Week 4 Polls (& RPI)

It's getting pretty close to the point where UPSF will be able to give us RPI ratings that begin to mean something, but untill the, here's the Polls for this week.

No change for the top 3 in the Soccer America rankings. FSU suffered only a little for its loss to UCF,and Florida suffered a bit more.

The big news is that Santa Clara came from the purgatory of the unranked all the way to #10 for beating Purdue and Notre Dame.
Call is ranked #7.


Soccer America Women's Top 25
TEAM (RECORD) LAST WEEK
1. North Carolina (6-0-0) 1
2. Stanford (7-0-0) 2
3. Portland (7-0-0) 3
4. Boston College (6-0-0) 5
5. UCLA (4-1-1) 6
6. Florida State (6-1-0) 4
7. California (5-1-0) 9
8. Georgia (6-0-1) 17
9. Maryland (7-0-0) 18
10. Santa Clara (5-2-0) NR
11. Michigan State (4-0-1) 19
12. South Carolina (6-0-0) 25
13. Notre Dame (3-3-0) 7
14. Florida (5-2-0) 14
15. Purdue (5-2-0) 12
16. Virginia (4-1-2) 16
17. UCF (5-1-1) NR
18. St. John's (5-1-0) NR
19. Connecticut (4-2-0) NR
20. Wake Forest (7-1-0) 10
21. San Diego (5-2-1) NR
22. Indiana (6-1-0) 12
23. Rutgers (5-1-1) 11
24. Denver (5-1-1) NR
25. Kansas (5-1-1) 13
25. West Virginia (2-2-3) 15


Illinois dropped completely off this poll after their disastrous weekend here, and Penn dropped off, as did our next opponent Texas A&M who lost to UNC 2-0 Saturday.

TopDrawer still has us #1, and he has our conference partners USD and SCU #'s 29 & 30. Here's is top 10:

Is Boston College is for real, or a product of a weak opening schedule?

Notre Dame with a .500 record in the top 15?? What is this, football?

'78 Alum wrote:Is Boston College is for real, or a product of a weak opening schedule?

Here is BC's not conference schedule. They still have two games to go - Harvard and Central Connecticut State.

If they win out their non-conference schedule, they will have beaten one team that has a winning schedule to date.


Boston College
6-0-0
Atlantic Coast (ACC)
Date Match Opp. Record Result

8/28/2009 vs. Fairfield 2-3-0 W 5-0
9/2/2009 vs. Boston U. 2-3-2 W 2-0
9/4/2009 at. Brown 0-3-0 W 5-0
9/6/2009 vs. Holy Cross 3-2-1 W 4-0
9/11/2009 vs. Marist 1-3-1 W 4-0
9/13/2009 vs. Long Beach St. 3-3-0 W 4-0
9/18/2009 vs. Harvard 1-3-1
9/20/2009 vs. Central Conn. St. 2-3-1

That's why Boston College is only #36, even in the current rudimentary RPI rankings.

Geez, do you agree that the pollsters are looking to be really stymied this year? The only really obvious teams at the top are North Carolina, the Pilots, and Stanford, and some (not me) are even questioning Stanford.

UPSoccerFanatic wrote:That's why Boston College is only #36, even in the current rudimentary RPI rankings.

Geez, do you agree that the pollsters are looking to be really stymied this year? The only really obvious teams at the top are North Carolina, the Pilots, and Stanford, and some (not me) are even questioning Stanford.

yeah, this year is clearly more unsettled than a lot of years in the past. I think it's a push between us and Stanford, though I think it will take them playing tougher teams to see if they have dealt adequately with the loss of their two best defenders.

Even with UNC, they were measured early by their romps over ND and UCLA. It's not all that clear that those teams are top tier either this year.

Our non-conference schedule looked like it might be a bit soft this year, now I'm not so sure. Teams we have played or will play are starting to look pretty competitive. I'm particularly gratified that we don't have many teams on our schedule with losing seasons thus far.

My sense at the beginning of the season was that UP had to have a perfect season to get a #1 seed. Now I think we might actually have a cushion.

It's a bit early to tell, though. Keep hoping for SCU and USD to do well in non-conference.

