Undefeated teams and Bottom 3

[Dan Wishengrad]

It's always about this time of year when Laxpower's rankings start to truly take shape, as until every team has played 5 games the numbers are seriously skewed. But the PCLL has only just started playing, and a few teams (like New Hampshire) have only played once. Speaking of UNH, I'd say they remain the "mystery team" of 2006. Until they play a few more games I have no clue how they stack up againt Northeastern and BC or anybody else.

But looking at Laxpower today is still interesting nevertheless. The first disagreement comes at #4 & #5, where Laxpower has UCSD ranked ahead of Oregon. The statistical difference, however, (0.53) is nominal. Laxpower then has BYU #6 and Cal-Poly #7, as opposed to our poll which ranks these same teams #8 and #13, respectively. It appears that Laxpower would give credibility to those that have argued here that losses to highly-ranked teams are more than offset by other wins over highly-ranked teams, and that teams with relatively unimpressive W-L records may still be stronger than teams who have compiled outstanding W-L records against weaker competition. The best examples of this include #7 Colorado (#11 Laxpower), #10 Lindenwood (#17 Laxpower), #11 UMD (#15 Laxpower) and #16 GT (#30 Laxpower).

On the flip-side, #18 Northeastern (#9 Laxpower) and #17 Chapman (#13 Laxpower) are perhaps underranked in the Top 25 Polls. The highest rated teams by Laxpower that are unranked in the polls are currently #21 Illinois and #22 Simon Fraser, who are both rated stronger than ranked teams Chico, Tex Tech, MSU, Texas and GT.

I am not claiming here that we pollsters are wrong and that Laxpower is right. I simply find the differences to be interesting and, as always, worth comparing for argument's sake.

[CATLAX MAN]

I'm sorry, Sonny, but if you think that VA Tech plays a tough schedule, you're the one whose credibility should be in question. Let's look at facts here. They've played a whopping total of 3 rated teams this year, Sonoma, UCSD, & FSU and lost them all. According to laxpower, their SOS rating is 38th best and even that is generous as some of the teams that they have played and will play will end up with worse records than what they have now.

Sure they are playing teams in the CCLA (West Virginia 0-4) and UMLL (U Wisc-SP 0-5). Those games are real tests. Outside of the rated teams that they've played, the combined record of those teams right now is 28-36. Powerhouse schedule there. Let's just see if they can improve their standings with games against power programs like West VA, B team App. State, Wake Forest, East Carolina and NC State. Yeah, I guess I have a credibility issue.

I understand you want to think that the SELC is a stronger conference than it is, but the facts don't back you up.

[steveperry]

I think the problem that people are having with placing Virginia Tech is that they have been better in the past. I saw them play the last couple of years, and they were a team that could beat some of the ranked teams. However, this year they have not proven much of anything. In my opinion, when you schedule on 3 games against ranked teams and you lose to all of them, you set yourself up for crticism. A team like this does not deserve to be in front of any of those teams in the top 20 that have at least beat a ranked team. I think that Catlax was generous to throw them in the 14-17 range. Where as they have been good in the past and will hopefully be good in the future, this year they are not a top 20 team.

[Sonny]

It has nothing to do with the SELC. VT has already played three Top 10 teams with one or more ranked teams a strong possibility in the upcoming SELC championships.

You publically complain when teams don't schedule aggresively against the top teams (out West). And when they do (ala VT this year), it still isn't good enough for you.

You keep moving the "goal posts" in this debate to whatever suits your needs and it is tiresome...

[CATLAX MAN]

I'm not moving anything, Sonny. If you think that scheduling 3 rated teams (one of whom you must play) is an aggressive schedule, then we have a basic philosophical difference. I have been very consistent in my statements in the past. We'll see what the voters think in their rankings.

[wheelz33]

I'm not moving anything, Sonny. If you think that scheduling 3 rated teams (one of whom you must play) is an aggressive schedule, then we have a basic philosophical difference. I have been very consistent in my statements in the past. We'll see what the voters think in their rankings.

