D3 Rankings just posted


#1

What the hell are these rankings outside of the obvious 1 Farmingdale 2 Ramapo

3 George Mason
4 University of Connecticut
5 Thomas College
6 Fairfield
7 Mass Maritime Academy
8 Rowan
9 Quinnipiac
10 Fordham

University of Connecticut? 3-2-0-1 record 0-2-1 last three games is a four seed? What is the new criteria? Anyone know? Please inform me. Thomas College is 3-0 they are the five seed? Technical difficulties must of put a virus in their program.


#2

If D3 is following the D1 and D2 formats the formula is based on the USCHO model. 50% of the rating comes from an AGD of 1 (basically wins/losses) and the other 50% is based on SoS with an AGD of 7.

Its the first ranking, so don’t worry too much. Looks like a statistical anomaly due to sample size. The only ranking that matters is the last ranking.

*spelling edit


#3

The problem is that somebody changed the ranking vendor and algorithm without telling the teams before they scheduled games. Tuning up the winning % to 50% (versus 10% last season), will put teams with cup-cake schedules and high win totals on the map, while hurting the .500 team with an extremely difficult schedule. It will shape out, but weaker teams with tough schedules are going to pay the price…


#4

I don’t disagree, but your closing comment sort of speaks for itself. “Weaker teams” are, well…, weaker.

If you win the games you are supposed to and keep the losses close, you will be golden.


#5

But “weaker” is defined by the strength of the competition you play…, which is the issue. In D3 you need more weight to be on determining the SOS because of the lack of parity. A team could be 1-7 and play the best 8 teams in the region, close, and not get any credit for the loss to elite teams, where another team could be 7-1 against the sisters of the poor and get too much credit for being 7-1. Last year’s algorithm was built and designed to handle this challenge…


#6

The new ranking system bothers me the more and more I think about it. Last year you were able to click on each team, see the break down of data, see the games played, records, and the score of games. If a game was entered incorrectly you were able to see it and change it. We have none of that and are relying that someone was able to check every game all teams played and that each game has the accurate scoring? The room for error is way to high for me. Oh, and when were teams going to be told the ranking is not being done the way it was last year? Teams go out and schedule games based on last years system only to see after the first ranking period, it’s not the same. Is someone going to address this? Send an email or an update? Who is responsible for that decision?


#7

3 ranking dates, 3 issues, consistency is key.