BTW, UPSF,

I notice you are using last year's region classifications. Is that for a reason? or was it just too late to change?

Women's Division I Soccer Top 25
Compiled by Gary Davidson, managing editor, www.SoccerTimes.com
September 14, 2009
(Records include games of Sunday, September 13)

-- First-place votes in parentheses --

Rank School Record Pts LW
1 North Carolina (16) 6-0-0 400 1
2 Stanford 7-0-0 379 2
3 Portland 7-0-0 373 3
4 UCLA 4-1-1 337 5
5 Florida State 6-1-0 329 4
6 Boston College 6-0-0 319 6
7 California 5-1-0 289 11
8 Virginia 4-1-2 272 9t
9 Florida 5-2-0 255 17
10 Wake Forest 7-1-0 236 9t
11 Purdue 5-2-0 206 8
12 Notre Dame 3-3-0 192 7
13 Texas A&M 3-3-0 163 14
14 West Virginia 2-2-3 129 12
15 South Carolina 6-0-0 121 23
16 Santa Clara 5-2-0 117 nr
17 Rutgers 4-1-1 97 15
18 Georgia 6-0-1 90 25
19 Central Florida 5-1-1 87 nr
20 Illinois 3-3-1 80 13
21 Oklahoma State 5-2-0 77 24
22 Kansas 5-1-1 76 20
23 Michigan State 4-0-1 73 22
24 San Diego 5-2-1 69 nr
25 Colorado 4-3-0 55 10

Key: Pts - Total points. LW - Last week's ranking. t - tie. nr - no ranking

Dropped out: No. 18 Brigham Young, No. 19 Penn State, No. 21 Indiana.

Others receiving votes: Maryland 54, Brigham Young 47, Connecticut 47, Penn State 42, Washington 40, Indiana 37, Ohio State 32, Denver 26, Washington State 20, Arizona State 15, Utah 9, Miami (Fla.) 8, Duke 7, Pepperdine 4, Southern California 4, Colorado College 3, Marquette 3, Louisiana State 2, Oregon 2, Georgetown 1, Missouri 1, Villanova 1.

Geezaldinho wrote:BTW, UPSF,

I notice you are using last year's region classifications. Is that for a reason? or was it just too late to change?

The Geez is referring to information posted on the RPI website about how the regions stack up against each other in terms of average RPI. Prior to 2009, the NCAA had the nation organized into six regions for Division I women's soccer: Central, Great Lakes, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Southeast, and West. The NCAA assigned teams to the regions based on the schools' geographic locations. Beginning with 2009, the NCAA has changed to eight regions, organized by conference, but depending on where the conferences' teams are predominantly located.

From the NCAA's perspective, I think this made some sense. The only purpose for the regions relates to the NCAA Tournament. Each region has a regional advisory committee that recommends to the Women's Soccer Committee what the rankings of teams within its region should be. The Women's Soccer Committee then considers all the regions' recommendations and goes through the at large selection and seeding processes. Within that context, it makes good sense for all of a conference's teams to be included within the same region, since the regional advisory committee members for a region will be familiar with all the teams in the conferences included within that region. For example, the ACC is in the Southeast Region, so that Boston College now is within that region. In the past, Boston College was in the Northeast Region even though it played the predominant number of its games against Southeast Region teams. Thus in the past, BC was being evaluated and ranked within a region by regional advisory committee members who were less familiar with its performance than were RAC members from a different region.

My purpose for looking at regional groupings, however, is different. What I am interested in is what "pools" teams play in and the problems the RPI has in rating teams from those different pools in relation to each other. There are two primary factors that lead to the existence of the playing pools. One factor is the conferences teams are in. The other factor is where the schools are located geographically. I calculate conference average RPIs and see whether conferences' teams outperform or underperform their ratings as a way to address the conference contribution to the pool problem. I calculate geographic area average RPIs and see whether the regions' teams outperform or underperform their ratings as a way to address the geographic contribution to the pool problem. For my purposes, the NCAA's new conference-based regions aren't adequate, since they can overlap geographically. For example, the WCC is in the West Region whereas the Pac Ten is in the Pacific Region, yet the WCC and Pac Ten clearly are in the same geographic playing pool. So what I've done is taken the NCAA's old six regions, but also looked to see where teams play the predominant number of their games. Almost all teams play the predominant number of games within the geographic region where they are located, but out of the 322 teams this year, there are 30 teams that have played the predominant number of their games elsewhere over the last couple of years. I've identified those teams and assigned them to the regions in which they play the predominant number of their games. Thus I've assigned Boston College to the Southeast Region and South Florida (Big East) to the Great Lakes Region.

