Re: NCAA Regional Rankings 1-28-2013
I wrote this before I realized the rankings were fake, but thought I'd post it anyways just for discussion. Not trying to pump one team up or another team down, but comparing OOC games for Amherst, Bowdoin, and Middlebury:
Bowdoin:
@University of New England (W)
Suffolk (W)
Salve Regina (W)
@USM (W)
University of New England (W)
USM (W)
Amherst:
Westfield State (W)
Gustavus (T)
Utica (L)
Elmira (W)
Plattsburgh (W)
St. Mikes (W)
Middlebury:
Plattsburgh (W)
Norwich (L)
Babson (L)
Wentworth (L)
Norwich (L)
Plattsburgh (L)
Bowdoin has not played one team OOC that is in the NCAA rankings. They have won against them all, as they should. Amherst has 1 OOC game against an NCAA ranked team and it’s a win against Plattsburgh. But other than that, their OOC schedule is averaged. Middlebury has only 1 OOC win against Plattsburgh as well. But 5 out of 6 of their OOC games are against teams ranked in the top 11 in the NCAA Rankings. Now, you look at all of their in conference records…
Bowdoin: 10-1-1 Middlebury: 7-3-2 Amherst: 7-4-1
Now I’m not trying to make Middlebury seem like they are better than they actually are, but if they would have gone the route of Bowdoin and/or Amherst, they most likely could be sitting at 12-4-2 or somewhat more of a respectable record than they currently have with 8-8-2. If they did have that record, they would probably be considered a top 10 team. They have a better conference record than Amherst. I guess I’m just asking the question….do you reward teams for winning games with an easy OOC schedule and penalize teams for doing poorly with a difficult OOC schedule? If I was Middlebury, I might stop playing Norwich and Plattsburgh 4 times a year after seeing how overall record has a huge influence on these rankings.
