With the Spring games beginning, I thought it was time to turn the page towards 2017/2018. The bar has been raised by Georgetown and their incredible run to the final four. Will anyone be able to step to that level next year? There are also player changes, coaching changes, new recruits arriving, etc. etc. Let's use this forum as a place to collect and discuss all the happenings.
DePaul will challenge the Hoyas for the top spot in the league this year. They are are very solid attacking team who play front footed soccer and will score a lot of goals. They were just as good as Georgetown last year and should be motivated by getting the shaft when they didn't make the NCAAs (and going undefeated the year before and having to play away at Wisconsin in 4 inches of snow - still ticks me off). I think Marquette has slipped a notch. Rest of the league (3-6) up for grabs, really. Both Butler and Creighton lost some very productive seniors, so they will need to rely on newbies. Providence and Nova rising. Xavier and Seton Hall probably still going to struggle.
Just as a marker to be checked on later: Marquette Georgetown StJohns DePaul Butler Creighton Providence SetonHall Villanova Xavier
As I have never known any of your posts to be based on anything but statistical analysis, is there some logic behind your "markers" Chris?
Yes. During the 2016 season, I did weekly simulations of how the season would end up and what the NCAA Tournament teams and seeds would be. To do that, I had to assign teams pre-season ARPI ratings (in order to determine game results, once I had teams' schedules). Then, in the fourth week of the season, I shifted to using teams' then current ARPI ratings to simulate game results for the balance of the season. Following the season, I did a study to see if there was a better way than the one I used for 2016, to assign teams pre-season ARPI ratings. I used only the actual 2016 season, using different team pre-season rating systems as applied to that season to see which pre-season ratings ended up the closest to teams' actual end-of-season ratings. One of my methods, and the one I used when I assigned 2016 pre-season ratings for my 2016 simulations, involved projecting ultimate teams' standings in their conferences and then assigning a team from a conference a rating based on the average rating of teams in that conference for that team's projected conference standing position over the last two years. Another of my methods simply used the end-of-previous season ratings. And so on, with other experiments. What I found was that the following came the closest, on average, to teams' actual end-of-season ratings: For teams with a coach who has been there for 9 or more years: average ARPI over the last 8 years For teams with a coach who has been there for 4 to 8 years: average ARPI over the last 6 years For teams with a coach who has been there for 0 (new coach) to 3 years: average ARPI over the last 2 years None of the systems did very well at projecting teams' ultimate ratings. The closest one simply was better than the others. So, that's how I came up with ratings for the Big East teams. I then assumed that the teams would end up with conference standings that match their "projected" ARPI rankings. Interestingly, the system I used last year appears to me as if it should have been better than the one I found came out the best. That system took into account teams' returning players (and their importance to the team), an evaluation of teams' new players, and a coach factor (all put together by an expert with a great data base). But, from an overall perspective, it wasn't better. What I got out of my study, however crude the results, was that it's very difficult to project how teams are going to end up. That's why, in the fourth week of the season, I will shift to using teams' current ARPIs. The current ARPIs, however crude they may be as a predictor of ultimate ARPIs, are better than any of the systems I tested. I've been reading up on how people project what's going to happen in the future, in relation to how they make decisions. The best studies indicate that people aren't as rational as they like to think, and this includes academics with training that should make them good evaluators of what is likely to occur if they take A course of action as compared to B course of action. Simply put, psychologically, people don't do "good statistics" when they analyze what they should do in relation to likely future outcomes, in ambiguous situations. In the soccer context, I take this as meaning one has to take anyone's prediction as to how teams will do in the future with a huge grain of salt. Thus, when it comes to soccer and evaluating teams, I always want to look at what the actual numbers say from a statistical perspective. Otherwise, it's simply too easy to have evaluations driven by unconscious factors. It will be interesting to come back to this thread, at the end of the season -- if any of us can remember to do it -- and see what my marker projected (based simply on coaching longevity), as compared to what sec123 has suggested (which makes good sense to me).
I knew the markers didn't come out of thin air ... but wow...you have put some thought into this. I am surprised the system which takes into account returning players, etc.. didn't do better. Just logically thinking it through, the strength of returning players combined with the strength of incoming players combined with a coaches ability to manage the changes should all be important. The only other factors I can think of that should also be important is the strength of schedule changing from year to year and injuries (which are nearly impossible to predict or measure). Thanks for the thought on this and I will be sure to circle back at the end of the year to see how things transpired.
I skimmed through some of the teams pages and found a couple interesting transfers coming into the Big East this year: Butler added a UCONN transfer: http://butlersports.com/news/2017/4...-annika-schmidt-to-2017-roster.aspx?path=wsoc DePaul added an Iowa transfer: http://www.depaulbluedemons.com/sports/w-soccer/spec-rel/022817aaa.html Spring seasons are in full stride, and in some cases nearly complete, anybody have any reports on how their teams look?