For those interested in this kind of stuff, as well as in where the WCC falls among the 30 conferences in terms of average RPI strength, you can get as much information and more from the RPI website. Use the following link, then go to the "RPI REPORTS" page. Beginning about half way down the page are reports showing the average conference RPIs and average region RPIs for games through September 13: http://sites.google.com/site/rpifordivisioniwomenssoccer/

Hello all--

Re week 4 and week 3 polls:

Navy's win (AT Coral Gables FL!) v. Miami looks much better now, does it not . . .

slick wrote:Hello all--

Re week 4 and week 3 polls:

Navy's win (AT Coral Gables FL!) v. Miami looks much better now, does it not . . .

I'm not sure what you are asking. Miami was a great win for Navy. It's really too hard to tell right now or if it's one of those wins you see from time to time that demonstrates that low scoring games are a crap shoot, or whether Navy is a good team.

Miami outshot Navy 25-3 and had 10 corners to Navy's 3, so from the numbers, it looks like Miami did everything to Navy but score. It sure does look like the Navy keeper had a great day, with 11 saves and a shutout.

The Navy win would be a lot more impressive if there were a body of work that supported it. Unfortunately, they have only one other win against a winning team, and that's Boise State, which is 4-3-1 so far.

The other 4 teams they have beaten other than those two combine for a 4-19-0 record so far.

Come on, Geezer, why spoil fun with facts?

NSCAA National Rankings
NCAA Rankings National Women
Division I National Poll - September 15, 2009

Rank School Prev. W-L-T
1 North Carolina (32) 825 1 6 - 0 - 0
2 Portland 789 2 7 - 0 - 0
3 Stanford 762 3 7 - 0 - 0
4 UCLA 707 6 4 - 1 - 1
5 Florida State 669 4 6 - 1 - 0
6 Boston College 633 10 6 - 0 - 0
7 Florida 542 14 5 - 2 - 0
8 Wake Forest 461 8 7 - 1 - 0
9 California 459 16 5 - 1 - 0
10 Virginia 455 9 4 - 1 - 2
11 Purdue 433 7 5 - 2 - 0
12 Santa Clara 415 RV 5 - 2 - 0
13 South Carolina 384 18 6 - 0 - 0
14 Notre Dame 379 5 3 - 3 - 0
15 Georgia 352 15 6 - 0 - 1
16 Rutgers 330 17 5 - 1 - 1
17 Texas A&M 329 13 3 - 3 - 0
18 San Diego 308 21 5 - 2 - 1
19 Central Florida 220 RV 5 - 1 - 1
20 Maryland 151 RV 7 - 0 - 0
21 Denver 145 RV 5 - 1 - 1
22 Indiana 110 25 6 - 1 - 0
23 Colorado 102 20 4 - 3 - 0
24 Oklahoma State 92 19 5 - 2 - 0
25 Ohio State 84 RV 5 - 1 - 1
Number in parentheses indicates number of first place votes

Also receiving votes: Illinois 79, West Virginia 72, Pepperdine 67, Arizona State 62, Kansas 54, St. John's 48, Villanova 46, Northeastern 42, Minnesota 25, Michigan State 17, Washington 17, Connecticut 15, William & Mary 12, Marquette 11, Washington State 5, Georgetown 4, Tennessee 4, Charlotte 4, Colorado College 3, Dayton 1, BYU 1


Big jump after the first few.

