NCAA’s second regional rankings

Posted on by

The NCAA released its second regional rankings today. These are through games of Sunday, Feb. 17. Please note, the overall record and regional record are listed. This is not the conference record.

Men’s basketball
In-region record, followed by overall record.

Number of teams ranked is relative to the number of teams in the region.

Atlantic
1. Richard Stockton 16-6 16-5
2. William Paterson 17-5 17-5
3. Farmingdale State 19-4 18-3
4. York (N.Y.) 19-7 17-6
5. SUNY-Old Westbury 14-9 14-7

East
1. Plattsburgh State 21-2 18-0
2. Rochester 17-5 16-5
3. Brockport State 18-6 15-4
4. Stevens 20-4 20-4
5. Nazareth 17-6 17-6

Great Lakes
1. Capital 20-3 19-3
2. Wooster 20-3 13-2
3. Hope 19-3 13-2
4. Albion 16-5 12-3
5. Penn State-Behrend 19-4 17-3
6. Heidelberg 18-5 16-4

Middle Atlantic
1. Ursinus 22-2 19-1
2. Gettysburg 19-3 17-2
3. Widener 19-4 16-3
4. DeSales 19-4 16-3
5. York (Pa.) 17-6 17-5
6. Messiah 15-8 14-7
7. Moravian 18-6 17-6
8. Lycoming 15-8 13-7

Midwest
1. Washington U. 18-4 15-3
2. Augustana 18-5 17-5
3. Lawrence 18-2 16-2
4. Chicago 15-7 14-7
5. Illinois Wesleyan 15-8 14-6
6. Wheaton (Ill.) 17-6 13-6
7. Elmhurst 17-6 16-6
8. Carroll 14-6 13-6

Northeast
1. Amherst 22-2 22-1
2. Mass-Dartmouth 21-2 21-2
3. Brandeis 18-4 17-4
4. Worcester Tech 18-5 17-4
5. Rhode Island College 18-5 18-5
6. Bowdoin 19-5 19-5
7. Trinity (Conn.) 18-6 16-5
8. Middlebury 18-6 17-5
9. Emerson 20-3 19-3
10. Bates 17-7 16-6

South
1. Centre 21-1 16-1
2. Mary Hardin-Baylor 20-3 18-2
3. Guilford 19-4 18-4
4. Virginia Wesleyan 19-5 18-4
5. Maryville (Tenn.) 21-2 15-2
6. DePauw 18-5 15-4
7. Millsaps 21-3 16-2
8. Randolph-Macon 18-5 13-5

West
1. UW-Stevens Point 19-4 17-4
2. St. Thomas 20-3 18-2
3. Occidental 19-3 12-2
4. UW-Whitewater 19-4 17-4
5. Cal Lutheran 19-3 15-3
6. Buena Vista 19-4 15-2
7. UW-Platteville 17-6 15-5
8. UW-Oshkosh 17-6 14-5

Women’s basketball
In-region record, followed by overall record.

Atlantic
1 Mary Washington 21-2 20-1
2 Marymount 20-3 19-3
3 Kean 21-2 20-2
4 William Paterson 18-5 18-5
5 Mount St. Mary (N.Y.) 21-2 21-2
6 New Jersey 18-5 17-5

Central
1 UW-Whitewater 21-2 19-2
2 UW-Eau Claire 18-5 16-4
3 UW-Stevens Point 19-4 18-4
4 Illinois Wesleyan 21-2 18-2
5 Washington U. 16-6 13-4
6 Chicago 17-5 15-5

East
1 Rochester 18-4 16-4
2 William Smith 19-2 17-2
3 St. Lawrence 19-4 15-4
4 Medaille 21-2 19-2
5 Brockport St. 20-4 17-3
6 Stevens 20-4 19-4

Great Lakes
1 Thomas More 23-0 19-0
2 Hope 22-0 20-0
3 DePauw 20-3 17-1
4 Baldwin-Wallace 21-2 21-2
5 Wilmington 18-5 16-5
6 Ohio Northern 17-6 16-6

Middle Atlantic
1 Messiah 21-2 18-2
2 DeSales 21-3 21-3
3 Albright 19-4 17-3
4 Scranton 18-5 17-4
5 Muhlenberg 18-5 18-5
6 Gwynedd-Mercy 19-5 18-5

Northeast
1 Tufts 21-2 21-2
2 Brandeis 17-5 17-4
3 Southern Maine 21-2 21-2
4 Amherst 22-2 21-2
5 Salem State 18-4 18-2
6 Bowdoin 17-7 15-5
7 Bates 15-9 15-7
8 Bridgewater State 17-4 17-2

South
1 Howard Payne 23-0 21-0
2 Oglethorpe 20-3 18-3
3 McMurry 20-3 20-2
4 Trinity (Texas) 17-5 16-4
5 Piedmont 20-3 16-3
6 Christopher Newport 18-4 17-3

West
1 Simpson 21-2 17-1
2 George Fox 20-3 13-2
3 Puget Sound 19-4 14-2
4 Chapman 22-3 15-3
5 St. Benedict 19-4 18-4
6 Gustavus Adolphus 16-7 16-7

17 thoughts on “NCAA’s second regional rankings”

  1. It’ll be a while before I get a chance to put the OWP and OOWP stats on here but you can find them on the link on the menu rail on the front page.

  2. This appears to give us the official word on Hope/Carthage: not in-region. Which is as it should be, really — glad there’s some new management at the NCAA that is a little more reasonable.

