New Strength of Schedule Index

[RD17]

I was sent a copy of the new SSI formula for this year, and it has been changed drastically, so that the penalty for losing to a good I-AA school is gone.

For example, losing to a I-AA school with a greater than .500 record yields 9 points towards your SSI. Losing on the road to a D2 school with a .700 or better record (i.e., if the Sioux were to lose to SCSU on Saturday) gets you just 8. So this part of the formula has been fixed and makes it appear as if playing I-AA teams now makes sense again.

The problem is that you are not rewarded very well in points if you beat a good I-AA team. A win over a .500 or better I-AA team now gets you 11 points, whereas beating a .500 or better D2 team at home yields the same. You can get 14 points for beating a .700 or better team on the road (i.e., UND wins on Saturday).

What's the moral of the story? You are now much better off playing a good I-AA team than a poor D2. You would get the same number of points for losing to NDSU as you would in beating Crookston, with of course the potential to get more points if you were to beat the Bison. It now makes very little sense to schedule a D2 team that you know is going to be bad if you can schedule a game with a quality I-AA program. The only drawback would come from a lack of regional wins (how much that comes into play for playoff selection, I don't know).

BTW, if any of you have listened to Dale Lennon's show last night, you heard him say that Winona's loss to SDSU will really hurt the Warriors in the SSI because SDSU is in a non-qualifying I-AA conference. This is NOT true. Even though NDSU and SDSU could not yet qualify for the postseason, they are considered as being from a qualifying conference because they currently play above D2 standards.

If anyone's interested, I can post the entire points system.

[jimdahl]

I've actually been struggling with this because by my calculations Winona St. and C-N are ranked unreasonably high in the latest regionals (both, of course, have lost to provisional I-AA's).

My first thought was something about changes to SSI, but I've been using the same 2004 SSI that's been on the NCAA site for a while now: 2004 Division II SSI (this seems to be the same numbers you were talking about).

That then got me wondering about whether I was undercrediting games against SDSU/NDSU for SSI; e.g. they could still be considered D-II or be considered auto-qualifying/independent:

• In the football participants list, the NCAA site indicates that NDSU & SDSU are currently considered D-II independents in the NW region.
  
• I don't see anything, though, that indicates that SDSU would be considered to be an independent or from a qualifying conference. The 2003 D-II manual (p.12) outlines what a qualifying conference is and I don't see how NDSU/SDSU would be included in that group? (I can't find an update to that either by searching or from the NCAA football championships page an update to that handbook).
  

So, do you know something I don't?

[NDSU grad]

I really think that it's in the semantics. I'm 99% positvie that NDSU got 6 points for the loss to Davis last year, even though they were not from a qualifying conference and not eligible for the playoffs. I think it's like RD17 said, if the I-AA school plays at a level above DII, then they count as if they were from a qualifying conference. Some of that stuff the NCAA puts out can be pretty hard to interpret.

[bisonguy]

Good breakdown RD17 (aka SSI guru)

It's good to see the NCAA taking steps to rectify the SSI.

[bigmrg74]

I really think that it's in the semantics.  I'm 99% positvie that NDSU got 6 points for the loss to Davis last year, even though they were not from a qualifying conference and not eligible for the playoffs.  I think it's like RD17 said, if the I-AA school plays at a level above DII, then they count as if they were from a qualifying conference.  Some of that stuff the NCAA puts out can be pretty hard to interpret.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Eh, you got that right!! At least it looks like you get more points for at least playing up a level, DI-AA than for playing down, D3 or NAIA. If I'm reading this right, you would only get 2 points at the most for beating a D3 team, while even losing to a crappy qualified D1-AA team would get you 7.

[RD17]

I've actually been struggling with this because by my calculations Winona St. and C-N are ranked unreasonably high in the latest regionals (both, of course, have lost to provisional I-AA's).

My first thought was something about changes to SSI, but I've been using the same 2004 SSI that's been on the NCAA site for a while now: 2004 Division II SSI (this seems to be the same numbers you were talking about).

That then got me wondering about whether I was undercrediting games against SDSU/NDSU for SSI; e.g. they could still be considered D-II or be considered auto-qualifying/independent:

[*]In the football participants list, the NCAA site indicates that NDSU & SDSU are currently considered D-II independents in the NW region.

[*]I don't see anything, though, that indicates that SDSU would be considered to be an independent or from a qualifying conference.