I'll use the NSCAA rankings posted by the Geez to make come comments. (It's not necessarily bad at this point in the season for rankings to be based in part on reputation, but it's good to know which rankings are based on performance and which on reputation.):

1. North Carolina - legitimate

2. Portland - legitimate

3. Stanford - legitimate

4. UCLA - has a loss to North Carolina and a tie with San Diego. San Diego is ranked at # 18. UCLA has wins over Illinois (not ranked, but would be #26 on the NSCAA list) and Florida ranked #7. UCLA's rank at this point is based on reputation and not performance -- see my comment on Florida.

5. Florida State - has a loss to UCF (Central Florida) ranked #19. Has wins over Penn State (NR), Washington State (NR, but would be #40 on the NSCAA list), and UAB (NR). FSU's rank is based on reputation and not performance.

6. Boston College - BC is 6-0-0, but its opponents have won only 45% of their games against teams other than BC, and its opponents' opponents have won only 59% of their games. BC's rank is based on something other than performance.

7. Florida - has lost to UCLA and Indiana ranked #22. Has wins over Miami (NR), Duke (NR and having a poor season), and Colorado ranked #20. Florida's rank is based on reputation and not performance. Further, its high rank probably contributed to UCLA's high rank.

8. Wake Forest - has lost to Connecticut (NR, but would be #37 on the list). Beat Penn State (NR). Wake's ranking is based on reputation and not performance.

9. California - has lost to Portland. Has wins over Texas A&M ranked #17 and Texas (NR).

10. Virginia - has lost to Penn State (NR) and tied Arizona State (NR, but would be #29 on the list) and West Virginia (NR, but would be #27 on the list). Virginia's rank is based on reputation and not performance.

11. Purdue - Lost to Stanford and Santa Clara ranked #12. Beat Texas A&M ranked #17.

12. Santa Clara - lost to Utah (NR) and Maryland ranked #20. Beat Georgetown (NR, but would be #41 on the list), Notre Dame ranked #14, and Purdue ranked #11. It's hard to understand why Santa Clara isn't ranked ahead of Purdue. Reputation may be playing in part in the rankings of Santa Clara, Notre Dame, and Purdue.

13. South Carolina - 6-0-0. No outstanding wins. Rank is based mostly on reputation.

14. Notre Dame - has lost to North Carolina, Stanford, and Santa Clara. Notre Dame's rank is based on reputation and not performance.

15. Georgia - has tied Mercer (NR). Has wins over Minnesota (NR, but would be #34 on the list) and Charlotte (NR, but would be #43 on the list). Georgia's rank is based on reputation and not performance.

16. Rutgers - has lost to San Diego ranked #18 and tied Stony Brook (NR). Has win over Penn State (NR). Rank is based on something other than performance. It's hard to understand why San Diego isn't ahead of Rutgers.

17. Texas A&M - has lost to North Carolina, California, and Purdue. Has wins over USC (NR) and St Mary's (2-1, NR). TAMU's rank is based on reputation and not performance.

18. San Diego - has lost to Cal State Bakersfield and Ohio State ranked #25. Tied UCLA. Has win over Rutgers (#16). San Diego's rank is based on reputation, both its own and UCLA's, and not performance.

19. Central Florida - has lost to North Carolina and tied LSU (NR). Has win over Florida State. UCF's rank is based on Florida State's reputation.

20. Maryland - 7-0-0. Has win over Santa Clara. The reputation of Santa Clara, Notre Dame, and Purdue may be playing a part in Maryland's rank.

21. Denver - Lost to Colorado ranked #23 and tied Illinois (NR, but would be #26 on the list). Beat Kansas (NR, but would be #30 on the list). It's hard to understand what this rank is based on.

22. Indiana - lost to St Johns (NR, but would be #31 on the list). Beat Florida ranked #7. Indiana's rank is based on Florida's reputation.

23. Colorado - lost to Illinois (NR, but would be #26 on the list), Oregon (NR), Florida ranked #7. Beat Denver ranked #21 and Oklahoma State ranked #24. Colorado's rank appears to be based on Oklahoma State's reputation.

24. Oklahoma State - lost to Colorado and BYU (NR, but would be #45 on the list). Oklahoma State's rank is based on reputation and not performance.

25. Ohio State - lost to Pittsburgh (NR) and tied West Virginia (NR, but would be #27 on the list). Has wins over San Diego ranked #18 and USC (NR). With San Diego, Ohio State's rank appears to be tied to UCLA's reputation.

