IRC National Rankings: 2/17/08

Monday, February 18, 2008

Message To The Readers

Starting 2/28/08, the IRC will be making a change that should slightly alter the rankings in each division. Over the past two years we have spent a good deal of time making sure that we can get the most accurate rankings in the country by spending countless hours at rinks around the country.

Starting with next weeks rankings, we will be having a new voting member and a new way to display the rankings each week. Currently each team is listed but there is no indication as to how many "points" each team has accumulated through the voting process as you would find when you read Associated Press polls, USA Today polls or even the BCS polls. So now we will attach a numerical number based on the amount of votes each team is awarded by the seven member panel.

Team who are getting first place votes will know how many of the seven voters think they are the top team in the country. Additionally, showing the voting totals, will allow those teams who just missed the rankings and are sitting in the spots just outside the top 15 know where they stand when the are mentioned in the "Additional Teams Receiving Votes" section.

Points will be awarded with 15 points to each first place vote and 1 point to each fifteenth place vote. Any question or concerns with the new way the rankings are going to be displayed, please email IndRankCom@gmail.com and we will get back to you as soon as possible.

Thank You for sticking with the IRC National Rankings.

Week 15: DI National Rankings

#1 – Lindenwood University (17-0-0)
Last Week: 1

#2 - University of Missouri-St. Louis (14-2-0)
Last Week: 3

#3 - University of California, Irvine (17-1-1)
Last Week: 4

#4 - Michigan State University (18-2-0)
Last Week: 6

#5 - SUNY Stony Brook (16-2-1)
Last Week: 2

#6 – SUNY Buffalo (20-3-0)
Last Week: 5

#7 - The Ohio State University (18-2-0)
Last Week: 7

#8 - University of Michigan (15-5-0)
Last Week: 10

#9– University of Florida (13-3-2)
Last Week: 9

#10 - Eastern Michigan University (15-7-3)
Last Week: 11

#11 - Long Beach State (14-2-2)
Last Week: 8

#12 - California Polytechnic State University, SLO (10-5-3)
Last Week: 13

#13 - University of Rhode Island (13-4-4)
Last Week: 14

#14 - University of North Texas (16-2-1)
Last Week: 12

#15 –Colorado State University (15-3-1)
Last Week: 15

Week 15: DII National Rankings

#1 – Neumann College (19-0-0)
Last Week: 1

#2 - University of California, San Diego (17-1-0)
Last Week: 3

#3 – West Chester University (17-2-0)
Last Week: 2

#4 - Missouri State University (14-0-3)
Last Week: 4

#5 – Cal Poly Pomona (15-2-2)
Last Week: 7

#6 – California State University, San Bernardino (15-2-1)
Last Week: 6

#7 – Truman State University (13-4-2)
Last Week: 5

#8 - University of Louisiana at Lafayette (19-1-0)
Last Week: 8

#9 – Albany (11-4-1)
Last Week: 9

#10 – Elon University (12-4-0)
Last Week: 10

#11 – Grand Valley State (13-5-2)
Last Week: 10

#12 – Shippensburg University (13-6-1)
Last Week: 12

#13 - Washington University (STL) (11-5-1)
Last Week: 14

#14 - Western Carolina University (11-4-1)
Last Week: 13

#15 - Saint Louis University (11-5-1)
Last Week: NR

Week 15: DIII National Rankings

#1 – Broward Community College (11-2-2)
Last Week: 1

#2 – St. Charles Community College (10-7-1)
Last Week: 2

#3 – Oakland Community College (11-7-3)
Last Week: 3

#4 – Arapahoe County Community College (16-3-0)
Last Week: 4

#5 - Suffolk County Community College (12-9-2)
Last Week: NR

Week 15: B National Rankings

#1 - State University of New York at Buffalo (16-0-3)
Last Week: 1

#2 – University of Michigan (13-0-1)
Last Week: 2

#3 – Lindenwood University – Gold (15-1-1)
Last Week: 3

#4 – Michigan State University (13-1-1)
Last Week: 4

#5 - Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Gold (15-1-1)
Last Week: 7

