Here is the link to the latest ITA rankings. I usually try to be pretty understanding with the rankings committee, but this time, they’ve made some extremely arbitrary moves that a lot of teams have a right to be upset with. Here’s a list of grievances:
1. OK, I think all of my readers can agree that I’m very complimentary of Pomona-Pitzer. But Pomona-Pitzer at #9. REALLY!? Really…. Really? Somehow, the Hens moves ahead of Bowdoin (who didn’t do much since the last ranking period except for beat Middlebury and Bates), Whitman (who hasn’t lost to anybody), and Middlebury (who Pomona-Pitzer lost to directly). Wowwwwwww. The crazy thing about this is the fact that Trinity (TX) went along for the ride up to #8 in the rankings without having done anything in the last couple of weeks. I guess Coach Belletto was OK with moving his team ahead of a team that beat his once, but couldn’t find a way to move them ahead of a team that beat his twice. Granted that all of these teams are so comparable that it’s difficult to place one ahead of the other, but if you have an established order for one ranking period, you can’t just put teams over other teams for no reason. There are five criteria for the creation of rankings and head-to-head results is the one that is supposed to be most important. If I were Middlebury, I would be pissed.
2. Speaking of head-to-head results being completely ignored… Bates over Redlands? How did that happen? All they’ve done in the last couple weeks is beat Trinity (CT), and since when does that justify one team moving ahead of another team that already beat them 7-2. Once again, a team moved ahead of another team for no reason. Well done, Browning. Well done. Let’s keep in mind that this is the same national ranking committee that thought putting Franklin and Marshall in the national rankings was a good idea.
3. North Carolina Wesleyan at #19. I like how the Battling Bishops somehow moved behind Case Western after beating them 7-2 early in the season. Their only losses are to Johns Hopkins and Carnegie Mellon, and they are one of only a handful of teams to have beaten Kenyon this season (on their home courts, no less). I guess early season results just don’t matter. Perhaps every team should just adopt the NESCAC schedule and not play until March. Maybe teams like NCW should just switch conferences and move their campuses to other states, so it’s easier for them to have better “strength of schedule.”
Keep up the good work, fellas.
You know last week I said the rankings were terrible and some of you people acted like I was wrong. I told you and these rankings only proved that I was right. Unreal………..
While Whitman may be getting bumped in the national rankings because the others teams are playing so many other top teams, they haven’t been moving in the regional rankings which is incredibly important
Just throwing this out there about the top 12 – Whitman beat Cruz and Mary Washington and Cal Lu lost to both, and lost to Mary Washington at home. Whitman beat Cruz straight up and it wasn’t that close. They both played much tougher DIII schedules than Whitman, but Whitman has a good argument to be ahead of both of them, based on direct and indirect wins. Ranking Whitman ahead of Cal Lu and Cruz would also put Whiitman ahead of Pomona and Trinity.
It is not as if Whitman did nothing else. Whitman did have two other wins over ranked teams and two wins over teams that are just outside the rankings after fliying across the country. The wins over Whittier and Trinity, Ct. were on the same day and on the road, showing some toughness. Whitman did nothing to drop in this last ranking period and Trinity and Cal Lu did nothing to move ahead of them. Cruz beat Cal Lu but that should not move them ahead of a team that beat them and has not lost. Cruz’s win over CMS at home was impressive, but was not against CMS at full strength. So far, it does not appear that getting Larsen back has made much difference to Cruz.
Whitman is being punished for a relatively weak conference – something out of its control. It is not a particularly big deal since after the top 4, there is not much to choose between the next 8 or so teams and Whitman’s ranking still shows that it is having a terrific year. Nonetheless, the drop appears quite arbitrary.
The more I think about Whitman’s body of work, the less impressed I am. They’ve beaten 1 top 20 team, at home, 3 months ago. Mary Washington, Kalamazoo, Rhodes, Trinity (CT) and Whittier have all established themselves as 3rd tier programs this season and Whitman played close matches with all of them. Yes, the scheduling and conference restrictions are somewhat out of Whitman’s control, but one can’t argue that the Whitties should be 6 or 7 in the country when every other team is beating up on each other and Whitman had one good win. Yes, they will probably get the top seed in their regional whether they deserve it or not. But I’d be shocked if anyone outside Walla Walla would pick them to go to the Elite 8 if they end up having to take on a Hopkins or Wash U. Yes, they play D1 and NAIA teams who are good, but they just don’t see the level that a Hopkins would bring in singles on a consistent enough basis to win a match like that.
