8-9 teams should get in NCAA from ACC and do well enough to face each other later in tournament. We can't lose perspective of these teams after they beat each other up for a month and a half. Duke will be fine when their opponent every fourth day isn't FSU, UVa, UNC, etc, etc.
I was interested in seeing how things would fare in the conference at the end. The ACC should at least get 8 teams in the tournament and breaking into that top 8 isn't easy to do. I was surprised to see Notre Dame as a co-champion as I assumed their U20 World Cup absences would affect them more. That wasn't the case but could impact them for postseason if Westendorf leaves soon. Biggest surprises were Miami and NC State. Most people, myself included, had them towards the bottom of the table with early expectations. Miami went 5-5 in league play. Must have a big advantage at home as they went 5-0 in Coral Gables and beat the likes of UVa and VA Tech while going 0-5 on the road including a loss to Pitt. Did MFM do enough to save her job? Perhaps. Predicted to finish 14th and they ended up 7th and qualified for ACC Tournament where they fought admirably in a PK loss to Clemson. 66 RPI though so not enough for making NCAAs. And NC State was picked to finish next to last at 13th and instead went on to 8th place. Their massive win against UNC proved they were a program that has made the turn. 40 RPI with good enough resume to get in. Took a while but well done to Tim Santoro. Biggest disappointments go to VA Tech and Boston College. VA Tech had an expected drop with the graduation of Meier, and unless they have something up their sleeve they will drop even further when Murielle Tiernan and her 10 goals graduates this year as I don't see their recruiting being on par with the other ACC programs. On the bubble and sweating it this week with a 38 RPI and didn't qualify for ACC Tournament. BC was picked at 8th and finished 12th. Boston College won't qualify again for the NCAAs with a 60 RPI, meaning this will be the 3rd year in a row without an NCAA Tournament win. Continued big drop for what was once an elite program. Mackenzie Meehan and Haley Dowd combined for 19 goals and will somehow need to be replaced. Had a stellar recruiting class coming in but for now it hasn't panned out. Too many National Team players on one team not to at least make NCAAs. Both of these programs made recent College Cup runs and don't see that happening anytime soon. Could put Wake Forest in that group too. Would expect Notre Dame, Clemson, Florida State, UNC, UVa, Duke, NC State, and guessing VA Tech to get selections next Monday.
I have a question on how the RPIs work overall. I was looking at NCAA RPI and they have Princeton with an RPI of 31 and yet they're 4th place in the Ivy league..how does that calculate out? Does their one loss to WV count for that much?
not that I disagree but..... "Selection Criteria "The following criteria shall be employed by a governing sports committee in selecting participants for NCAA championships competition [Bylaw 31.3.3; Criteria for Selection of Participants]: "* Won-lost record; "*Strength of schedule; and "*Eligibility and availability of student-athletes for NCAA championships. Miami SOS is 19 VT 11 and NC State 2 How are these teams not included? What would be the rational?
also, would not NC State be the 7th???? from the ACC ND, Duke, Clemson, UNC, FSU and Virginia is only 6
Virginia Tech is the likely 7th. Here's a more compete rendition of the criteria, from the 2016 Pre-Championship Manual: "Selection Criteria "The following criteria shall be employed by a governing sports committee in selecting participants for NCAA championships competition [Bylaw 31.3.3; Criteria for Selection of Participants]: "* Won-lost record; "*Strength of schedule; and "*Eligibility and availability of student-athletes for NCAA championships. "In addition to Bylaw 31.3.3, the Women's Soccer Committee has received approval from the NCAA Division I Championships Oversight Committee to consider the following criteria in the selection of at-large teams for the soccer championship (not necessarily in priority order): "Primary Criteria "* Results of the adjusted Rating Percentage Index (RPI); "* Results versus common opponents; and "* Head-to-head competition. "Secondary Criteria "If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision, the secondary criteria will be reviewed. All the criteria listed will be evaluated. "* Results versus teams already selected to participate in the field (including automatic qualifiers with RPI of 1-75) "* Late season performance -- defined as the last eight games including conference tournaments (strength and results). "Recommendations are provided by regional advisory committees for consideration by the Women's Soccer Committee. Coaches' polls and/or any other outside polls or rankings are not used as a criterion by the Women's Soccer Committee for selection purposes." [Underlining added.] The Manual also contains information about the RPI: "RPI. The committee uses the RPI (Rating Percentage Index), a computer program that calculates the institutions' Division I winning percentage (25 percent), opponents' success (50 percent), opponents' strength of schedule (25 percent) plus a bonus/penalty system. When evaluating the RPI, the committee may consider comparing data of individual teams, including, but not limited to, overall record, Division I record, overall RPI rank, non-conference record and RPI rank, conference regular-season record and conference tournament results. The RPI shall be used as a selection tool." Strength of schedule, in isolation, is not really a criterion. Nor is a team's winning percentage. Rather, you have to look at some combination of the two, and that is what the RPI is for. Bottom line is that when you look at all of the factors together, it looks like the ACC gets 7 teams, with NC State just missing (although arguably "in") and Miami out.
Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it. You clearly know what you are talking about but to me as a lay person there is no question NC State has a better resume than VT. NC State 2 top 25 wins, 5 vs teams ranked or voted fpr at some point in the season. VT none. NC State #2 SOS. VT #11 NC State made it's own tourney, VT did not. So can you explain (as I had asked) the rational for VT over NC State. Or does the ACC only get 5? Again, I really appreciate your knowledge. I have been reading your posts for years.
Are we looking at the same schedule/results for NC State? What top 25 team did they beat other than North Carolina? What other ranked teams did they beat? Most of their 10 wins are against bad teams (high point, lasalle, others) or bottom-tier teams in the ACC (much like Virginia Tech). They lost all their matches against upper-tier ACC teams except for North Carolina. I mean, CP keeps telling me that RPI does not favor big conferences. I'm skeptical, especially when it comes to the ACC, as both NC State and Va. Tech did not have good seasons, really--but they played a bunch of good ACC opponents--NC State getting one (upset) win and Va. Tech getting two ties (one of those scoreless). NC State did very little of note otherwise, from what I've seen. Va. Tech scored all of two goals against the top 5 ACC teams it played. They're both pretty meh. If the strength of schedule of your opponents, and your opponents records, constitute 75 percent of RPI, as I think I read yesterday, how could teams in the ACC NOT benefit? You benefit merely from playing the big boys (big girls?)--even if you get waxed. As with the basketball tourney, the committee must choose between lower-mid level big-conference teams and upper teams from smaller conferences, I should think.
RPI SOS and SOOS decays to about 40% and 10% weighting, respectively, by end of season (despite their actual coefficients of 50% and 25%). A team's own W/L (Element 1) eventually dominates. I conjecture that it's because conference records are zero-sum, and so they end up with narrower variations, and have less effect distinguishing between two teams. That is, if a "bad" team and a "medium" team both play in the ACC, then both of their SOS and SOOS elements (Elements 2 and 3) will be closer together, so the delta between them will be closer to zero. Re-read the RPI formula as: baseline + 0.25(far from zero) +0.5(near zero) +0.25(nearer zero) and you can appreciate that the difference between the two teams will be dominated by their Element 1s. As for RPI not favoring big conferences, that's an emergent result over years and all conferences, and shows a relatively tiny bias. You probably can't disprove that with any two counterexamples for any one year. For starters, try comparing NC State/Virginia Tech with all similar schools, vs. all schools in all other conferences with similar W/L records, over five years, to make a case whether they're being unusually favored or not, compared to their peers. Maybe all Power 5 teams with similar profiles have actually made the tournament slightly less often than mid-majors with the same results (because a mid-major with such a resume probably wouldn't also finish 7th-10th in its conference, or something like that). But that's a big-data-ish argument, and so you can't argue it either way without a boatload of data. It extends beyond woso, too, e.g. Ohio State's 2016 wvb is having a tough slog through the loaded B1G, yet their RPI is high from similar factors, and might get them into that tourney.
What needs to be looked at is Miami beat UVA ranked 2 and VT ranked 25 and took Clemson to PK's in the quarters of the ACC Championship.
ACC haters should prep for 8 teams in field. Then prep for 3-4 in Sweet Sixteen. Then prep for 2-3 in Elite Eight. Then prep for 1 in College Cup.
