9. Cortland State 5-2, .714, 9.143
10. Wilkes 5-2, 8.857
Every unbeaten team is by default better than every team with a loss. The rankings are just basically a rehash of the QOW, with the exception of Fitchburg State (6-1, .857, 11.000), the only nod to actual team strength. Also left out, Buffalo State, which has a QOW of 10.500 but only a 2-4 overall record, 1-1 in region.
North Region
1. North Central 5-0, 1.000, 13.500
2. Wabash 6-0, 1.000, 11.333
3. Ohio Northern 5-1, .833, 10.571
4. Mount Union 5-1, .833, 11.500
5. Augustana 5-1, .833, 10.333
6. John Carroll 6-1, .857, 9.857
7. Mount St. Joseph 6-1 , .857, 9.571
8. Carthage 5-2, .714, 10.286
9. Otterbein 5-2, .714, 10.000
10. Capital 5-2 , .714, 9.143
Ohio Northern is out of order in terms of QOW but has the head-to-head win against Mount Union. Similarly John Carroll is somewhat out of order but has a win against Ohio Northern. Left out? Alma, 4-1, .800, 10.400 But there won’t be five OAC teams in this ranking forever.
South Region
1. Trinity (Texas) 5-0, 1.000, 12.400
2. Ferrum 7-0, 1.000, 10.333
3. Mary Hardin-Baylor 4-1, .800, 10.000
4. Thiel 7-0, 1.000, 11.429
5. Bridgewater (Va.) 4-1, .800, 9.000
6. Hardin-Simmons 5-1, .833, 10.333
7. Johns Hopkins 6-0, 1.000, 11.167
8. Salisbury 2-0, 1.000, 13.500
9. Washington and Jefferson 5-1, .833, 8.833
10. Wesley 4-0, 1.000, 12.500
Looks for all the world like Thiel should be above Ferrum, as should Johns Hopkins. Not sure what’s going on there. And our QOW number doesn’t include Ferrum’s game against Chowan — which it shouldn’t, really. Chowan has scholarship players now. If you include the Chowan game, it lowers Ferrum’s QOW even more. No teams left out that have a particularly good reason to be in according to the criteria.
West Region
1. Linfield 4-0, 1.000, 10.250
2. UW-Whitewater 6-0, 1.000, 12.000
3. St. John’s 7-0, 1.000, 10.571
4. Occidental 6-0, 1.000, 11.167
5. St. Olaf 7-0, 1.000, 9.857
6. Coe 5-1, .833, 11.000
7. Monmouth 7-0, 1.000, 10.714
8. Concordia-Moorhead 5-1, 9.167
9. Whitworth 4-1, .800, 9.800
10. Central 6-1, .857, 11.143
Well, Linfield doesn’t have the highest QOW but they hold the Walnut and Bronze. That usually counts for quite a lot. Coe is higher on the head-to-head win against Central, and St. John’s because of beating Concordia-Moorhead.
Regional rankings don’t measure the games that make national rankings most accurate — games between regions. They don’t see the difference between a one-point win and a blowout. All of these things get measured in a national poll.
It’s funny – Wesley has a high QOW and a undefeated regional ranking, but their 10th. So something must be going on there. Is the south in a bizarro ranking scheme???
But of course, consistency would be a tall order…
Perhaps, but they get rocked on the secondary criteria, i.e., getting rocked by Brockport.
I wonder if the south Region Evaluation Committee considers the unoffical ACFC as a real conference for all practical purposes.
Just out of curiousity, anyone know who is on the South region evaluation committee???
The South Region EvaluationCommittee is listed on Page 9 of the Handbook.
http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/football/2005/2005_d3_football_handbook.pdf
We have talked earlier that QOW should not be the only measuring bar. If we went strictly on the QOW then Ferrum would be ranked higher than Linfield. The region is just a committee which ranks the teams in the order they feel they should be placed. The committee must have seen something good from the Ferrum squad. The Panthers have been very solid this year.
Pat- If CNU was placed second in the region and was undefeated would there have been any discussion whether they deserve the ranking?
If they had the same sad QoW that Ferrum has relative to the other two undefeateds, yes.
“The committee must have seen something good from the Ferrum squad.”
Well, Averett and Shenandoah both have members on the South Region Committee, and Ferrum beat both schools by 2+ scores…
One other factor in Ferrum’s favor is that they have won every game they have played.
The committee won’t penalize teams for only winning by reasonable margins. I get the impression that they don’t want teams to smash everyone by 60 points. A win is a win.
However, the first Ferrum loss might be the impetus to seed Ferrum much much lower with respect to other criteria.
But if the Ferrum players win every game they play, then there are going to be a lot of fans in Salem in December.
🙂
rbrockwell – you’ve got the respect you’ve been pining for…congrats to fc, but forgive me if i don’t understand how they are ranked ahead of thiel who at least has a win vs. another regionally ranked team
pat/anyone – why does ferrum show a 7-0 regional record??? chowan is not d3, are they? – who is responsible for submitting this info and could that extra win have affected rankings? thanks
I assume they’re counting Chowan. Perhaps the rules say that is permitted — I don’t know when in the transfer to Division II a school is no longer considered a D-III regional opponent.
For our sites it’s simple. If you’re offering scholarships, you ain’t Division III.
pat – i thought it was that simple for the ncaa, too 🙂
If the purpose of these rankings is playoff selection and Ohio Northern is currently not eligible for post season play, what is the point of ranking them? I’m not being bitter, but rather think that it would be appropriate to include only those schools currently eligible.
Of course it’s no sillier than including the QOW as a selection criteria and then paying little or no attention t o it.
Seventiesraider, haven’t you been following the story? ONU appealed and is apparently eligible until the appeal is heard.
If you’re saying that MUC should be ahead based SOLELY on QOW, well, remember, that is just one of the criteria.
Hmmmmmmm………..
Actually I mean’t my remark in relation to the QOW across all regions. It doesn’t seem to be much of a factor. If it was Whitewater would lead the West.
Mount is right where the belong right now.
Pat,
I think Augustana is 5-0 in the North region aren’t they? Their loss was to Central (IA), a West region team.
Augustana and Central are within 200 miles of each other, so it is a regional game. The definition of “regional game” changed before the 2004 season.
I have no trouble with being behind Coe as they have the head to head win. The trouble I have is Whitworth. We have two more wins, a full schedule, a better QOW, and a win over another top 25 team (Augustana).