Early Look at SOS

For those of you that follow my Watch Listyou know that I’ve been using the Massey Rankings to get my Strength of Schedule (SOS) numbers. SOS is one of the selection criteria so I wanted something to use since the NCAA hadn’t released their numbers, yet. Even when they do (and they just did) the numbers they release are not calculated in the same way as the SOS selection criterion, but they are the best numbers out there available for me to use. Since the NCAA has published their numbers, I thought it would be good to talk through it. (Note – This article is based on numbers through the weekend.)

First off, there are major differences between what the NCAA uses (and publishes) versus what Massey is publishing. For instance, the NCAA says that SUNY Potsdam is the leader with a 0.780 SOS. Massey has the same team with an SOS of -0.36 or 185^th nationally. I assume Massey attempts to judge the quality of the teams played than how the NCAA does it, which is just to determine the winning percentage of all of the teams a school has played. Lots of pros and cons with both methods but the bottom line is we want to mimic the selection criteria the best we can so out goes the Massey numbers.

With three weeks in the books, we can use the NCAA SOS numbers to gauge who has played the teams that have won the most so far in the season. These are the teams that have a head start when it comes to SOS and maybe the most important selection criterion the NCAA uses. We can also use their data to see how teams will trend in the future. One problem with this is that the NCAA shows us the record of a team’s future opponents. What it doesn’t consider, however, is that scheduling changes when we get to conference play. When I talk about trending below, I’m using the NCAA numbers but also trying to be smart with how conference play will alter those numbers. Focusing on the West Region, let’s see how our 4ish conferences are doing. One note, I have no idea what a tie is in volleyball. I can only assume it’s a result that hasn’t been processed, yet?

#	School	Conf.	Wins	Losses	Ties	SOS
304	UC Santa Cruz	ACAA	57	66	0	0.463
372	Mills	ACAA	27	40	1	0.404
377	Finlandia	ACAA	25	38	0	0.397
408	Mount Mary	ACAA	31	61	1	0.339
413	Valley Forge	ACAA	8	18	0	0.308

The ACAA does not have an automatic qualifier but it does contain two West Region teams and they are 1 and 2 with regards to SOS in the conference.

This got me thinking about the number of Pool B bids this year. There is a calculation that determines how many bids are assigned to the independent teams. Basically they take the ratio of Pool A bids (teams in an automatic qualifier conference / # of those conferences) and apply it to the independents. I haven’t done the math but that should come out to around 9 or 10 teams meaning we need 18 or 20 independents to get that second Pool B bid. My problem is that I could only find 15 independent schools, which would indicate only one Pool B bid this year. We’ll know when the pre-championship manual comes out which should be any day but I was under the impression there were 2 Pool B bids again this year. (I just received confirmation that there will only be one Pool B bd this year.)

Sorry to get sidetracked there but of the independent teams I know about, the leaders in SOS are Neumann (0.640) and Marywood (0.618). Based on their future schedules, Santa Cruz will end up behind both teams and Marymount in SOS.

#	School	Conf.	Wins	Losses	Ties	SOS
29	Texas-Dallas	ASC	65	33	0	0.663
56	Hardin-Simmons	ASC	42	26	0	0.618
78	Mary Hardin-Baylor	ASC	62	42	1	0.595
142	LeTourneau	ASC	47	38	0	0.553
231	East Tex. Baptist	ASC	38	37	0	0.507
278	Concordia (TX)	ASC	39	42	0	0.481
291	McMurry	ASC	32	36	0	0.471
301	Sul Ross St.	ASC	33	38	1	0.465
331	Belhaven	ASC	32	40	0	0.444
334	Howard Payne	ASC	30	38	1	0.442
398	Louisiana Col.	ASC	21	37	0	0.362

Looking at the ASC, the top three in this list have selection worthy SOS numbers. When you start getting into the 0.550 range and lower, it gets more difficult. Looking at the trend from future opponents, the top 3 also look to be heading lower with both Hardin-Simmons and UMHB pegged to pass UT-Dallas. Certainly something to watch for as UT-Dallas is in position for an at-large bid. The trends show LeTourneau holding steady with the other teams trending higher.

