The first regional rankings were published Wednesday, meaning we have our first glimpse of the at-large picture from the NCAA’s perspective. In case you didn’t know, the first regional rankings are published alphabetically, not numerically. So, nobody should be saying “We are the best in region X” just yet, as theoretically we don’t know what the numerical order of each region is. Regardless, we now have a definitive list of schools we can start constructing a possible post-season around, which is very exciting. This leads us to our first bracketology segment of the 2024 season.
Why are the regional rankings important?
I said it in 2021, I said it in 2022, I said it in 2023, and I’ll say it again. All the mainstream rankings for D3VB men’s volleyball (AVCA Coaches Poll, T100, KPI, Massey, etc) are meaningless measurements used for bragging rights between programs. These rankings have no intrinsic value when it comes to your post season chances, but the ones released by the NCAA Wednesday do! Being regionally ranked by the NCAA is the first hurdle programs must clear if they are playing for extra chances at the post season.
This year’s tournament will feature 11 Pool A bids (Conference Champions), 3 Pool B bid (Independent schools not associated with a conference), and 2 Pool C bids (at-large bids comprising the pool of remaining teams from Pool A and B). Most schools have the opportunity to play for two chances to enter the NCAA tournament, but only the schools who are regionally ranked are considered for any of the coveted Pool C/B bids; that’s why being ranked is a big deal. Additionally, this is the first (and likely only) year we’ll ever see three Pool B bids allocated for the NCAA tournament.
State of Play
The rankings released yesterday were listed alphabetically as opposed to numerically; meaning the landscape is still in the dark in terms of the regional pecking order. Since the ranking criteria and some of the match data is public knowledge, I’m giving it my best shot to numerically rank them according to what I believe the standings are within each region as of this moment.
Fair warning, I’m not an expert when it comes to the ranking process, and I’ve never been involved in one. Further, the below snapshots are where I think the regions stand based on the publicly available information we have, they are essentially my opinions.
Just for emphasis… These are not official NCAA rankings by any means and shouldn’t be used as such, they are the predictions of one fan who runs a D3VB website. I do think I’ve done a decent enough job in capturing where things stand regionally to provide value to the landscape until the 2nd rankings come out.
For reference, the primary NCAA ranking criteria are as follows…
- D3 Win/Loss %
- Strength of Schedule
- Win/Loss versus Regionally Ranked opponents
- It’s worth mentioning that no team could have a record versus regionally ranked teams yet, because no teams were regionally ranked up till yesterday. This is one of the reasons why initial rankings are released alphabetically. This criterion will be captured in future releases now that we have a pool of regionally ranked teams; the second rankings being based on the teams from week 1 and the 3rd ranking based on the teams ranked in weeks 2 and 3.
- Record versus Common Opponents
- Head-to-Head Result
Below is where I think things stand numerically in the respective regions (meaning 1-7). I’ve included some of the available criteria alongside each team; only match data up to 3/25 is utilized.
| Region I | DIII Win/Loss | Strength of Schedule |
| Wentworth | 24-0 (1.000) | .615 |
| Springfield | 17-2 (.894) | .639 |
| Nichols | 19-4 (.826) | .586 |
| Lasell | 11-11 (.500) | .633 |
| Endicott | 11-8 (.578) | .569 |
| Emmanuel | 10-8 (.556) | .589 |
| Baruch | 13-6 (.684) | .580 |
| Region II | DIII Win/Loss | Strength of Schedule |
| St. John Fisher | 22-3 (.880) | .594 |
| Vassar | 19.5 (.792) | .622 |
| NYU | 10-7 (.588) | .684 |
| MIT | 14-6 (.700) | .593 |
| Hobart | 15-10 (.600) | .610 |
| New Paltz | 16-9 (.640) | .652 |
| Nazareth | 17-8 (.680) | .574 |
| Region III | DIII Win/Loss | SOS |
| Stevens | 25-1 (.962) | .653 |
| Southern Virginia | 21-0 (1.000) | .590 |
| Misericordia | 18-8 (.692) | .612 |
| Juniata | 19-5 (.791) | .612 |
| Marymount | 18-5 (.783) | .594 |
| Messiah | 14-8 (.636) | .601 |
| Stevenson | 12-7 (.632) | .629 |
| Region IV | DIII Win/Loss | SOS |
| Loras | 20-0 (1.000) | .582 |
| Cal Lutheran | 20-3 (.870) | .624 |
| Carthage | 13-5 (.722) | .651 |
| UCSC | 10-8 (.556) | .656 |
| Dominican | 13-5 (.722) | .529 |
| North Central | 13-6 (.684) | .621 |
| Benedictine | 12-9 (.571) | .581 |
One more time, and with emphasis, THESE ARE SIMPLY MY GUESSTIMATIONS OF THE CURRENT REGIONAL LANDSCAPE. They are not official rankings. Further, these were made only using match results up to 3/25, no results after that day could be included. While I’m confident in their general accuracy, these rankings intrinsically mean nothing. Likewise, the predictions I have below likewise mean nothing and should be taken with a grain of salt.
Possible Tournament Field
We can begin constructing a Tournament field with the information above and the playing trends we’ve seen throughout the season so far. Below you’ll find a list of the likely Pool A candidates, if the #1 seeds in Conferences win their Conference Tournaments (below reflects the #1 seeds as of 3/25, sorry if seeding has changed since then).
UVC: St. John Fisher
CVC: Southern Virginia
MAC: Stevens
GNAC: Wentworth
CCIW: Loras
NACC: Aurora/Dominican
Skyline: NJCU
MCVL: Wittenberg
CUNYAC: Baruch
AMCC: St. Vincent
United East: Lancaster Bible
Given the field above, the teams below were the front runners for the remaining bids as of 3/25 (meaning only matches played up to 3/25).
Pool B: Cal Lutheran
Pool B: Springfield
Pool B: Nichols
The race for the third independent slot is still close, and I don’t believe UCSC is out of the conversation just yet. But they do need to run hot for the remainder of the year and get wins over North Central (doable as things stand) and Cal Lutheran (much harder) to get some breathing room.
Pool C: Vassar
Pool C: Juniata
On the Bubble: Carthage
For the Pool C bids, I want to emphasize it’s very hard to actually assume these are the teams in the running for the at-large bids currently. Not having access to records vs regionally ranked opponents makes a lot of this forecasting pure conjecture, so we’ll have to wait till next week before we can develop a truly accurate picture of the at-large race.
If the season ended on 3/25, I do think it would have been a VERY close conversation between Carthage and Vassar for a Pool C bid. However, Vassar has a lot more opportunities currently to add to their resume than Carthage does, as they end their season with matches against Springfield, New Paltz, and Stevens; all regionally ranked programs. Carthage only has one match against Loras left before playoffs and won’t see another regionally ranked opponent until the CCIW Tournament begins. Vassar will have three to end the season, plus whoever they potentially face in the UVC tournament.