  3. I agree with Pat that the official word on Hope/Carthage being not in-region is the correct and logical ruling. However, I must say I find it frustrating that yet again the rules changed in mid-season. The NCAA should have announced that this would not be an in-region game at the beginning of the season not just quietly changed the ruling from last year when this year’s rankings were released.

    I still think the ruling on UChicago-DePauw is incorrect and illogical.

  4. If I can edit my last post I can’t figure out how. So I will clarify that it appears that the NCAA also corrected UChicago-DePauw so I withdraw the last sentence of my previous post.

  5. Actually there was discussion about this elsewhere — it actually wasn’t DePauw/Chicago that was non-region but DePauw/Colorado College. That was fixed.

    I would say that just because you and I and other fans didn’t know about it, that doesn’t mean that the NCAA didn’t tell the schools involved that they were backing off their ridiculous 2007 ruling.

  6. Oglethorpe and McMurry women flipped in the South Region, after both teams won their games last week.

    I think that this reflects the changes that occurred inside the OWP and OOWP numbers and Regionally ranked opponents.

    McMurry — two regionally ranked opponents, HPU, HPU. St Thomas MN fell out of the regional rankings this week.

    Oglethorpe — has three regionally ranked opponents, Piedmont, DePauw and Trinity.

    My frustration with the Women’s Regional rankings is that I do not think that they are ranking enough teams!

    The men have ranked one team in the regional rankings for every 6.5 members, which is in line with the bid allocation. There are 55 members in the South Region for the women. I think that the Women’s committee should have ranked (55 / 6.5 = 8.4, truncated to 8) 8 teams. As spread out as the region is, the chance to play a ranked team is challenging. IMHO, ranking the number of teams that are in proportion to the bids allocated is the just and equitable way to do the rankings.

  7. Oglethorpe and McMurry women flipped in the South Region, after both teams won their games last week.

    I think that this reflects the changes that occurred inside the OWP and OOWP numbers and Regionally ranked opponents.

    McMurry — two regionally ranked opponents, HPU, HPU. St Thomas MN fell out of the regional rankings this week.

    Oglethorpe — has three regionally ranked opponents, Piedmont, DePauw and Trinity.

    My frustration with the Women’s Regional rankings is that I do not think that they are ranking enough teams!

    The men have ranked one team in the regional rankings for every 6.5 members, which is in line with the bid allocation. There are 55 members in the South Region for the women. I think that the Women’s committee should have ranked (55 / 6.5 = 8.4, truncated to 8 ) 8 teams. As spread out as the region is, the chance to play a ranked team is challenging. IMHO, ranking the number of teams that are in proportion to the bids allocated is the just and equitable way to do the rankings.

  8. Sorry about the duplicate post. I tried to edit the blog to eliminate our friendly “eight close parenthesis smiley face” and it did not work.

  9. Quote…

    “# Pat Coleman Says:
    February 20th, 2008 at 4:57 pm

    Actually there was discussion about this elsewhere — it actually wasn’t DePauw/Chicago that was non-region but DePauw/Colorado College. That was fixed.

    I would say that just because you and I and other fans didn’t know about it, that doesn’t mean that the NCAA didn’t tell the schools involved that they were backing off their ridiculous 2007 ruling.” End quote.

    ———————————————

    And why didn’t they tell us?

    WE ARE THE FANS, AND WE WANT IT NOW! 😉 8)

  10. Here are the remaining discrepancies:

    On the women’s side, Illinois Wesleyan is 18-2, looks like 19-2 in reality. Is Manchester somehow over 200 miles?

    On the men’s side, Lycoming and Messiah look wrong. Are they counting PSU-Harrisburg games as regional?

    Old-Westbury lost to Yeshiva on 12/27, the site has it as a win.

    Ursinus is 21-2, 18-1, not 22-2, 19-1. I have no idea where the NCAA gets the extra game.

  11. I don’t have Manchester/IWU as 200 miles but I’ll plug it again with the street addresses to make absolutely sure.

    I mentioned Penn State-Harrisburg and/or Lancaster Bible to the committee in my e-mail last week as it related to Messiah. Guess they didn’t get around to fixing it yet as it seems clearly wrong.

  12. In response to Ralph Turner:
    Oglethorpe has 4 regionally ranked opponents not 3. I think you overlooked Wilmington, Ohio in the great Lakes Region.
    Keep up the great work D3 Hoops, Pat Coleman & Ralph Turner

  13. Thanks, Coach! Sorry about that. Good luck. You don’t suppose that Oglethorpe would be flown to HPU or Abilene, do you? ;-)…

    Actually, I think that you might host a South Region first round, too. Good luck against DePauw Women in the tourney.

    If the Regional Rankings went 8-deep in the South, we might see R&M and VWC.

  14. i feel like Lawrence should have moved ahead of Augie since Augie lost last week… Lawrence is at 18-2 with a double OT loss to carrol and a lose to UW-Stevens Point… and Augie is 18-5… why isn’t Lawrence ahead of Augie right now?

  15. Augustana has a significant edge in strength of schedule. Lawrence’s OWP and OOWP are .509 and .510 while Augustana’s are .581 and .556.

  16. I recognize that I have a bias but does the NCAA look at scoring margin at all? The IWU women have that below .500 OWP, but they also have a +29.2 average scoring margin. I’m just wondering if they take that into consideration when raking 4 loss UWSP and UWEC ahead of the IWU women.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.