#6 – University of Central Florida (11-2-1)
Last Week: 6

#7 - University of Missouri - St. Louis (14-3-1)
Last Week: 9

#8 - University of Missouri - Columbia (12-2-3)
Last Week: 10

#9 - North Texas University (13-0-1)
Last Week: 5

#10 – Central Michigan University (10-4-0)
Last Week: 11

#11 –Penn State University (14-3-2)
Last Week: 12

#12 –UC Santa Barbara Gold (10-3-3)
Last Week: 13

#13 - Lindenwood University Black (12-3-2)
Last Week: 8

#14- Colorado State University (12-6-1)
Last Week: 14

#15 - Eastern Michigan (8-5-1)
Last Week: 15

The Rankings Explained

Since the conclusion of the season both founders set out to find the best solution to answer the age old question, “Who’s #1?” After much search, the answer was to use a mathematical formula to calculate the answer. Removing the human element from the voting would likely result in less biased rankings towards individual teams and regions.

The solution would be found in the ELO chess rating system. They system was created to rank chess players by another means that wins, losses and draws. The system uses a mathematical formula to reward each person for impressive feats and punish them for lesser impressive feats. Because chess and inline hockey are two different animals, the general equation had to be changed to allow for more hockeys related factors into the equation.

Using the FIFA Women’s World Rankings as a guideline (Elo Based), we managed to change the rankings to suit the nature of our sport. The rankings include the importance of the game, the outcome of the game, the expected result of the game, and the goal differential of the game when calculating a result. To better explain the way the rankings work I give you the following examples (all team start with a ranking of 1500):

Lindenwood University (1500) vs. UMSL (1500): If Lindenwood won the regular season game 4-3; they would be awarded 15 points for the victory and UMSL would be docked 15 points. However, if the game was won 12-2, Lindenwood would earn 39.38 points for the victory and UMSL would be docked 39.38 points. Additionally, the importance of the game could change, using the national title game as the example, with both teams having equal ratings Lindenwood would be awarded 52.5 points for a 6-3 win.

However, as you could assume, two teams having the same rating would be rare. Each teams point total carries over from one week to the next and from one season to the next. The following is a example of two teams with different point values and the different results it can produce.

Lindenwood University (1746.38) vs. Illinois State (1360.88): There are a few things that you can determine because of the vast difference in each teams rating (385.5). The first is that Lindenwood is expected to win the game. The second is that Illinois State winning the game would be a much bigger accomplishment that Lindenwood winning the game. The maximum points Lindenwood can earn from this game is 7.72, which would mean they won by at least 10 goals. However, on the flip side, if Illinois State was to win the game by at least 10 goals they could earn as many as 71.03 points. This is based on the projection that Lindenwood would win the match-up 90% of the time.

As the two examples show, there are a bunch of positives when using this system. For starters, once a team has achieved a high rating, it becomes difficult for them to increase it without playing a higher level of competition. This rewards regions that have more competitive teams. It also rewards teams who travel out of the region and win games against other higher rated teams. For example, last season, Towson and Army both played James Madison who would have had a higher rating that both visiting teams. In the games, Army and Towson both won handily and would have increased their ratings while negatively hurting James Madison. But, the hidden bonus is they now can bring those rating points back into their region. Those points then become spread out over the entire region as the season progresses and teams win and lose.

For the ratings system to work, each game has to have a certain amount of value attached to it. In the system we will be using five different levels to rate the importance of any give game. The first level is the lowest level of importance; it contains all pre-season exhibition games. The second level includes all regular-season regional games, as well as cross-divisional exhibition games. Level three includes all cross-regional games and invitational based tournaments, like WinterFest. The fourth level includes all regional playoff games and the fifth and final level includes all national playoff games.