Interesting this year that I'd easily believe any of six ACC teams could be that team in the college cup. Not like last year or 2014 where I'd put good money on it being FSU or UVA. Or 2013 where the ACC was outrageously dominant and sending a bunch of 1 seeds (and 6/8!! teams to the elite eight). This year six really really good teams, any of them could make the college cup, but I also wouldn't be surprised to see any one of them miss it. Just none of them that level of dominant. Will be interesting to see who the shots fall for. Hopefully FSU! Definitely one of the teams who has the talent to make a run to the finals with a strong showing. (And I grabbed a few tix to San Jose when the venue got moved... Hope to be rooting them on in person soon!)
Maybe tomorrow I'll update my simulations after today's games and publish them. Just for fun to see who might end up where and to whet your appetites. Stay tuned ....
I looked at it closer. I can't see a path for VT. As you say, Miami beat them head to head. Then they were out scored 11-2 vs the Big 6 (only playing 5 of te Big 6) Did not make their own tournament. Miami Had the one win over the Big 6 and also played 5 of the Big 6 with an aggregate of 8-3. NC State played all 6 (and also overall had the toughest schedule) had one win as did Miami but did better in aggregate 9-5. I still see no way either VT or Miami gets in ahead of NC State. But, what do I know. The only way VT gets the nod is on name recognition and past years (bias) . No math supports them.
What team is it you are championing? I can pretty much grantee that the winners of most mid major conferences would never make the tourney if they played in the ACC. .. never mind the runner ups. Mid Major folks really don't realize the difference. I have heard the ACC routinely referred to as one of the ten best women leagues in the world. BTW, the ACC teams would not benefit in the RPI if they were not competitive. There are good wins, bad loses which are factored different and then there is the whole out of conference schedule. A couple years back the ACC had a win % of over .900 out of conference. If you don't like the RPI look at the Hero algorithm. Basically the same.
Well, RPI math does support VT, and that happens to be the math that counts. .5869 #40 (+11=3-5 .658) Virginia Tech -- bubble .5834 #44 (+10=1-8 .553) North Carolina St. -- bubble membrane .5628 #66 (+08=2-9 .474) Washington State -- not eligible .5627 #67 (+10=1-8 0.553) Miami (FL) -- even not-ier NCAA expressly omits scoring margin (to de-emphasize running up scores), and equally values the "All 20" of a team's entire season. That might explain the discrepancy between your assessment and NCAA's: you're using different data. Delving a little: - VT and NC State both beat #62 #74 #214, tied #81, and lost to #12 #15. Can't separate them from that. - Miami beat #40 #74 #269, beat #81, beat #12, and lost to #17. +1.5 wins edge to Miami over both, but ... - NC State beat #5 and lost to #9 twice, i.e. .333 vs. combined records +39=11-9 (.754). - VT lost to #5 but tied #9 and #11, i.e. .333 vs. combined records +39=10-10 (.746). That's close to even. - Miami lost to #5 #9 and tied #11. That's a -0.5 win difference, which narrows the gap. - NC State beat #94 #99 / #183 #194 #205 / #247. - VT ~~~ beat #90 #101 / #128 #132 #133 #134 #136 / #241. Moderate edge to VT in the middle group. - Miami beat #101 #102 / #161 #188 / #272. - NC State lost to #17 #73 (+23=4-11). - VT ~~~ lost to #25 #67 (+20=4-14). Sight edge to NC State. - Miami lost to #17 #25 #83 / ghastly gruesome to #194 #239. That's two chutes, no ladder. So VT and NC State are pretty close in total resume, but VT had more wins and fewer losses, and did it against slightly better #100-tier competition. That puts them ahead by a nose. Miami was comparable to both of them right up to that very last sentence, but thereafter, I don't see how Miami even sniffs the "next 4 in" discussion. If we flipped both of those bad beats to wins, then Miami's resume actually would look better than both. N.B. One way in which RPI subtly disadvantages Power 5 teams (esp. ACC) is that they're not worth bonus points to each other in-conference (by definition), and they sometimes gain 0 bonus for their non-conference wins, but they're worth bonus points to all of their non-conference opponents. So they're a conference full of little Santas (or fruits in Pac-Man), giving out bounties and never collecting them. Over a season, that surely drags some lucky-loser conferences up a few millipoints relative to the ACC. Virginia Tech, NC State, and Miami had =0.000 bonus/penalty adjustment in 2016 because of this: all of their non-conference wins were #90 Indiana or worse, below the 41-80 threshold. (Conversely, Miami's most gruesome loss was #239 FIU, just above the 255-294 band.)