Others receiving votes: None of Vilanova (#32), Northeastern (#33), Minnesota (#34), Michigan State (#35), William & Mary (#38), Georgetown (#41), Tennessee (#42), Charlotte (#43), and Dayton (#45) have done anything to particularly distinguish themselves. Illinois (#26), West Virginia (#27), Pepperdine (#28), Arizona State (#29), Kansas (#30), St John's (#31), Washington (#36), Connecticut (#37), Marquette (#39), Washington State (#40), Colorado College (#44), and BYU (#46) appear to have some basis in performance for being on the list.

QUESTIONS: Arizona State 4-1-1 (NR, would be #29 on the list): tied Virginia ranked #10 and lost to Kansas (NR, would be #30 on the list). If Virginia is #10, shouldn't Arizona State be in the top 25?

Washington - Washington's loss to Miami appears to really have hurt. Otherwise, it could lay claim to a high ranking and certainly a top 25. It seems to be out of favor with the pollsters.

Overall, except for a very few teams at the top, figuring out how the teams should stand is a total mish mash this year. It may seem early, but we're actually already about 1/3 of the way through the season, with conference competition starting soon for some teams. In fact, the Big East conference games begin this week.

The phrase so-and-so's"rank is based on reputation and not performance" is a classic putdown -- I want it printed on a T-shirt. Thanks to all who do the legwork in this arcane world of rankings.

Albyn Jones' first 2009 ratings now are available, covering almost all games through September 6: http://soccerratings.com/index.php?title=Women%27s_NCAA_Division_I_Soccer_Ratings

Jones' ratings include recognition of past team history, so his ratings as of this time of year are more reliable than RPI ratings which do not recognize past history.

The problem with using historical data from last year is pretty dramatically demonstrated By Santa Clara's ranking in the Sept 7 rankings.

They were ranked 81, Notre Dame was ranked at 4, and Purdue was ranked at 13.

According to his system, the chances of SCU beating ND was about 1:44, and the chances of them beating Purdue was about 1:6

Yet they won both.

Our odds according to that ranking of beating TAMU, BTW, are about 12.55:1

I think they still have to play the game.

The Pilots a 12:1 shot? I'll get in on that action.

In a purely hypothetical, entertainment purposes only sense, of course...

PurplePrideTrumpet wrote:The Pilots a 12:1 shot? I'll get in on that action.

In a purely hypothetical, entertainment purposes only sense, of course...

Well, there would be bookies happy to take your money even if the rankings were more mature.

For one thing, that doesn't take into account the possibility of a tie, which I'm not sure I know how Albyn computes. It probably has to do with the statistical error (SE on his charts), but I have no idea exactly how. Those numbers a pretty high this early in the year. There is certainly some possibility of it, though.

PurplePrideTrumpet wrote:The Pilots a 12:1 shot? I'll get in on that action.

In a purely hypothetical, entertainment purposes only sense, of course...

I don't think I'd put down $12 for the chance of winning $1 for the A&M/UP game. A&M is a good team (held UNC scoreless for over 80 minutes). When teams are even somewhat closely matched, too many things can go wrong to be 92% confident of a victory, including

• a red card
  
• several UP players coming down with H1N1
  
• a flukey goal or two
  
• a bad ref call or two
  
• UP "off" day or A&M having an "on" day.

No kidding, eprof. A few years ago Spurs lost the last game of the season against West Ham after several of the players got sick. At first they thought it was a dodgy lasagna at the team hotel! but it turned out to be a more generic virus that just hit at the wrong time.

Almost at the halfway point in the season now. Team health is also a big X-factor at this point! Most are healthy and fit....except for Cloee and Cassi. Anyone hear of an ETA on Cloee's return? She's a gem! I was so looking forward to watching her against the Illini and Miami! I'd like TAMU to meet her too... ....but not at the expense of not having her come tournament time!

GO PILOTS!!!

Counting the weeks from when she and others said she's scheduled to come back, you might see Kassi at the Montana game. That might be a good game to ease her back in and see how she's doing.

But I'm sure they won't rush her. I think the goal is still the Tournament.