#	School	Conf.	Wins	Losses	Ties	SOS
11	Willamette	NWC	56	24	0	0.700
35	Whitworth	NWC	44	24	0	0.647
80	George Fox	NWC	51	35	0	0.593
130	Linfield	NWC	66	52	0	0.559
151	Lewis & Clark	NWC	40	33	0	0.548
165	Pacific Lutheran	NWC	60	51	0	0.541
179	Whitman	NWC	24	21	0	0.533
268	Puget Sound	NWC	60	63	0	0.488
336	Pacific (OR)	NWC	38	48	0	0.442

With the NWC, we know that the schools are done with non-conference play so the trend will basically be around 0.500. Higher if you are at the bottom of the conference and lower if you are at the top because your record impacts SOS when factored into your opponent’s record. Right now it looks like Willamette will be around that 0.565 mark with everyone else below that. If that proves correct, it will be very difficult to get two teams in from the NWC. (I have Whitworth around 0.545 as the next highest team.)

#	School	Conf.	Wins	Losses	Ties	SOS
22	Southwestern	SCAC	69	34	1	0.668
31	Colorado Col.	SCAC	66	34	0	0.660
48	Trinity (TX)	SCAC	67	40	1	0.625
156	Dallas	SCAC	62	52	0	0.544
233	Schreiner	SCAC	40	39	0	0.506
238	Centenary (LA)	SCAC	37	37	0	0.500
256	Texas Lutheran	SCAC	52	53	0	0.495
264	Austin	SCAC	47	49	0	0.490

I’ve been loving on Trinity for their schedule and hesitant about Colorado College but sometimes you have to see the raw numbers to set you straight. The issue is that Trinity has played higher quality teams while Colorado College has played more good teams. The way the NCAA does SOS, it’s better to avoid the poor teams if you can play a number of teams with a record over 0.550. You’ll notice that you don’t see either JWU (Denver) or St. Thomas (TX) as their matches are not included in the NCAA statistics until they are in year 3 of their reclassification process. Trending shows the top 3 schools keeping their positions at the end of the season. Southwestern plays Carnegie Mellon late in the year and I think that is helping them a lot with their trending.

#	School	Conf.	Wins	Losses	Ties	SOS
7	Cal Lutheran	SCIAC	80	33	0	0.708
18	Chapman	SCIAC	66	32	0	0.673
28	Claremont-M-S	SCIAC	77	39	0	0.664
33	Redlands	SCIAC	52	28	0	0.650
38	La Verne	SCIAC	74	41	0	0.643
121	Pomona-Pitzer	SCIAC	55	42	0	0.567
184	Whittier	SCIAC	58	51	0	0.532
192	Occidental	SCIAC	49	44	0	0.527
428	Caltech	SCIAC	0	0	0	0.000

Cal Lutheran is our leader right now in SOS within the West Region. The trends show Cal Lu, La Verne, CMS, Redlands and Chapman all around 0.550 or higher. Pomona-Pitzer and Whittier come in around 0.530. Again, we can’t really trust the trending but with this conference they are basically sticking in SoCal the rest of the year so it’s probably more accurate than the ASC or SCAC numbers.

(Re-read this and I really didn’t touch on how fluid these numbers can be. Just remember that every team someone plays keeps playing so their records keep changing. The best a team can do to secure a good SOS is to play the best teams and hope their records reflect their ability.)

All of this is pretty interesting to me but there is a larger issue that I’ve covered before. Accounting for trending, right now the estimate is that Cal Lutheran, Hardin-Simmons, Southwestern and then Mary Hardin-Baylor will be our leaders in SOS at the end of the year. None of these teams look to hit the 0.600 mark for SOS, which can be problematic when comparing our region with other regions that are able to play more teams in and around their area. I wrote an article on how the West Region can mimic a New England Schedule and the end result is that we can just never get there. I highly recommend that you read that article because, quite frankly, it was a work of art (modest boast) and describes quite clearly the problems the West Region faces. But, if you are lazy and who among us isn’t, here is a quote from the summary,

“Okay…last word. The simplest solution is for the NCAA to realize that not all regions are created equal and that a 0.617 SOS in New England has no comp in the West Region. The selection criteria need to be intelligently discussed with a common goal of getting the best 19 at-large teams in the tournament. As long as I have followed the process, the DIII volleyball selection committee has told us that they are not interested in this.”

The quote summarizes my work in trying to get a West Region team up to an SOS number that mimics a New England team. In the end I couldn’t do it. When I look at the trending numbers, I can see at least 8 New England teams that can reach a 0.600 SOS and I think that will end up being a conservative number. We are only three weeks into the season and the NCAA SOS numbers are already telling us that once again we will be in a losing position to other regions because of our isolation and our inability to mimic their schedules. The SOS numbers are certainly fun to look through and teams with a high SOS can certainly take the opportunity to pat themselves on the back, but the dark cloud of selection looms and I fear until the NCAA does something, we may have another year where they sprinkle our teams around the nation (well, except for the New England area, of course).