They had a good season and they’re a good team, but I see them more in the Redlands/Case/Carnegie category than the Bowdoin/Trinity/Pomona category and I think this will show when they have to take on a top team in NCAAs.
Seems to me like the ranking committee realized they had made several mistakes with their recent past rankings and basically fixed most of them on this most recent ranking. The top 12 or so looks about right to me. I guess Pomona should maybe be a little lower but they did beat Cruz recently. Other than that there really isn’t any issue in the top 12 or so. Outside of that, however, I could see arguments from several teams. I feel for NCW because they were like top 5 when they beat kenyon, then they lost to Hopkins (did they have another loss?) and moved waaaayyy down and hopkins was top 5 with that win. I could be wrong but thats what I remember. Anyway, like I said; top 12 or so seems good, 12-20 there are arguments for everyone it seems.
Riddle me this…
A def B 5-4
A def C 7-2
A lost @D
Has win over a top 5 team, only two losses are teams inside top 15 and top 20
B lost A 4-5
B def C 8-1
B has put together an amazing body of work including several top 10 wins.
C lost A 7-2
C lost B 8-1
C def D at neutral site
Wins over #18, 21, 22, 27. Also has a loss to #20.
C’s best win is #18 and has a direct lost to A.
A’s best win is #4, direct win over C, worst lost is #18.
A = NCW #19
B = Kenyon #4
C = Case #17
How does Case possibly move above NCW?
Not going to criticize, but I will discuss NCAA tournament impact. Traditionally, even though the rules say otherwise, the NCAA selection and seedings have been identical to the ITA rankings. I challenge anyone to find me a time when it wasn’t the case. First thing that pops out is Bates over Redlands and Wash U. If Bates loses to Midd, and Redlands goes on to finish 4th in their conference tournament, these rankings seem to indicate that Bates gets the 6th Pool C spot, Wash U gets the 7th, and Redlands is on the outside looking in. To give an analogy for my Redlands bashing the other day, they are like an unmotivated kid who has very wealthy parents and inherits millions without ever doing anything. They didn’t do anything to deserve that money, but they ended up getting it. Redlands doesn’t really deserve a spot, but THEY HAVE THE BEST RESUME and they beat Bates head-to-head. However, it seems as though my wish was granted and Redlands will have to finish 3rd or above in their tournament to get in. The scenario that would create the most drama is if Redlands loses to CMS and then BEATS PP or CLU in the 3rd place match along with Bates losing to Midd today. The rankings indicate that Wash U would then be on the outside looking in, Redlands would get 6th and Bates would get 7th in Pool C. Not necessarily fair, but that’s what the rankings say. So Bears fans, root hard for Redlands to lose. Bobcats fans, I think you’re in the tournament no matter what happens this weekend.
Secondly, 6-7-8 overall now looks like Trinity, Bowdoin, Whitman. This probably means the following: Trinity flies to St. Louis, Bowdoin hosts Midd, Whitman flies to Baltimore and it seems like Bates may have to go to Williams. Gustavus will probably now get sent over to Whitewater and Kenyon will go there as well. Obviously there are other scenarios in play (which I’ll examine and post this weekend) here as I spent about 30 seconds coming up with what I just wrote, but that jumps out to me as the obvious bracket.
It’s what we expect when new rankings come out. Yes, NC Wes at 19 is ridiculous, but I’m more surprised by Coe in the top 30. They beat Whitewater; big deal. Instead of rewarding Coe they should have punished Whitewater out of the rankings.
We here at Coe appreciate the recognition, but have asked the ITA to remove Coe from the National rankings. The Players and I do not feel we have earned the right to be in the national rankings. Yet.
Congratulations on your win versus Whitewater, a solid team with talented players, despite what anyone says. It sounds like your team prefers staying off the radar screen versus ranked opponents. That only works so long however as your program keeps improving.
Last six matches vs ranked foes:
Grinnell 5 Coe 4
Carleton 9 Coe 0
Kalamazoo 9 Coe
Coe 6 Elmhurst 3
Luther 7 Coe 2
Coe 5 Whitewater 4
Not a resume of a top 30 team.
OK, you are right…but that doesn’t mean your team should be taken lightly. Whitewater learned that lesson! Last year, Whitman learned that lesson against Whitewater on the road. Claremont versus Swarthmore this year, lots of examples…sometimes its injuries and playing on the road, academic stresses with finals, lack of sleep, any number of reasons but it makes for some excitement and anxiety both for coaches and fans. Who do you think the sleeper teams will be this year at NCAA’s (or will you reserve judgement until you see the brackets)?