Exhibition season in full swing. Regular season just around the corner. Any updates on how the teams are looking? Any freshman likely to make an impact? Any injuries? Transfers? Non-returners of note?
http://www.bigeast.com/news/2017/8/...-the-way-in-bigeastwsoc-preseason-voting.aspx Not surprising to see G-town on top of poll followed by DePaul, Marquette and St. John's but a little surprising to see Villanova above 3 other teams Georgetown also sweeping all of the pre-season player of year awards Chris Henderson pointed out the pre-season team only includes 2 defenders and has 6 forwards. What's up with that?
Villanova's new coach is the reason they have bumped up. That guy could be magical. I hope some of the games make it to ESPN3. They have a crazy number of recruits coming in the next few years including a YNT GK he somehow stole from her home state in the Big12. He may very well make an impression in his first year even saddled with Kulas' players. He may actually be that good. Going out on a limb a bit here, but I think Villanova may really on its way over next few years to a G-town status like renaissance. (conversely watch Ohio State plummet in his absence)
Maybe Creighton should be moving higher. After all the coach did say he wants to win a national championship with the program I actually do think DePaul should be higher. Georgetown aside they are probably the next strongest program. Marquette rounding out the top three.
You have to be the ultimate slacker to screw Villanova up in the BE. Basketball name recognition, fields a football team (not the SEC, but enhances campus experience), main line, access to Philly but not the hood. It's not the most fun place in the world but compared to the rest of that kinda dark, cold, blue (outside of SJ) BE, it's a destination. Outside of BE, naah. McClain will leverage those assets for top level BE (wealthy) recruits then jump to a P5. The school is very expensive (limited recruiting pool kills BE overall) but very stingy with aid.
https://www.topdrawersoccer.com/college-soccer-articles/2017-big-east-womens-soccer-preview_aid42220 Preview from TDS. Somewhat superficial in my opinion but it is what it is.
LET THE GAMES BEGIN!! Weekend Schedule Friday Grambling State vs. Xavier, 3:30 p.m. (Cary, N.C.) #1 West Virginia at #5 Georgetown, 4 p.m. William & Mary vs. Providence, 4:30 p.m. (Harrisonburg, Va.) St. John’s at La Salle, 7 p.m. Butler at #18 Notre Dame, 7 p.m. Siena at Seton Hall, 7 p.m. Creighton at Iowa State, 8 p.m. DePaul at #23 Northwestern, 8 p.m. #2 Stanford at Marquette, 8 p.m. Sunday #12 Duke vs. Xavier, 1 p.m. (Cary, N.C.) George Washington at Georgetown, 1 p.m. Delaware at Villanova, 2 p.m. DePaul at Illinois, 2 p.m. Providence at James Madison, 2 p.m. Butler at Ohio, 2 p.m. Kentucky at Marquette, 3:30 p.m. All Times Eastern
The Xavier v Grambling game got taken off the schedule a couple of weeks ago. Xavier is playing Cleveland State, at home, at 6:00 pm Xavier time. The West Virginia v Georgetown game got moved forward in time due to the weather forecast. West Virginia won, 1-0.
With 2 weeks in the books, an early look at how the league and teams are doing: SCHOOL OVERALL PCT. St. John's 2-0-1 0.833 Marquette 3-1 0.750 Georgetown 3-1 0.750 Butler 2-1-1 0.625 Xavier 2-1-1 0.625 DePaul 2-2 0.500 Villanova 1-2 0.333 Providence 1-3 0.250 Creighton 0-3 0.000 Seton Hall 0-2 0.000 Overall the league is 16-16-3 for a .500 pct. Not very good if the league wants to place multiple teams into NCAA in my opinion. Good starts by top half of the league in general. G-town has looked good even in their defeat to WVU. Butler has been a bit of a positive surprise with nice tie vs. Notre Dame. DePaul is a bit of a negative surprise at just 2-2 although have picked it up last 2 games (8-0 aggregate). Is it too early to start worrying about the bottom of the league dragging down RPIs? Creighton has looked uncompetitive so far going 0-3, giving up 9 goals and not scoring one at all yet. Anyone able to watch any of the games who can give some 1st hand feedback?
Besides Georgetown, the places 2-10 in the league appear wide open right now. Marquette has looked awful - they lost a couple impact players for sure, but right now they stink. 7 goals against and an own goal as their only goal so far in league play. Very surprised Xavier is 2-0. I still think DePaul will make a run and finish 2nd or 3rd, but they are off kilter right now. Seton Hall tying both the Blue Demons and Butler is very surprising. Watched Butler twice; they play a nice game. Will check back in 1.5 weeks after 5 of 9 games in the books.