Heres the problem. I haven't looked into this (so feel free to prove me wrong) but I think a majority of the teams that have "agressive schedules" have them because of whom they play in conference. Va Tech can't help their conference is a little weaker then RMLC or WCLL. Half or a third of their games are taken up by non top 25 in-conference games. A few teams offer to come to them, take one big trip out west like you seem to demand, where they play a couple top 10 teams, and theres your schedule. No its not a TOUGH schedule, but its not WEAK either. They've played a few top 10 teams, they played tough vs them (losing to #2 team by 3 and #9 by 1). Are they top 10? Definetly not. Top 20? I think they've proven enough to belong there.

[Lefty]

Catlax,

what else can they do???
they played Noma, and UCSD. We can't expect them to come out here twice can we??? They did what they could, they played 3 teams in the top 10. Do their losses suggest they don't belong in the top 14?? If Chapman goes out and beats FSU, it gets harder to justify them getting a bid over the bubble WCLL teams.

[UofMLaxGoalie11]

I'm not moving anything, Sonny. If you think that scheduling 3 rated teams (one of whom you must play) is an aggressive schedule, then we have a basic philosophical difference. I have been very consistent in my statements in the past. We'll see what the voters think in their rankings.

Heres the problem. I haven't looked into this (so feel free to prove me wrong) but I think a majority of the teams that have "agressive schedules" have them because of whom they play in conference. Va Tech can't help their conference is a little weaker then RMLC or WCLL. Half or a third of their games are taken up by non top 25 in-conference games. A few teams offer to come to them, take one big trip out west like you seem to demand, where they play a couple top 10 teams, and theres your schedule. No its not a TOUGH schedule, but its not WEAK either. They've played a few top 10 teams, they played tough vs them (losing to #2 team by 3 and #9 by 1). Are they top 10? Definetly not. Top 20? I think they've proven enough to belong there.

Thats the best explanation ive heard thus far IMHO.

[horn17]

It appears that Laxpower would give credibility to those that have argued here that losses to highly-ranked teams are more than offset by other wins over highly-ranked teams, and that teams with relatively unimpressive W-L records may still be stronger than teams who have compiled outstanding W-L records against weaker competition. The best examples of this include #7 Colorado (#11 Laxpower), #10 Lindenwood (#17 Laxpower), #11 UMD (#15 Laxpower) and #16 GT (#30 Laxpower).

Dan

Are you making the point that these teams dont play tough schedules or what?...if your not ...im sorry and will remove the post..but i get tired of the "confrence isnt tough enough arguement to support the rankings"....

UMD:
I was under the impression Oregon (Loss), U of Wash (win), Utah (win), Cal Poly (win), Michigan (?), and Oakland (?) is a pretty good OOC schedule .... if you were trying to say they play little or weak competition, you need to look at the schedule again....

I understand that the UMLL might not be regarded as one of the most competitive leagues this year...however, UMD and the entire umll have consistentlybeen scheduling tougher OOC confrence games over the past 3- 4 years....trying to make that arguement is like trying to slice cheese with a spoon.....not very bright, and just looking silly....

[Dulax31]

Why don't some of these SELC teams hold an invitational like Michigan does? I mean man, Florida State for example, I would love to come down and play 3 ranked games at their new facility. Then teams wouldn't have to travel to Florida, Georgia, and Virginia to get good games down there, they would just get to play all their games at one locations. It costs alot to travel when you need to rent out those motor coaches to get around. (Plus you could get your 3 games over with and enjoy the weather!)

[CATLAX MAN]

No its not a TOUGH schedule, but its not WEAK either. They've played a few top 10 teams, they played tough vs them (losing to #2 team by 3 and #9 by 1). Are they top 10? Definetly not. Top 20? I think they've proven enough to belong there.

Catlax,
what else can they do???
they played Noma, and UCSD. We can't expect them to come out here twice can we??? They did what they could, they played 3 teams in the top 10. Do their losses suggest they don't belong in the top 14??