[jimdahl]

My information comes directly from one of the D2 football committee members. The only schools that are considered to be "non-automatic qualifying" I-AA are the ones in the NEC, Pioneer, and MAAC.

Excellent, I certainly wasn't trying to question your source so much as ask how much you could tell me about the details of what you knew. I'll recode my SSI calc to incorporate the I-AA blacklist instead of whitelist (as I had before) and see how the numbers come out. I'm sure I'll be in touch with you later by PM or email for some help, regardless, seeing as how you've done this before

[star2city]

With the SSI changes, it seems both RT (in the Dakota Student) and Dale Lennon are now open to renewing the UND/NDSU series. This quote by Lennon in the Williston Daily Herald confirms the possibility:

When asked about the departure of North Dakota State University from the schedule, as the Bison opted to play at a higher level, the veteran coach has mixed feelings.

"There definitely feels like something is missing on the season," said Lennon.

"Both coaches and players will miss that."

However, Lennon believes it's only a matter of time before the rivalry will be reinstated.

"That's not dead, just on hold," said Lennon, "with some rule changes necessary."

With the Bison in the new situation, this penalizes a Division II team for playing them, according to Lennon.

"Playing NDSU would be equivalent to playing Mayville State, and point wise it can hinder our chances for a higher seed or even making the playoffs," added Lennon.

BTW, the article includes alot of good info on two Willistonites: OL Andy Hoffelt and volleyball's Jamie Skadeland: Hoffelt finds himself in key role on UND line

[tony]

I kind of wish DII would publish the SSI ratings along with their poll. What would that hurt?

[RD17]

I kind of wish DII would publish the SSI ratings along with their poll. What would that hurt?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree. Sometimes the NCAA seems to treat some of this stuff like it's classified information. Also, it would be nice if the specifics of the next year's SSI was decided upon before all the scheduling takes place. I have a feeling that if the specifics of the new SSI ratings would have been available in January, UND and NDSU would be playing this fall.

[Warrior41]

I was sent a copy of the new SSI formula for this year, and it has been changed drastically, so that the penalty for losing to a good I-AA school is gone.

For example, losing to a I-AA school with a greater than .500 record yields 9 points towards your SSI. Losing on the road to a D2 school with a .700 or better record (i.e., if the Sioux were to lose to SCSU on Saturday) gets you just 8. So this part of the formula has been fixed and makes it appear as if playing I-AA teams now makes sense again.

The problem is that you are not rewarded very well in points if you beat a good I-AA team. A win over a .500 or better I-AA team now gets you 11 points, whereas beating a .500 or better D2 team at home yields the same. You can get 14 points for beating a .700 or better team on the road (i.e., UND wins on Saturday).

What's the moral of the story? You are now much better off playing a good I-AA team than a poor D2. You would get the same number of points for losing to NDSU as you would in beating Crookston, with of course the potential to get more points if you were to beat the Bison. It now makes very little sense to schedule a D2 team that you know is going to be bad if you can schedule a game with a quality I-AA program. The only drawback would come from a lack of regional wins (how much that comes into play for playoff selection, I don't know).

BTW, if any of you have listened to Dale Lennon's show last night, you heard him say that Winona's loss to SDSU will really hurt the Warriors in the SSI because SDSU is in a non-qualifying I-AA conference. This is NOT true. Even though NDSU and SDSU could not yet qualify for the postseason, they are considered as being from a qualifying conference because they currently play above D2 standards.

This was a needed and positive change for DII football for multiple reasons. The first being D1aa schools should be expected to win so why penalize a team so drastically, at least schools can take a shot and not have to worry about losing valuable play-offs. Another positive that really goes hand-in-hand with that is guarantees. Most D1aa schools can offer more, making it a good way to boost scholarship funds for schools who need the help, like Winona. It also opens up scheduling options for the top schools no one wants to visit (I.E. UND at the Alerus) or geographically challenged universities (TAMUK). It really worked in Winona

[Hansel]

Also, it would be nice if the specifics of the next year's SSI was decided upon before all the scheduling takes place.

Amen to that

[ethanm]

This same rule changing happened with the BCS this year (what a surprise). Oklahoma added Oregon to its schedule last spring and played Bowling Green instead of Arkansas St. (or somebody like that) because it would help them in the strength of schedule component. Then after everybody's schedules are set, they drop that from the BCS formula. Hopefully, the DI BCS schools will complain enough about changes being made so late to the formula that it will have a trickle down effect to the lower divisions.