This article will provide some data on the relationship between the Power 4 conferences and the 27 Not Power 4 conferences and point out a significant NCAA Division I Women's Soccer Committee issue related to Power 4 as compared to Not Power 4 candidates for NCAA Tournament at large positions.
First, some background:
1. Power 4 conference teams, as a group, have an historic pattern of having a high proportion of their games against Not Power 4 conference teams at Power 4 home fields.
2. Whereas in the past it was fairly common for Power 4 conference teams playing Not Power 4 conference opponents to enter into home-away contracts, I am hearing from coaches that many, if not all, Power 4 conference teams no longer are allowed by their administrations (1) to enter into home-away contracts and (2) to travel to Not Power 4 sites for away games. I also am hearing that when there are not home-away contracts, Power 4 conference teams have less money available to help cover Not Power 4 conference opponents' travel costs if they travel to Power 4 sites. This fits with information I have heard of the possibility that beginning in 2027, the first weekend of the season for Power 4 conference teams will consist of inter-Power 4 conference games, which will mean significant travel expenses for half the Power 4 conference teams every year.
3. Power 4 conference teams, because their conferences are strong, of necessity play significant numbers of highly ranked opponents every year. This will be even more the case if there is a future increase in inter-Power 4 conference competition. Not Power 4 conference teams have far fewer opportunities to play highly ranked opponents and it looks like they may have even fewer in the future. An effect of this is that Power 4 conference teams have more opportunities to achieve "good results" than do Not Power 4 conference teams and may have even more in the future. This raises the question whether the NCAA Women's Soccer Committee has the necessary statistics sophistication to properly compare good results of Power 4 conference teams with good results of Not Power 4 conference teams. A 2025 at large decision of the Committee, giving Power 4 Kentucky an at large position rather than Not Power 4 St. Mary's, will provide a good case study for this question.
POWER 4 HOME FIELD ADVANTAGE
I break down consideration of Power 4 conference home field advantage into three time periods:
2007 (the first year in my data base) to 2012
2013 to 2023, with 2013 being the year of completion of significant changes in conference memberships, including but not limited to the split of the Big East into the Big East and American Athletic Conference, with some teams migrating to the ACC and others to the Big Ten.
2024 to the present, following the distribution of most Pac 12 teams among the ACC, Big Ten, and Big 12 and the shift from the Power 5 to the Power 4.
The following table shows the proportions of Power conference home field advantage in games against Not Power conferences for each period (with Pac 12 teams counting as Power conference teams through 2023):
As you can see, the Power conferences over time have increased their home field advantage proportions in games against Not Power conference opponents. If it is correct that starting in 2027 the season's opening weekend will have Power conference teams playing games against teams from other Power conferences, it seems likely Power conference teams will be even less willing to travel to Not Power opponents' sites for games. Thus it seems likely the Power conference home field advantages will increase even more in the future, if Not Power conference teams play them.
LIKELY DECREASE IN PROPORTION OF POWER VERSUS NOT POWER CONFERENCE GAMES
The following tables show the proportions of games that were Power versus Not Power for the three time periods:
As you can see, there has been a gradual decline in the proportions of Power versus Not Power games. If the Power versus Power season-opening weekend happens in 2027 and continues into the future, it seems likely the proportion of Power versus Not Power games will decline even more.
It is important to note in the above table that on average Not Power conference teams currently play 93.3% of their games against other Not Power teams, meaning only 6.7% against Power teams. This equates, on average, to Not Power conference teams playing about 1 game per year against Power teams (1.25 games per year, to be exact).
ABILITY OF POWER CONFERENCE TEAMS, AS COMPARED TO NOT POWER CONFERENCE TEAMS, TO PLAY HIGHLY RANKED OPPONENTS
Power conference teams are able to play significant numbers of highly ranked opponents simply by playing their conference regular season games. If the Power versus Power season-opening weekend happens, the Power conference teams' opportunities to play highly ranked opponents will increase. Conversely, the opportunities to play highly ranked opponents for strong teams from Not Power conferences mostly are in their non-conference games and if the Power versus Power season-opening weekend happens, these opportunities are likely to decrease. Further, with Power conference teams having decreased willingness to enter into home-away contracts and lesser ability to share travel costs for one-off home games against Not Power conference opponents, the opportunities of strong Not Power conference teams to play highly ranked opponents is likely to decrease even more.
This suggests that given the inequality between Power and Not Power teams in opportunities to play games against highly ranked opponents, how the Women's Soccer Committee evaluates results against highly ranked opponents will become increasingly important in the Committee's NCAA Tournament at large selection process. The Committee's decision to give Kentucky an at large position in the 2025 NCAA Tournament, rather than St. Mary's, provides a good case study for this issue.
#42 St. Mary's, in the Not Power West Coast Conference, had an overall record of 12W/2L/4T. They played no Top 50 opponents in conference play. They played 2 in non-conference play: Lost away to #3 Stanford; and Won away against #12 Georgetown.
#50 Kentucky, in the Power SEC, had an overall record of 12W/4L/4T. They played 6 Top 50 opponents in conference play and 2 in non-conference play. They: Lost home to #41 Illinois; Lost home to #38 Ohio State; Lost away to #43 Georgia; Won home against #29 Alabama; Lost home to #4 Vanderbilt; Won home against #37 South Carolina; Tied away against #14 LSU; and tied neutral against #43 Georgia.
One way to look at the Top 50 results is to look at the numbers of good results. St. Mary's had 1 good result. Kentucky had 4, counting ties against Top 50 opponents as good results, as I would do. If the number of good results against Top 50 opponents is the way to consider these games, Kentucky is the choice for the at large position.
On the other hand, St. Mary's played top 50 opponents with an average rank of #7.5 and had an 0.500 winning percentage against them. Kentucky played top 50 opponents with an average rank of #31 and had an 0.375 winning percentage against them (counting a tie as half a win). If the average rank of Top 50 opponents and the winning percentage against them is the way to consider these games, St. Mary's is the choice for the at large position.
As you can see, which way the Committee considers Top 50 results is critical. It is especially critical given the unequal opportunities of Not Power conference teams to play Top 50 opponents as compared to Power conference teams. And it looks like it will become even more critical in the future.
Given the unequal opportunities to play Top 50 opponents, I believe the stronger argument is that the Committee should compare Power and Not Power conference candidates' Top 50 results using the latter method: rather than looking simply at numbers of good results, they should look at the average rank of a team's Top 50 opponents and the winning percentage against those opponents. That method will take out of the equation the unequal opportunities to play Top 50 opponents.
No comments:
Post a Comment