I appreciate the comments, Coach Rogers. I said before that your team is on the rise, but you’re right: not quite deserving of a national ranking YET. This is just another blatant error on behalf of the ranking committee. It’s like they saw your big win over Whitewater and didn’t even look anywhere else. The same goes for Franklin and Marshall last ranking period: they saw the win over Swarthmore, and didn’t even bother to look at the losses to TCNJ and Monmouth.
My comment wasn’t intended as criticism of Coe, it was meant to show the voters’ short attention. I’m sure Coe has talented players just like Whitewater, and just like probably 15-25 teams that could be considered for that 28-30 spot in the rankings. Unfortunately, these borderline programs seldom play each other, mainly due to travel budgets. Carlton beat Coe earlier in the season. Maybe Carleton should be ranked. Despite what others have said, Franklin & Marshall has a fine team. CNU is talented, too, but they went out west early and got beat. Haverford is competitive this year. Wittenberg has a good team, Bridgewater is improving, Tufts will be better next year. Maybe the rankings should be expanded to the top 50. Recognition would be good for many schools, just like Coe. Forgive me Coach. I posted my comment hastily. Be proud of your season.
How about Hopkins ahead of Bates when Bates spanked them.
Out of curiosity who does the national rankings? Are these “elected” positions or do they rotate? Just seems strange that teams would make big jumps and drops between ranking periods without any results.
I mean as much as I joked above, to be fair its not like certain teams leapfrogged over others earlier in the season for a particular reason so why now. Yes Bowdoin after PP is odd but having them suddenly leapfrog them earlier in the year didn’t make any sense either until they had the Midd win. Again this season has been absolutely crazy so its hard to criticize ranking committee too much as they are trying to do their best with it. I don’t understand the sudden Bates over Redlands because if that were going to happen it should have happened earlier not this ranking period. I can understand to an extent PP leaping over Bowdoin because of the most recent win being Santa Cruz who beat Cal Lu. That being said yes Bowdoin does hold the direct win over Midd who has beaten PP but I think the message being sent is that Midd’s body of work isn’t as strong. Cal Lu has the Kenyon win and Trin Tx win and Cruz has the Trin Tx and Cal Lu and CMS win. Its a completely imperfect system but given all the talk on here about rewarding late play I can understand the logic. Of course it can really be argued either way and quite honestly certain West teams their ranking doesn’t matter because their fate for regionals is sealed. The important thing to notice is the other changes
I think it’s pretty sad that at this point the team rankings seem to be based about 50% on actual results, 30% on a teams reputation (always been ranked in top 10 so they shouldn’t move too low, etc) and 20% which coaches are on the rankings committee.
Once again, I have forgotten that I’m talking about real people because of the anonymity involved in the blogosphere. While I still disagree pretty intensely with several of the decisions that were made in this period’s rankings, I shouldn’t have attacked anyone’s integrity. My bad. I still think the slow clap thing was pretty funny.
Secret pact to impact Regional hosting/seedings and who goes where? That’s the only thing I can think of is that makes any sense of it.
I doubt that is the case, as probably teams ranked 7 through 22 can all beat one another on any given day…and #6 UCSC when not at full strength has proven to be vulnerable. Based upon talent levels and recent results a case could be made for Johns Hopkins and Wash U. to also be higher in the rankings. Plus I predict Redlands will beat either P-P or Cal Lu in the SCIAC tourney on their home courts this weekend and justify a move up in the rankings as well.
However if the motivation for some of movements by teams in the rankings is true and the wish is for Whitman to join the CA teams in a California Regional (which unfortunately already will have 4 of the top 10 teams in the country playing), then these teams should “watch out for what they wish for”…if their wish is to see Middlebury and Whitman end up as #2 seeds in tough regionals elsewhere on the road, then so be it. Every team has to deal with adversity, some are better at it than others. Perhaps the rankings committee is being swayed more by recent results,talent levels of players, results from last year where teams are virtually intact again this year, or whatever.
If travel costs were not an issue, I would love to see how the SCAL teams do on the road at regionals in the Midwest or on the East Coast. CMS has proven itself on the road, but even they have struggled to play up to their potential away from home. My edge in the NCAA tourney goes to teams who have proven they can compete well on the road this year…though there is no denying the fact that home courts are a big advantage for teams and they should deserve having that home court advantage!