I was asked what I thought about VA Tech. I answered that it was hard to judge them because, in my opinion, I felt their schedule was not too tough. With a small sample of games against rated teams to judge against, it is more difficult to place teams relationally. Based on what they have done and what I know about them, I stated that I thought they should be in the 14-17 range. So, Lefty, yes I think their losses mean that they should not be in the top 14, in my opinion. I know all teams can't play all of the rated teams every year, but the fewer you play, the less chances you have to better your standing. That should be obvious.

Although they lost to Sonoma by 3, they scored some late goals to make that game closer than it actually was. UCSD pummeled them by 10. I saw them twice last year at the tourney and my impression was that there were a number of teams that were better than they were, including some teams who didn't make the tourney (opinion warning).

Italics added to avoid Sonny's ire.

[scoot88]

Catlax Man:
Thanks for your insight; I did not think it would stir up so much debate. For the record, I share your opinion and would even rank them a bit lower than "14-17"...probably more along the lines of what Joker said-closer to 20.

[scoot88]

While the ranking may not seem to matter as far as getting into nationals, it still determines your first game which can set the tone for a teams whole performance. And also while the GRLC isn't the strongest conference I still believe there is at least one other team that should be in the top 25 IMO.

Your right that rankings will set the pace for the playoffs, but if a #16 team were to upset #1, they would also have the advantage of stealing that great bracket position for the rest of the tourney. As I've said before, there is much more parody in the league and I suspect we will see some first round upsets in Texas.

AZ, Chapman, Cal Poly and Utah are teams to watch during the first round (assuming they make it). Ironically, Arizona & Chapman are the lowest ranked teams in the group and I think they have the best chance of knocking off a highly ranked opponent.

[Dan Wishengrad]

It appears that Laxpower would give credibility to those that have argued here that losses to highly-ranked teams are more than offset by other wins over highly-ranked teams, and that teams with relatively unimpressive W-L records may still be stronger than teams who have compiled outstanding W-L records against weaker competition. The best examples of this include #7 Colorado (#11 Laxpower), #10 Lindenwood (#17 Laxpower), #11 UMD (#15 Laxpower) and #16 GT (#30 Laxpower).

Dan

Are you making the point that these teams dont play tough schedules or what?...if your not ...im sorry and will remove the post..but i get tired of the "confrence isnt tough enough arguement to support the rankings"....

UMD:
I was under the impression Oregon (Loss), U of Wash (win), Utah (win), Cal Poly (win), Michigan (?), and Oakland (?) is a pretty good OOC schedule .... if you were trying to say they play little or weak competition, you need to look at the schedule again....

I understand that the UMLL might not be regarded as one of the most competitive leagues this year...however, UMD and the entire umll have consistentlybeen scheduling tougher OOC confrence games over the past 3- 4 years....trying to make that arguement is like trying to slice cheese with a spoon.....not very bright, and just looking silly....

Horn17, I think you need to polish up your reading skills. My post is about Laxpower's computer rankings, and a comparison of these with the actual Top 25 poll that I am a voter for. Any opinions I stated in this post were only given in the context of trying to make sense of the computer rankings and the apparent inconsistencies of these compared to our actual Top 25.

I agree with you about UMD, specifically. I watched them played three terrific games at our HIT here in Seattle recently, and came away much more impressed with the team that I had been previously regarded them. We pollsters ranked the Bulldogs #11 in the most recent poll. Laxpower, however, has Duluth at #15. I gave this as an example of the differences between the computer and the human rankings. If you take umbrage at this, I think you need to take your anger out on the computer -- and not on me or we pollsters as a collective.

[Bluevelvet]

This thread was about undefeated teams at one point.
Well, now there are none.
Oregon lost to Sonoma 10-9 in the rain and mud and D2 NDNU 16-8
Colorado (undefeated in MDIA play) lost to UCSB 14-6 and D3 Williams College 12-10.
That leaves CSU (8-2) as the only undefeated team in MDIA play. CSU had some very close one goal wins at UCSB and Sonoma St and lost to NCAA D3 Whittier & D2 NDNU.
I still think Michigan has the best team in the MDIA. They are well coached, patient, disciplined and smart.